Statistics / Football / Lithuania. 1 Lyga / BFA vs Hegelmann II

BFA vs Hegelmann II Statistics & Analysis

BFA BFA
Jun 20, 2026 - 16:00
0 1.45
1 1.15
xG Accuracy: 64%
Hegelmann II Hegelmann II
Premium betting site stake: New users can use the promo code FHn2uDc1 to receive $100 cash.

Tracked markets vs full-time result

Each row compares the pre-match model lean to the full-time result.

  • Market Prediction Result Outcome
  • Over / Under 2.5 Under 2.5 Under 2.5 (1 goals) ✔ Correct
  • Both Teams To Score BTTS No No ✔ Correct
  • 1X2 BFA Hegelmann II ✖ Incorrect
  • Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 2-1, 0-1, 2-0 0-1 ✔ Correct

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Jul 24, 2026 · 16:49 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-1618565

Closing Odds 1.35
AI Fair Odds —
CLV +0.0%
Final Result Hegelmann II win · BFA 0–1 Hegelmann II
Prediction ✖ Missed
Decision Grade C

Model Performance

This prediction contributes to:

  • Primary Bets ROI (180d): -100.0%

Market intelligence

Supporting read on how the prioritized closing feed moved versus the model — use after the Primary pick above.

Market briefing

Market remained largely stable before kickoff. No meaningful late implied-price shift was detected between PRE30 and PRE1 on the prioritized bookmaker snapshot.

Despite limited late movement, the model still prices Draw (1X2), Hegelmann II (1X2), Under 2.5 goals meaningfully above what those closing snapshots implied — that gap is a static “model vs. price” read, not a late steam or chase story.

The model still exceeds closing implied on Under 2.5 goals by about 15.8 percentage points — the clearest mispricing signal summarized on this page.

Model vs. closing implied

Market Model % Closing impl. % Gap (pp)
BFA (1X2) 42.4 65.8 -23.4
Draw (1X2) 29.2 19.5 +9.7
Hegelmann II (1X2) 28.4 14.7 +13.7
Over 2.5 goals 48.2 64.0 -15.8
Under 2.5 goals 51.8 36.0 +15.8
What this means

In plain terms: the model lands near 51.8% on Under 2.5 goals, while the closing snapshot implied about 36.0%. The difference — about 15.8 percentage points — is the largest model-vs.-market gap highlighted on this page.

Quick definitions: “closing implied” is the probability for that outcome implied by the final captured odds (after a simple de-vig). “Gap (pp)” is the model percentage minus that implied value, in percentage points (pp).

Closing-window line move

Single prioritized bookmaker per snapshot (not all books). Capture path: PRE30 → PRE1 · Book: Pinnacle

Column tags in parentheses: Closing uses the first available snapshot in PRE1→PRE5→PRE10→PRE30; Early uses the first available in PRE30→PRE10→PRE5 that is not the same capture as Closing.

Detailed capture odds are folded below — movement was negligible on de-vig implied prices.

View full line-by-line capture table
Market Early (PRE30) Closing (PRE1) Implied Δ (pp)
BFA (1X2) 1.35 1.35 0.0
Draw (1X2) 4.55 4.55 0.0
Hegelmann II (1X2) 6.05 6.05 0.0
Over 2.5 goals 1.43 1.43 0.0
Under 2.5 goals 2.54 2.54 0.0

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Below is a compact, numbers-first snapshot aligned with the same engine as the cards above.

  • League: 1 Lyga
  • Fixture: BFA vs Hegelmann II
  • Kickoff: 2026-06-20 16:00:00
  • 1X2 (model): Home 42.4% · Draw 29.2% · Away 28.4%
  • xG (showing): BFA 1.45 — Hegelmann II 1.15 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
  • Value headline: At least one tracked line reaches the headline EV threshold — align with the hero / Primary card if shown.
  • Structural leans (not bets): Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS No
  • BTTS (model): Yes N/A · No N/A
  • Correct score (top bin): N/A

Saying “no value” on a snapshot is a feature, not a bug: it protects readers from forcing a play when the edge is not there.

If lines move materially, re-run generation or refresh — implied probabilities and any future EV readouts will change first.

Historical Recommendation

Historical Decision: Wait - No Primary Bet

Outcome: Missed — Pre-match 1X2 lean did not match the full-time result.

Risk Factors Considered Before Kickoff

  • Price movement: implied probabilities and EV move with odds.
  • Sample / data gaps: low-information leagues widen forecast bands.
  • In-play state: goals and red cards are not modelled here.
  • Scoreline variance: the most likely scoreline is still usually a low absolute probability outcome (often well below 20%).

Last Updated

September 29, 2026 (UTC)

Get Premium Predictions for BFA & Hegelmann II!

Unlock in-depth analysis, exclusive betting tips, and match forecasts with our premium subscription service.

Subscribe Now
Back to Statistics
1 Lyga 1 Lyga — Standings
# TEAM MP W D L PTS
1 Minija 24 21 1 2 64
2 Babrungas 25 19 4 2 61
3 Be1 NFA 24 16 2 6 50
4 Neptūną Klaipėda 25 14 2 9 44
5 Tauras 25 13 4 8 43
6 Žalgiris II 25 13 4 8 43
7 BFA 25 13 4 8 43
8 Dainava 24 11 7 6 40
9 Atmosfera 24 8 6 10 30
10 Jonava 25 7 6 12 27
11 Garliava 24 6 4 14 22
12 Kauno Žalgiris II 24 7 1 16 22
13 Hegelmann II 25 7 1 17 22
14 Transinvest 2 25 6 3 16 21
15 FA Šiauliai II 25 4 5 16 17
16 Ekranas 25 4 2 19 14
# TEAM MP GS GC +/- PTS
1 Minija 24 63 13 +50 64
2 Babrungas 25 43 11 +32 61
3 Be1 NFA 24 43 25 +18 50
4 Tauras 25 43 31 +12 43
5 BFA 25 39 35 +4 43
6 Žalgiris II 25 38 32 +6 43
7 Atmosfera 24 37 33 +4 30
8 Dainava 24 34 23 +11 40
9 Neptūną Klaipėda 25 33 30 +3 44
10 Hegelmann II 25 30 56 -26 22
11 Transinvest 2 25 29 58 -29 21
12 Jonava 25 28 33 -5 27
13 Garliava 24 27 30 -3 22
14 FA Šiauliai II 25 27 56 -29 17
15 Ekranas 25 25 58 -33 14
16 Kauno Žalgiris II 24 23 38 -15 22
1 Lyga Lithuania. 1 Lyga Predictions