Brentford v Nott'm Forest

The bar is the model's probability; the caret on the same scale is the market's, with the margin removed. The distance between them is the disagreement.

Model fair prices, computed as 1 / probability from a Dixon-Coles score matrix. No bookmaker margin is included, and no bookmaker is quoting these. A real price will be shorter than every number here.

Computed arithmetic, not generated text. Each driver is a stored quantity: the Elo difference replayed from results, points per game over the last five matches, rolling expected goals, and each absent player's share of team expected goals.

Removing a player scales that side's expected goals by their share of recent attacking output, then rebuilds the score matrix. Every market moves together.

Written by gpt-5.6-terra from the numbers above, which it cannot add to or override.

The model rates Brentford at 35.8%, the draw at 35.1%, and Nott'm Forest at 29.1%. Expected goals are low at 0.98 for Brentford and 0.86 for Forest. Over 2.5 goals is rated 28.0%, while both teams scoring is 36.9%. The market is much stronger on Brentford, assigning them 46.1% versus the model’s 35.8%. It prices the draw at 25.9%, below the model’s 35.1%, and Forest at 28.1%, close to the model’s 29.1%. The scorecard does not show the model beating the market. Brentford have 1 win, 3 draws and 1 loss in 5, while Forest have 1 win, 1 draw and 3 losses. Forest’s 11.4 xG in that spell exceeds Brentford’s 7.1. The head-to-head is even across 8 matches: 3 Brentford wins, 2 draws and 3 Forest wins. No named absentees are listed, but there are 13 unmeasured Brentford absentees and 9 for Forest, so their attacking impact is not quantified.

Shown with the model's own record, because that is what decides how much these are worth.

Dixon-Coles bivariate Poisson fitted to Premier League results with exponential time decay. Statistical model, no language model involved.