Charlton Athletic W vs London City Lionesses Statistics & Analysis

Charlton Athletic W

Sep 19, 2026 - 11:30

1 1.31

4 1.29

xG Accuracy: 44%

London City Lionesses

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 Over 2.5 (5 goals) ✖ Incorrect
Both Teams To Score BTTS Yes Yes ✔ Correct
1X2 Charlton Athletic W London City Lionesses ✖ Incorrect
Correct Score Insights 1-1, 1-0, 0-1, 2-1, 1-2 1-4 ✖ Incorrect

Validation Report

Immutable Snapshot

Prediction Time: Sep 14, 2026 · 01:09 UTC Snapshot ID: dp-8662379

Closing Odds 1.18

AI Fair Odds —

CLV +0.0%

Final Result London City Lionesses win · Charlton Athletic W 1–4 London City Lionesses

Prediction ✖ Missed

Decision Grade F

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 Charlton Athletic W (1X2), Draw (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 Charlton Athletic W (1X2) by about 26.9 percentage points — the clearest mispricing signal summarized on this page.

Model vs. closing implied

Market	Model %	Closing impl. %	Gap (pp)
Charlton Athletic W (1X2)	35.6	8.7	+26.9
Draw (1X2)	29.7	12.7	+17.0
London City Lionesses (1X2)	34.7	78.6	-43.9
Over 2.5 goals	48.2	56.5	-8.3
Under 2.5 goals	51.8	43.5	+8.3

What this means

In plain terms: the model lands near 35.6% on Charlton Athletic W (1X2), while the closing snapshot implied about 8.7%. The difference — about 26.9 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)
Charlton Athletic W (1X2)	10.66	10.66
Draw (1X2)	7.29	7.29
London City Lionesses (1X2)	1.18	1.18
Over 2.5 goals	1.66	1.66
Under 2.5 goals	2.16	2.16

AI match briefing

AI Match Summary

Model favours Charlton Athletic W; market prices London City Lionesses instead — inputs may be missing or stale.

Model: Charlton Athletic W 1.31 xG vs London City Lionesses 1.29 → Charlton Athletic W 35.6%
Market: London City Lionesses ~8.7% implied
Validation failed — do not treat 1X2 EV as actionable.

Do not act on 1X2 value until validation passes. Structural leans (O/U, BTTS) need separate odds review.

Structural lean (model): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5 (Under 2.5 51.8% · Over 2.5 48.2%); BTTS Yes (Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%) Value lean (pricing): O/U 2.5 Under 2.5; BTTS Yes

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

October 01, 2026 (UTC)

Explore More Predictions Content

Get Premium Predictions for Charlton Athletic W & London City Lionesses!

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

Subscribe Now

Back to Statistics

FA WSL — Standings

#	TEAM	MP	W	D	L	PTS
1	Manchester City W	4	4	0	0	12
2	London City Lionesses	4	3	0	1	9
3	Tottenham Hotspur W	3	2	1	0	7
4	Chelsea W	3	2	1	0	7
5	Everton W	3	2	0	1	6
6	Arsenal W	3	1	2	0	5
7	Liverpool W	3	1	1	1	4
8	Crystal Palace W	3	1	1	1	4
9	West Ham W	3	1	0	2	3
10	Aston Villa W	3	0	2	1	2
11	Brighton W	4	0	2	2	2
12	Birmingham City W	3	0	1	2	1
13	Manchester United W	3	0	1	2	1
14	Charlton Athletic W	4	0	0	4	0

#	TEAM	MP	GS	GC	+/-	PTS
1	Manchester City W	4	12	4	+8	12
2	Tottenham Hotspur W	3	11	2	+9	7
3	London City Lionesses	4	9	4	+5	9
4	Chelsea W	3	8	1	+7	7
5	Liverpool W	3	7	5	+2	4
6	West Ham W	3	3	5	-2	3
7	Aston Villa W	3	3	6	-3	2
8	Brighton W	4	3	6	-3	2
9	Birmingham City W	3	3	7	-4	1
10	Everton W	3	2	1	+1	6
11	Arsenal W	3	2	1	+1	5
12	Manchester United W	3	2	8	-6	1
13	Crystal Palace W	3	1	7	-6	4
14	Charlton Athletic W	4	1	10	-9	0

#	TEAM	MP	xG	xGC	+/-	PTS
1	London City Lionesses	4	1.2	0.2	+1.0	9
2	Manchester United W	3	0.2	1.2	-1.0	1
3	Manchester City W	4	—	—	—	12
4	Tottenham Hotspur W	3	—	—	—	7
5	Chelsea W	3	—	—	—	7
6	Everton W	3	—	—	—	6
7	Arsenal W	3	—	—	—	5
8	Liverpool W	3	—	—	—	4
9	Crystal Palace W	3	—	—	—	4
10	West Ham W	3	—	—	—	3
11	Aston Villa W	3	—	—	—	2
12	Brighton W	4	—	—	—	2
13	Birmingham City W	3	—	—	—	1
14	Charlton Athletic W	4	—	—	—	0