Skip to main content
Icelandic 1. Deild · Thursday, 13 August 2026

Grotta v Njardvik Correct Score Prediction

Kick-off:

MODEL ESTIMATE

Score probability model

CSM-1.0
Published score2-26.5%
Expected goals1.40 – 1.95Grotta / Njardvik

Most likely scorelines

#11-111.1%
#21-29.3%
#32-16.7%
View score probability matrix
Score probability model
Home goals ↓ / Away goals →01234
05.0%5.3%6.6%4.3%2.1%
13.4%11.1%9.3%6.1%3.0%
23.4%6.7%6.5%4.3%2.1%
31.6%3.1%3.1%2.0%1.0%
40.6%1.1%1.1%0.7%0.3%

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 estimate6.5%
Model fair odds15.27
Recorded CS odds10.00
Bookmaker implied10.0%
Model-market gap-3.5 pp
Price gap vs model fair price-34.5%

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

Published12 Aug 2026 · 19:09 GMT+0100

✓ Original forecast preserved · Original prediction: 2-2

Legacy / unverifiablePublication timing unavailable

Available market odds

Both teams to score — Yes1.40View odds
Both teams to score — No2.70View odds
Over 2.51.40View odds
Under 2.52.62View odds

Why this score?

The model projects Grotta versus Njardvik to finish 2-2. That scoreline implies Yes for BTTS and Over 2.5 for the goals market. Confidence is recorded as Medium; this is a model output, not a guarantee. The recorded final score is 1-4, so the archived prediction can be checked against the outcome.

→ 2-2
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