01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Iğdır or draw (1X)70%
- Over 1.5 goals77%
Turkish 1. Lig25°9 km/h
Läs på svenska
IğdırPossession controlMarcus Johansson · · Analysis from the match model · How the predictions work
42% – that's the probability, according to the model, of Igdir FK coming out on top against Kayserispor. It's a striking number, considering the latter's edge in both actual points and expected points this season. The model leans towards Igdir FK, but Kayserispor is not to be underestimated with their 6 points on the board compared to Igdir's 3.
Igdir FK kicks off with a possession control style, aiming to dictate the pace of play. Their expected goals (xG) is 1.53, suggesting they have the opportunity to create chances, though their actual xG per match sits at a modest 1.0. Kayserispor, with their high press approach, have posted an impressive xG per match of 2.3, indicating a more dynamic offensive threat. Their expected goals against (xGA) is 0.69, while Igdir FK boasts a better defensive profile with an xGA of just 0.5.
The potential for a 1-1 draw seems tangible, with a 12% likelihood, yet the model hints at a 1-0 or 2-1 result for Igdir FK, both at 9%. Weather isn't a factor this time, so no dampening of the offensive flair should be expected. The over 2.5 goals market is finely balanced at 52%, while both teams scoring is a shade more probable at 56%.
Kayserispor's six points so far hint at a team that knows how to get results, but their task won't be straightforward. With Igdir FK's probability to win and Kayserispor's attacking prowess, expect a tightly contested affair. The model tilts towards the home side, but given the attacking numbers, a punt on both teams to score seems the sharpest angle, aligning with the 56% likelihood – shop around for value, with odds on BTTS potentially reflecting that edge.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
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 | Iğdır | Kayserispor |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 3 | 6 |
| xPoints | 3.3 | 4.2 |
| xG per match | 1 | 2.3 |
| xGA per match | 0.5 | 0.69 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.02 | 0.59 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.06 | 0.12 |
| Playing style | Iğdır | Kayserispor |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.32 | 0.3 |
| Field tilt | 0.48 | 0.66 |
| xT per match | 0.95 | 1.1 |
| xTA per match | 0.84 | 0.6 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 31 | 26 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.23 | 0.29 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.19 | 0.2 |
| Entries into the box per match | 8 | 14 |
| Entries into the box against | 8 | 9 |
| Pass completion % | 0.75 | 0.84 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.71 | 0.8 |
| Passes per match | 372 | 505 |
| Passes against per match | 348 | 307 |
| Switches of play per match | 16.7 | 30.1 |
| Long balls per match | 33 | 35 |
| Set pieces | Iğdır | Kayserispor |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.11 | 0.07 |
| Corners per match | 3.5 | 5.5 |
| Corners against per match | 3.5 | 5 |
| xG per corner | 0.03 | 0.09 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.03 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.71 | 0.82 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.43 | 0.5 |
| Other | Iğdır | Kayserispor |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.66 | 0.66 |
| The goalkeepers | Jakub Szumski (Iğdır) | Gokhan Degirmenci (Kayserispor) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 5 | 4 |
| Save % | 83% | 100% |
| xG prevented | 66% | 100% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Iğdır a 42% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Iğdır 42%, draw 28%, Kayserispor 31%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 12% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 52% and under at 48%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 56% 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.