01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Amedspor or draw (X2)76%
- Over 1.5 goals80%
Süper Lig
Läs på svenska
AmedsporPossession control18+ · Gamble responsibly · stodlinjen.se · Affiliate links
Oscar Nilsson · · Model-assisted analysis, fact-checked · How the predictions work
The TEXT includes a claim not supported by the facts: "despite the small head-to-head sample that doesn't carry much weight yet." No head-to-head data appears in the FACTS. This should be removed.
CORRECTED TEXT:
Amedspor's edge over Gençlerbirliği is evident across various metrics. The visitors have a clear form advantage with 13 points compared to the hosts' 7, a gap supported by expected points. Amed also boasts superior expected goals and a much more robust defensive record, conceding an average of just 1.0 xGA per match against Gençlerbirliği's 2.1. The hosts are on a concerning losing streak, having dropped their last three matches, which makes their task even tougher against a side that's been more efficient at both ends of the pitch.
Both teams employ a similar style, focusing on possession control, yet Amed are doing it more effectively. They average 1.6 xG per match, a significant advantage over Gençlerbirliği's meager 1.0. This discrepancy suggests that the visitors are not only creating more opportunities but also more likely to capitalize on them. The expected goals model leans towards Amed, predicting they'll find the back of the net at least once, perhaps twice, whereas the hosts face an uphill battle just to level the scoreline.
The most likely outcomes according to model probabilities are a 1-1 draw or a 1-2 victory for Amed, reflecting their superiority in both form and statistical backing. The over 2.5 goals probability stands at 56%, indicating a decent chance for goals, but given both teams' playing styles, it might be slightly optimistic. The match could hinge on Amed's ability to exploit Gençlerbirliği's defensive frailties, especially since the hosts are struggling to keep opponents at bay.
For those seeking value, Amed's win at odds of 2.4 with LeoVegas is a standout opportunity. The model's 45% probability suggests a 7% edge over the bookmaker, highlighting a potentially profitable bet. While no outcome is guaranteed, the data points firmly toward Amed taking the spoils in this clash.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).
| Bookmaker | 1 · Gençlerbirliği | X | 2 · Amedspor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betsafe | 2.62 | 3.50 | EV+ 10% 2.45 |
| LeoVegas | 2.60 | 3.45 | EV+ 10% 2.45 |
| Nordicbet | 2.62 | 3.50 | EV+ 10% 2.45 |
Odds updated 3 Oct, 12:36
2.55 → 2.60
3.40 → 3.45
2.40 → 2.45
1.68 → 1.70
LeoVegas · 2 recorded price levels · 03/10/2026 → 03/10/2026 · 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 | Gençlerbirliği | Amedspor |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 7 | 13 |
| xPoints | 6.1 | 10.9 |
| xG per match | 1 | 1.6 |
| xGA per match | 2.1 | 1 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.2 | 0.33 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.31 | 0.18 |
| Playing style | Gençlerbirliği | Amedspor |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.29 | 0.34 |
| Field tilt | 0.36 | 0.4 |
| xT per match | 0.61 | 0.78 |
| xTA per match | 1.2 | 0.67 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 18 | 18 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.28 | 0.27 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.2 | 0.21 |
| Entries into the box per match | 9 | 9 |
| Entries into the box against | 16 | 7 |
| Pass completion % | 0.76 | 0.77 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.73 | 0.73 |
| Passes per match | 304 | 324 |
| Passes against per match | 405 | 395 |
| Switches of play per match | 36 | 21.9 |
| Long balls per match | 37 | 29 |
| Set pieces | Gençlerbirliği | Amedspor |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.06 | 0.1 |
| Corners per match | 4.5 | 4 |
| Corners against per match | 6.8 | 4.4 |
| xG per corner | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.03 | 0.02 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.48 | 0.4 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.53 | 0.71 |
| Other | Gençlerbirliği | Amedspor |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.72 | 0.73 |
| The goalkeepers | Irfan Can Egribayat (Gençlerbirliği) | Alban-Marc Lafont (Amedspor) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 35 | 17 |
| Save % | 73% | 71% |
| xG prevented | 53% | 39% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Amedspor a 45% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Gençlerbirliği 29%, draw 26%, Amedspor 45%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 11% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 56% and under at 44%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 57% 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.

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.