01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance AIK or draw (1X)73%
- Over 1.5 goals80%
Swedish AllsvenskanStrawberry arena, Solna15°3,0 mm17 km/h
Läs på svenskaAnna Karlsson · · A data-driven preview · How the predictions work
In the context of their recent clashes, AIK holds a clear advantage over Mjällby with four victories to one in their last seven encounters. This head-to-head trend provides AIK with a psychological edge, yet its importance is lessened by the small sample size compared to the broader analysis of current form and expected goals. AIK's possession and high press style meshes intriguingly with Mjällby's possession control approach, suggesting a tactical battle where AIK's home field and pressing might tilt the balance.
AIK's form is notably stronger, sitting 11 points clear of their opponents in the league table. However, the expected points tell a different story, with Mjällby slightly edging AIK, suggesting that AIK's table position might overstate their actual performance level. The expected goals data shows both teams averaging 1.2 xG per match, indicating an evenly matched offensive potential. The defenses are similarly matched, with both conceding 1.8 xGA per game, which could lead to a tight affair despite the model favoring over 2.5 goals.
Weather could play a role. With 3.6 mm of rain forecasted, the conditions might suppress the scoring slightly, although the model has accounted for this in its 57% lean towards over 2.5 goals. The most probable scorelines showing 1-1 and 2-1 suggest a match that could swing on a single moment of quality or error.
The sharpest angle lies in the odds for an AIK victory. Given the historical dominance and Mjällby's recent three-game losing streak, the 45% probability assigned by the model could indicate value. If the bookmaker has set favorable odds on AIK, this might be the most compelling play for punters looking to leverage the statistical edge AIK seems to possess.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
Head-to-head based on Allsvenskan 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 | AIK | Mjällby |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 31 | 20 |
| xPoints | 18.9 | 19 |
| xG per match | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| xGA per match | 1.8 | 1.8 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.24 | 0.22 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.4 | 0.47 |
| Playing style | AIK | Mjällby |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.34 | 0.31 |
| Field tilt | 0.53 | 0.51 |
| xT per match | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| xTA per match | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 29 | 34 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.52 | 0.56 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.23 | 0.24 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.22 | 0.25 |
| Entries into the box per match | 13 | 14 |
| Entries into the box against | 14 | 15 |
| Pass completion % | 0.81 | 0.81 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.76 | 0.77 |
| Passes per match | 394 | 416 |
| Passes against per match | 362 | 381 |
| Switches of play per match | 15.5 | 17.5 |
| Long balls per match | 36 | 32 |
| Set pieces | AIK | Mjällby |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.09 | 0.21 |
| Corners per match | 4.9 | 4.5 |
| Corners against per match | 5 | 4.5 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.31 | 0.37 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.58 | 0.51 |
| Other | AIK | Mjällby |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.6 | 0.56 |
| The goalkeepers | Kristoffer Nordfeldt (AIK) | Robin Wallinder (Mjällby) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 68 | 57 |
| Save % | 75% | 68% |
| xG prevented | 65% | 42% |
| Claims | 53 (87%) | 96 (90%) |
The model gives AIK a 45% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: AIK 45%, draw 27%, Mjällby 29%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 11% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 57% and under at 43%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 59% 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.