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 46.1% · Draw 24.9% · Fortuna Sittard 29.0% Why NEC is favoured Elo essentially level (1523 vs 1520) — winner depends on context. Recent: NEC 2W-3D-3L · Fortuna Sittard 4W-2D-2L (last 8). Goal differential per game: NEC -0.1, Fortuna Sittard -0.1. Form depth NEC: avg 1.6 goals scored, 1.8 conceded per game (0/4 at home, 2/4 on the road). Fortuna Sittard: avg 1.8 goals scored, 1.9 conceded per game (1/4 at home, 3/4 on the road). NEC on a 2-draw streak. Goals expectation Model expects ~3.5 total goals (NEC 1.8, Fortuna Sittard 1.8) — above the 2.5-goal mid line. But — counter-arguments Fortuna Sittard has a stronger recent record (50% vs 25%) — model favours NEC on Elo + home advantage despite the form gap. Head-to-head 3 prior meetings — NEC 0W, 3D, Fortuna Sittard 0W (draws are common). Last 3: 2-3, 3-2, 4-1. Calibration Raw model: 47.2% home · Platt-calibrated down to 46.1% based on historical reliability across this sport's graded matches. Confidence note Elo data on these teams is thin (35% sample-size confidence); this is a low-conviction match overall — bet only with strong reason from outside the model.