01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Sagan Tosu or draw (1X)63%
- Over 1.5 goals77%
J2 League21°13 km/h
Läs på svenskaFinal score 2–1. Before kick-off the model's prediction was as follows. BetBuilders AI model prediction for Sagan Tosu vs Omiya Ardija (J2 League, Saturday, 17 October 2026): Sagan Tosu win 39%, draw 25%, Omiya Ardija win 36%. Expected goals (xG): Sagan Tosu 1.39, Omiya Ardija 1.41. Most likely score: 1-1 (12%). Over 2.5 goals 53%, both teams to score 57%. Double chance: Sagan Tosu or draw 64%, Omiya Ardija or draw 61%. Prediction updated Friday, 9 October 2026.
18+ · Gamble responsibly · stodlinjen.se · Affiliate links
Sofia Andersson · · The model's read on the match · How the predictions work
TEXT holds factually except for one unsupported claim: the facts do not state that Sagan Tosu's 11 points were accumulated "in the same timeframe" as Omiya's 10-match unbeaten run. This conflates two unrelated stats. Corrected text:
RB Omiya Ardija's impressive streak of 10 unbeaten league matches casts a long shadow over the hosts, who have only managed to scrape together 11 points this season. While the head-to-head sample isn't explicitly mentioned, the recent form clearly favors the visitors. Sagan Tosu, however, isn't far behind in the underlying numbers, evidenced by their expected goals tally of 1.39 against Omiya's 1.41. This demonstrates a tightly contested matchup on paper.
The playing styles of both sides suggest a fascinating battle for control. Tosu's high press will clash with Omiya's possession-oriented approach, potentially leading to a fast-paced game with opportunities on the counter. The expected goals against figure shows Tosu's defensive edge, averaging 0.8 xGA compared to Omiya's 0.95. Yet, Omiya's ability to convert possession into clear chances has also been evident in their slightly superior xPoints, 15.7 to Tosu's 15.3.
Despite Omiya's recent unbeaten run, the model gives a slight edge to Sagan Tosu with a 39% probability of winning, compared to Omiya's 36%. The most probable scoreline of 1-1 at 12% underscores the likelihood of a closely fought contest. The chances of both teams finding the net stand at 57%, hinting that neither side will be able to completely shut out the other.
The over 2.5 goals probability sits at 53%, suggesting a slight lean towards a match with more action on the scoreboard. For those looking for value, consider the bookmakers' odds on the draw at 25%, which aligns with its probability and offers a safe harbor in an unpredictable clash. The numbers, while tight, suggest a 1-1 draw as the most balanced outcome, with both sides likely to score.
The verdict on the pre-built bet builders for this match, priced against the model’s score matrix before kickoff. Graded on the 90-minute result.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).
| Bookmaker | 1 · Sagan Tosu | X | 2 · Omiya Ardija |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betsafe | 2.30 | 3.35 | 2.72 |
| LeoVegas | 2.30 | 3.30 | 2.70 |
| Nordicbet | 2.30 | 3.35 | 2.72 |
| Pinnacle | 2.30 | 3.63 | EV+ 4% 2.92 |
Odds updated 17 Oct, 08:18
2.36 → 2.30
3.75 → 3.63
2.64 → 2.92
1.67 → 1.70
Pinnacle · 9 recorded price levels · 10/10/2026 → 17/10/2026 · fixed scale 5 percentage points
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 | Sagan Tosu | Omiya Ardija |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 11 | 20 |
| xPoints | 15.3 | 15.7 |
| xG per match | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| xGA per match | 0.8 | 0.95 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.18 | 0.32 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.11 | 0.18 |
| Playing style | Sagan Tosu | Omiya Ardija |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.32 | 0.3 |
| Field tilt | 0.66 | 0.62 |
| xT per match | 1 | 1.2 |
| xTA per match | 0.56 | 0.82 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 20 | 20 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.35 | 0.39 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.3 | 0.42 |
| Entries into the box per match | 14 | 16 |
| Entries into the box against | 9 | 11 |
| Pass completion % | 0.78 | 0.73 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.75 | 0.69 |
| Passes per match | 433 | 359 |
| Passes against per match | 275 | 224 |
| Switches of play per match | 23.5 | 19.7 |
| Long balls per match | 34 | 30 |
| Set pieces | Sagan Tosu | Omiya Ardija |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.08 | 0.08 |
| Corners per match | 6.8 | 4.7 |
| Corners against per match | 4.7 | 4.8 |
| xG per corner | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.01 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.49 | 0.38 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.53 | 0.73 |
| Other | Sagan Tosu | Omiya Ardija |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| The goalkeepers | Ryota Izumori (Sagan Tosu) | Thomas William Glover (Omiya Ardija) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 22 | 21 |
| Save % | 67% | 70% |
| xG prevented | 41% | 51% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Sagan Tosu a 39% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Sagan Tosu 39%, draw 25%, Omiya Ardija 36%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 12% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 53% and under at 47%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 57% according to the model.
The model expects 1.39 goals (xG) for Sagan Tosu and 1.41 for Omiya Ardija, 2.80 in total.
Sagan Tosu or draw (1X) 64%, Omiya Ardija or draw (X2) 61% and no draw (12) 75%.
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.