01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Lunds BK to win50%
- Over 1.5 goals83%
Swedish Ettan11°4,1 mm43 km/h
Läs på svenskaFinal score 1–4. Before kick-off the model's prediction was as follows. BetBuilders AI model prediction for Eskilsminne vs Lunds BK (Swedish Ettan, Saturday, 24 October 2026): Eskilsminne win 28%, draw 22%, Lunds BK win 50%. Expected goals (xG): Eskilsminne 1.43, Lunds BK 1.75. Most likely score: 1-1 (11%). Over 2.5 goals 62%, both teams to score 63%. Double chance: Eskilsminne or draw 50%, Lunds BK or draw 72%. Prediction updated Friday, 16 October 2026.
18+ · Gamble responsibly · stodlinjen.se · Affiliate links
Marcus Johansson · · Analysis from the match model · How the predictions work
The numbers suggest a tight but high-stakes clash as Eskilsminne squares off against Lunds BK, with the visitors holding a notable edge. With Lunds BK given a 50% probability of winning by the model, the tactical battle will likely hinge on how well Eskilsminne can disrupt Lund’s possession control and convert their high press into effective scoring opportunities. Historically, Eskilsminne holds a slight edge in this fixture, but the small sample size of seven encounters since 2023 tempers the weight of this advantage.
In terms of scoring potential, both teams show promise, with expected goals for Eskilsminne at 1.43 and Lunds BK at 1.75. The forecast of 4.1 mm of rain might suppress goal-scoring slightly, but with a 62% chance of over 2.5 goals and the likelihood of both teams scoring set at 63%, the damp conditions are already factored into these projections. Despite the weather, a high-scoring game remains plausible given the average of 4.6 goals per meeting between these teams.
Lunds BK's overall season form and xPoints superiority present a compelling argument for their edge in this matchup. The visitors average slightly fewer goals against per match (1.2) compared to Eskilsminne’s 1.7, pointing to a more robust defensive setup. This defensive stability, combined with slightly superior offensive metrics, reinforces the model’s lean towards an away victory.
The most probable scorelines of 1-1 and 1-2 reflect the expected competitive nature of the game. Yet, should Lunds BK effectively assert their control, the 1-2 outcome appears the more likely. The betting value is clear: odds of 2.22 on Lunds BK with Betsafe and Nordicbet are rated with an 11% edge, offering a lucrative angle for those backing the visitors.
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 · Eskilsminne | X | 2 · Lunds BK |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betsafe | 2.75 | 3.70 | EV+ 5% 2.10 |
| LeoVegas | 2.75 | 3.70 | EV+ 6% 2.12 |
| Nordicbet | 2.75 | 3.70 | EV+ 5% 2.10 |
Odds updated 24 Oct, 11:37
Market signal
The market has moved clearly towards a Eskilsminne win since 21 October — the odds have shortened from 3.50 to 2.75 (−21%).
3.50 → 2.75
3.75 → 3.70
1.82 → 2.10
Nordicbet · 19 recorded price levels · 21/10/2026 → 24/10/2026 · fixed scale 20 percentage points
Head-to-head based on Ettan 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 | Eskilsminne | Lunds BK |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 33 | 44 |
| xPoints | 35.8 | 41.9 |
| xG per match | 1.4 | 1.7 |
| xGA per match | 1.7 | 1.2 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.21 | 0.4 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.27 | 0.23 |
| Playing style | Eskilsminne | Lunds BK |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.36 | 0.35 |
| Field tilt | 0.48 | 0.57 |
| xT per match | 1.6 | 1.4 |
| xTA per match | 1.6 | 1.3 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 28 | 38 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.53 | 0.52 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.27 | 0.3 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.26 | 0.31 |
| Entries into the box per match | 15 | 15 |
| Entries into the box against | 16 | 11 |
| Pass completion % | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.72 | 0.69 |
| Passes per match | 324 | 366 |
| Passes against per match | 348 | 308 |
| Switches of play per match | 20.6 | 20.8 |
| Long balls per match | 34 | 38 |
| Set pieces | Eskilsminne | Lunds BK |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.17 | 0.16 |
| Corners per match | 4.5 | 5.5 |
| Corners against per match | 5.3 | 4.8 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.33 | 0.51 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.59 | 0.65 |
| Other | Eskilsminne | Lunds BK |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.55 | 0.44 |
| The goalkeepers | Ian Pettersson (Eskilsminne) | Andreas Alexandersson (Lunds BK) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 93 | 84 |
| Save % | 68% | 70% |
| xG prevented | 50% | 42% |
| Claims | 131 (98%) | 156 (92%) |
The model gives Lunds BK a 50% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Eskilsminne 28%, draw 22%, Lunds BK 50%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 11% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 62% and under at 38%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 63% according to the model.
The model expects 1.43 goals (xG) for Eskilsminne and 1.75 for Lunds BK, 3.18 in total.
Eskilsminne or draw (1X) 50%, Lunds BK or draw (X2) 72% and no draw (12) 78%.
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.