NEC scores shown first. Bivariate Poisson with team xG from recent form — most-likely score ≠ most-likely winner.
Probabilities derived from a Poisson model on expected goals. Edge % shown only when the book posts both sides of a market.
Joint probability comes from the score grid (the truth). Naïve is what a book gets by multiplying legs — they undershoot correlated positive legs like "home + BTTS" and overshoot anti-correlated ones like "draw + over 2.5". Buy positive correlation; avoid negative.
Model probabilities NEC 48.6% · Draw 24.3% · FC Groningen 27.1% Why NEC is favoured NEC's Elo (1523) is +15 over FC Groningen (1507); low confidence. Recent: NEC 2W-4D-3L · FC Groningen 4W-2D-3L (last 9). Goal differential per game: NEC -0.1, FC Groningen +0.3. Form depth NEC: avg 1.7 goals scored, 1.8 conceded per game (0/5 at home, 2/4 on the road). FC Groningen: avg 2.4 goals scored, 2.1 conceded per game (2/5 at home, 2/4 on the road). NEC on a 3-draw streak. Goals expectation Model expects ~4.0 total goals (NEC 1.9, FC Groningen 2.1) — above the 2.5-goal mid line. But — counter-arguments FC Groningen has a stronger recent record (44% vs 22%) — model favours NEC on Elo + home advantage despite the form gap. Elo confidence is low (30%) — ratings are based on a thin sample, so the prediction itself is wider than the headline number suggests. Head-to-head 1 prior meetings — NEC 0W, 1D, FC Groningen 0W (draws are common). Last 3: 2-1, 2-0, 2-1. Confidence note Elo data on these teams is thin (30% sample-size confidence); this is a low-conviction match overall — bet only with strong reason from outside the model.