01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Nottingham Forest or draw (X2)67%
- Under 3.5 goals79%
Premier LeagueSelhurst Park, London13°0,2 mm17 km/h
Läs på svenska18+ · Gamble responsibly · stodlinjen.se · Affiliate links
Sofia Andersson · · The model's read on the match · How the predictions work
The numbers paint a vivid picture of Crystal Palace's struggles in front of goal. Averaging just 0.91 expected goals (xG) per match, the hosts have found it difficult to carve out clear opportunities, which is a stark contrast to Nottingham Forest's more productive 1.7 xG per game. This attacking disparity suggests that the visitors are more likely to find the back of the net, despite the notoriously challenging atmosphere at Selhurst Park.
Defensively, the story isn't much different for Palace. Conceding 2.2 expected goals against (xGA) per game, their backline has proven porous, especially in comparison to Forest's relatively tight 1.1 xGA. These figures hint at a tactical vulnerability for Palace, one that Forest, with their direct playing style, will look to exploit. The clash of similar low-defence, direct styles might ironically lead to a match that hinges on fine margins, precisely where Palace have often faltered.
Recent head-to-head encounters, albeit based on a small sample of four matches, don't favor the Eagles either. With no wins and just a single loss to Forest, the psychological edge seems absent. Meanwhile, the visitors will arrive with the confidence of having seen off Palace before, adding another layer to their potential tactical advantage.
From a betting perspective, Nottingham Forest emerges as the value bet here. Priced attractively at bookmakers and given the model's 39% win probability, which exceeds the draw and home win probabilities, Forest offers a promising angle. The most likely scoreline indicates a 1-1 draw, but with Forest's slight edge in both xG and xGA metrics, a 1-0 victory for the visitors seems plausible.
Finally, with the over/under 2.5 goals market leaning towards the under at 58%, this match is expected to be low-scoring. The analytical edge lies with Forest, especially if defensive discipline and pragmatic attacking can translate predictions into reality.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).
| Bookmaker | 1 · Crystal Palace | X | 2 · Nottingham Forest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betsafe | 2.60 | 3.25 | EV+ 7% 2.72 |
| LeoVegas | 2.60 | 3.30 | EV+ 6% 2.70 |
| Nordicbet | 2.60 | 3.30 | EV+ 8% 2.75 |
| Pinnacle | 2.62 | EV+ 2% 3.42 | EV+ 4% 2.64 |
Odds updated 2 Oct, 15:36
Head-to-head based on Premier League data since 2022.
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 | Crystal Palace | Nottingham Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 4 | 5 |
| xPoints | 4.2 | 8.2 |
| xG per match | 0.91 | 1.7 |
| xGA per match | 2.2 | 1.1 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.18 | 0.32 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.59 | 0.13 |
| Playing style | Crystal Palace | Nottingham Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.31 | 0.33 |
| Field tilt | 0.39 | 0.55 |
| xT per match | 0.91 | 1.2 |
| xTA per match | 1.2 | 0.61 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 23 | 23 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.25 | 0.23 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.25 | 0.28 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.19 | 0.2 |
| Entries into the box per match | 7 | 14 |
| Entries into the box against | 16 | 11 |
| Pass completion % | 0.77 | 0.74 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.7 | 0.7 |
| Passes per match | 337 | 308 |
| Passes against per match | 469 | 351 |
| Switches of play per match | 14.9 | 25.4 |
| Long balls per match | 22 | 32 |
| Set pieces | Crystal Palace | Nottingham Forest |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.01 | 0.05 |
| Corners per match | 2.4 | 3.4 |
| Corners against per match | 4.8 | 4.6 |
| xG per corner | 0.03 | 0.04 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0 | 0.35 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.62 | 0.43 |
| Other | Crystal Palace | Nottingham Forest |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.71 | 0.79 |
| The goalkeepers | Dean Henderson (Crystal Palace) | Matz Sels (Nottingham Forest) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 12 | 11 |
| Save % | 60% | 69% |
| xG prevented | 47% | 66% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Nottingham Forest a 39% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Crystal Palace 31%, draw 30%, Nottingham Forest 39%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 14% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 42% and under at 58%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 48% 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.

Min. insättning 100 kr. Omsättning 6× inom 60 dagar, odds från 1,80
Hämta bonus
Se ComeOns villkor
Hämta bonus
Se Hajpers villkor
Hämta bonusPredictions come from PlaymakerAI's match model and reflect the model's assessment — not betting advice. Gamble responsibly.