01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Wolverhampton to win55%
- Over 1.5 goals76%
EFL ChampionshipMolineux, Wolverhampton14°1,2 mm19 km/h
Läs på svenskaOscar Nilsson · · Model-assisted analysis, fact-checked · How the predictions work
Wolverhampton holds a 55% edge in the probabilities, and yet, the tension is palpable given their current form. While the hosts have only secured 8 points so far, West Bromwich Albion, somewhat surprisingly, sits at 13 points. That points difference might raise eyebrows, but xPoints tell a different story, leaning in favor of Wolves at 8.6 over the visitors' 7.3. The promise of equilibrium between actual points and expected performance underscores the potential for a recalibration.
The most probable scorelines—1-1, 1-0, and 2-1—suggest a tight contest, reflecting the balance in both teams' tactical profiles. Wolverhampton's possession-based play will likely clash with West Brom's physicality. Expected goals (xG) lean towards the home side, suggesting they should control the tempo, with an xG of 1.8 contrasting sharply with Albion’s 1.2. This hints at the hosts' potential to carve out more scoring opportunities.
Wolves' defensive metrics also imply an upper hand, with a lower expected goals against (xGA) at 1.1 per match compared to West Brom's 1.4. This defensive solidity might just tip the scales, especially in a match where every chance counts. Yet, the likelihood of both teams scoring, set at 53%, reflects potential vulnerabilities on both ends.
With a slim 51% chance of over 2.5 goals, the market is finely balanced. However, the model's inclination towards Wolverhampton, coupled with their superior expected goals, suggests a narrow victory. A 1-0 triumph could be on the cards, aligning with the second most likely scoreline.
This isn't merely about a team finding its stride but also about current metrics pointing to an underestimated potential.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
Solid line = created (xG), dashed = conceded (xGA).
Last 5 matches. Circle size = pass volume, line width = combinations between players. Attacking left to right.
The same network weighted by offensive threat (xT): circle size = threat created by the player, line width = threat of the combinations. Last 5 matches, attacking left to right.
| Performance | Wolverhampton | West Bromwich Albion |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 8 | 13 |
| xPoints | 8.6 | 7.3 |
| xG per match | 1.8 | 1.2 |
| xGA per match | 1.1 | 1.4 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.37 | 0.1 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.06 | 0.2 |
| Playing style | Wolverhampton | West Bromwich Albion |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.29 | 0.3 |
| Field tilt | 0.5 | 0.52 |
| xT per match | 1.2 | 0.75 |
| xTA per match | 0.77 | 1.1 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 24 | 27 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.22 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.31 | 0.27 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.23 | 0.23 |
| Entries into the box per match | 14 | 11 |
| Entries into the box against | 13 | 13 |
| Pass completion % | 0.79 | 0.8 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.69 | 0.77 |
| Passes per match | 383 | 428 |
| Passes against per match | 315 | 395 |
| Switches of play per match | 29.3 | 23.1 |
| Long balls per match | 30 | 23 |
| Set pieces | Wolverhampton | West Bromwich Albion |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.05 | 0 |
| Corners per match | 5.4 | 4.5 |
| Corners against per match | 5 | 6.4 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.06 | 0.01 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.48 | 0.41 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.6 | 0.66 |
| Other | Wolverhampton | West Bromwich Albion |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.73 | 0.77 |
| The goalkeepers | Marshall Munetsi (Wolverhampton) | Max Oleary (West Bromwich Albion) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 9 | 19 |
| Save % | 100% | 79% |
| xG prevented | 100% | 60% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Wolverhampton a 55% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Wolverhampton 55%, draw 25%, West Bromwich Albion 20%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 12% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 51% and under at 49%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 53% according to the model.
The same rules as the bookmakers’ builders: legs that contradict or already follow from your slip cannot be combined — for example correct score 2–1 with under 2.5 goals. The difference is that we don’t look the rules up in a table; we compute them straight from the score matrix.
Predictions come from PlaymakerAI's match model and reflect the model's assessment — not betting advice. Gamble responsibly.