01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Arlanda or draw (X2)60%
- Over 1.5 goals80%
Swedish Ettan14°0,3 mm15 km/h
Läs på svenska
ArlandaCounter-attacks & crossesSofia Andersson · · The model's read on the match · How the predictions work
Arlanda's 40% win probability in the model suggests they've got the upper hand over Gefle, despite the tight expected goals of 1.54 to 1.44. This clash sees two counter-attacking teams squaring off, both relying on crosses, which could result in a cagey encounter. However, with a 57% probability for over 2.5 goals, the numbers hint at a match that might break open, especially considering the high likelihood of both teams finding the net at 60%.
The rain — 7.5 mm expected — might dampen fiery attacking play, but it's factored into the model already. Despite this, Arlanda's slight advantage in points and expected points suggests they're better equipped to handle such conditions. Gefle's single win in their three recent encounters with Arlanda, while balanced by a draw and a loss, doesn't paint a definitive picture of dominance. It's a small sample, so season form takes precedence.
Arlanda's superior xG of 1.4 per match compared to Gefle's 1.1 underscores their edge in creating quality chances. Defensively, both teams face the same xGA of 1.4, pointing to potential vulnerabilities at the back. Gefle's reliance on counter-attacks might struggle against a side that mirrors their style but does it a touch more effectively.
Given these factors, a 1-2 scoreline seems plausible, just edging out the 1-1 model favorite. The betting value lies with Unibet's odds for Arlanda at 2.5, reflecting their edge in key metrics, even if the rain might flatten out attacking verve briefly. This one's Arlanda's to lose, with an entertaining edge should they unlock Gefle's defense.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
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 | Gefle | Arlanda |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 24 | 36 |
| xPoints | 26.4 | 28.7 |
| xG per match | 1.1 | 1.4 |
| xGA per match | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.21 | 0.26 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.27 | 0.29 |
| Playing style | Gefle | Arlanda |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.35 | 0.34 |
| Field tilt | 0.43 | 0.41 |
| xT per match | 1.3 | 1.4 |
| xTA per match | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 30 | 33 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.47 | 0.5 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.23 | 0.29 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.24 | 0.32 |
| Entries into the box per match | 10 | 11 |
| Entries into the box against | 13 | 14 |
| Pass completion % | 0.79 | 0.73 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.75 | 0.67 |
| Passes per match | 337 | 263 |
| Passes against per match | 439 | 334 |
| Switches of play per match | 16.3 | 17.7 |
| Long balls per match | 28 | 32 |
| Set pieces | Gefle | Arlanda |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.15 | 0.13 |
| Corners per match | 3.8 | 3.6 |
| Corners against per match | 5.1 | 4.8 |
| xG per corner | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.04 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.47 | 0.45 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.58 | 0.58 |
| Other | Gefle | Arlanda |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.58 | 0.42 |
| The goalkeepers | Max Croon (Gefle) | Adam Smedberg Lagh (Arlanda) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 62 | 69 |
| Save % | 62% | 75% |
| xG prevented | 38% | 56% |
| Claims | 83 (97%) | 98 (95%) |
The model gives Arlanda a 40% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Gefle 34%, draw 25%, Arlanda 40%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 12% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 57% and under at 43%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 60% 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.