Skip to main content
Swedish Allsvenskan · Sunday, 9 August 2026

Malmo v Degerfors Correct Score Prediction

Kick-off:

MODEL ESTIMATE

Score probability model

CSM-1.0
Published score2-010.9%
Expected goals2.04 – 0.91Malmo / Degerfors

Most likely scorelines

#12-010.9%
#21-110.4%
#31-010.0%
View score probability matrix
Score probability model
Home goals ↓ / Away goals →01234
05.9%4.1%2.2%0.7%0.1%
110.0%10.4%4.4%1.3%0.3%
210.9%9.9%4.5%1.4%0.3%
37.4%6.7%3.1%0.9%0.2%
43.8%3.4%1.6%0.5%0.1%

Market-fitted Poisson + Dixon–Coles · Estimated model probabilities are fitted to recorded 1X2 and goal-market prices. They are not yet empirically calibrated probabilities and do not guarantee an outcome.

PRICE COMPARISON

Model vs market price

CSVI-1.0
Model estimate10.9%
Model fair odds9.19
Recorded CS odds7.50
Bookmaker implied13.3%
Model-market gap-2.5 pp
Price gap vs model fair price-18.4%

This is a mathematical comparison between the uncalibrated CSM-1.0 estimate and the recorded price. It is not a calibrated expected-value claim, guarantee or betting recommendation.

Prediction record

Published8 Aug 2026 · 16:37 GMT+0100

✓ Original forecast preserved · Original prediction: 2-0

Legacy / unverifiablePublication timing unavailable

Available market odds

Both teams to score — Yes1.73View odds
Both teams to score — No2.00View odds
Over 2.51.67View odds
Under 2.52.10View odds

Why this score?

The model projects Malmo versus Degerfors to finish 2-0. That scoreline implies No for BTTS and Under 2.5 for the goals market. Confidence is recorded as Medium; this is a model output, not a guarantee. The recorded final score is 1-2, so the archived prediction can be checked against the outcome.

→ 2-0
Share tip
FacebookX

Shares the tip and page link — never the bookmaker link.

How to interpret this prediction

Correct score is a high-variance market. The projected score is a forecast, not a certainty. The companion markets below are derived consistently from the same projected scoreline.

Prediction methodology · Results methodology · Editorial policy