Walter Ferretti vs Jalapa Statistics & Analysis

Quick read on how the model reads this matchup.

• League: Primera Division
• Fixture: Walter Ferretti vs Jalapa
• Kickoff: 2026-09-20 00:00:00
• 1X2 (model): Home 34.7% · Draw 29.7% · Away 35.6%
• xG (showing): Walter Ferretti 1.29 — Jalapa 1.31 (total xG ≈ 2.6)
• Value headline: None (actionable) — best tracked EV is about +1.9%, still below the +2.0% minimum for a headline / default stake (no default bet).
• Structural leans (not bets): 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
• BTTS (model): Yes 54.5% · No 45.5%
• Correct score (top bin): 1-1 (12.6%)

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.

No bankroll-sized bet is implied here.

Treat this page as a read-only diagnostic: totals/BTTS structure can be informative even when the honest answer is to wait.

Correct-score markets remain high-variance even when one scoreline leads the table.

What do the grey “lean” labels mean then?

They summarise where the model tilts (e.g. Under 2.5 or BTTS No) without claiming a priced +EV ticket. Lean ≠ EV. If book odds are missing, EV cannot be computed — size to zero unless you deliberately accept discretionary risk (keep any experiment small, e.g. ≤0.25–0.5% bankroll).

How is Consensus EV calculated vs No-vig / Raw probability?

Consensus decision EV (P1.5) ≈ model probability × consensus decimal odds − 1 (not a single outlier book). Market Probability (No-vig) is the three-way vig-removed implied % (for pp gap). Consensus implied (with vig) = 1/P1.5 — display only, not used for pp or Primary EV. Probability edge (pp) is not the same number as EV %.

Why is there no “best bet” on this page?

Two different EV gates: Primary needs consensus EV ≥ +5.0% plus strength/reliability/calibration gates. A separate Lean/tracked gate is +2.0% for selective/context lines only — it is not a default Primary. A line can clear +2% and still fail Primary (e.g. +4.5% < +5.0%), or pass EV and still fail xG/strength gates.

Should I still read the 1X2 card?

Yes — it shows whether any winner price clears value. Here it often explains why there is no headline: probabilities can be clustered while prices already embed that uncertainty.

• 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%).

• Inputs: Same structured facts bundle as the public prediction page (xG / Poisson snapshot, market EV where available, decision engine v2).
• Compliance: Educational framing only; not personalised advice.

September 30, 2026 (UTC)