01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Juve Stabia or draw (1X)70%
- Under 3.5 goals73%
Serie BStadio Romeo Menti, Castellammare di Stabia22°2,4 mm7 km/h
Läs på svenskaMarcus Johansson · · Analysis from the match model · How the predictions work
The recent head-to-head record between Juve Stabia and Cesena leans heavily in favor of the hosts, with three wins and a draw in their last four encounters. However, this is a small sample, and Cesena's form this season shows a different story. Currently, Cesena holds an edge with five points to Stabia's three, and their xPoints of 4.6 suggests they've been the more effective side despite their lower attacking output.
Juve Stabia, a team known for counter-attacking and utilizing crosses, will look to exploit Cesena's low defensive line with quick transitions. This could create opportunities, especially given their expected goals of 1.44, which is higher than Cesena's 1.17. Yet, Cesena's defense has been more robust, allowing just 0.78 xGA per match compared to Stabia's 1.5. This defensive solidity could be crucial in staving off Juve Stabia's attacks, despite the home side's offensive potential.
The numbers point to a tightly contested match, with the model indicating a 43% chance of a home win and a 29% chance for Cesena. The most likely scorelines hover around a narrow margin, with a 1-1 draw at 13% being the most probable outcome. The over 2.5 goals market is balanced at 48%, suggesting no clear lean towards a high-scoring game, while both teams have a 53% chance to score.
For bettors, the standout angle is the model's lean towards Juve Stabia at a 43% likelihood for a win. With the hosts also unbeaten in their last four head-to-heads against Cesena, this could present value at odds over evens from bookmakers like Bet365. Yet, caution is advised given Cesena's slightly stronger form and defensive numbers this season.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
Head-to-head based on Serie B data since 2023.
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 | Juve Stabia | Cesena |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 3 | 5 |
| xPoints | 2.2 | 4.6 |
| xG per match | 1 | 0.88 |
| xGA per match | 1.5 | 0.78 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.15 | 0.05 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.38 | 0.16 |
| Playing style | Juve Stabia | Cesena |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.28 | 0.32 |
| Field tilt | 0.45 | 0.43 |
| xT per match | 0.81 | 0.66 |
| xTA per match | 0.6 | 0.81 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 26 | 16 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.28 | 0.24 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.32 | 0.27 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.27 | 0.21 |
| Entries into the box per match | 12 | 11 |
| Entries into the box against | 12 | 16 |
| Pass completion % | 0.79 | 0.79 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.75 | 0.71 |
| Passes per match | 407 | 374 |
| Passes against per match | 292 | 394 |
| Switches of play per match | 25.3 | 34.6 |
| Long balls per match | 25 | 40 |
| Set pieces | Juve Stabia | Cesena |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.01 | 0.12 |
| Corners per match | 5.5 | 4 |
| Corners against per match | 3.6 | 7.4 |
| xG per corner | 0.03 | 0.01 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.59 | 0.58 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.64 | 0.57 |
| Other | Juve Stabia | Cesena |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.71 | 0.84 |
| The goalkeepers | Pietro Boer (Juve Stabia) | Alessandro Siano (Cesena) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 13 | 13 |
| Save % | 72% | 81% |
| xG prevented | 75% | 73% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Juve Stabia a 43% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Juve Stabia 43%, draw 28%, Cesena 29%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 13% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 48% and under at 52%.
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.