Model output, not advice. These are probabilities from a
statistical model, published for transparency about how it performs. They are
not tips and not financial advice. In backtests this model does not
reliably beat closing prices, which is the only benchmark that matters, so
expect selections here to lose money over time. 18+. Gambling is addictive; if
it stops being a modelling exercise, stop.
DEN1 4 fixtures across 3 days
Best goal markets over/under and both teams to score, every day in this window
| Match | Market | Pick | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over3.5 | 28.2% | 3.54 | 8.72 | +146.0% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over3.5 | 33.2% | 3.01 | 6.88 | +128.8% | 3.00% |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over3.5 | 41.0% | 2.44 | 5.57 | +128.5% | 3.00% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over2.5 | 49.3% | 2.03 | 3.86 | +90.6% | 3.00% |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over2.5 | 62.3% | 1.61 | 2.86 | +78.4% | — |
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over2.5 | 54.7% | 1.83 | 3.21 | +75.8% | 3.00% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | BTTS | Yes— | 52.2% | 1.92 | 3.35 | +74.9% | 3.00% |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Totals | Over3.5 | 22.5% | 4.44 | 7.52 | +69.3% | 2.66% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over1.5 | 73.8% | 1.36 | 2.29 | +69.1% | — |
| ViborgvAarhus | BTTS | Yes— | 56.1% | 1.78 | 3.00 | +68.1% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over1.5 | 77.8% | 1.29 | 2.05 | +59.7% | — |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over1.5 | 82.9% | 1.21 | 1.84 | +52.1% | — |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Totals | Over2.5 | 42.6% | 2.34 | 3.48 | +48.6% | 3.00% |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Totals | Over1.5 | 68.4% | 1.46 | 2.13 | +45.5% | 3.00% |
| SilkeborgvOdense | BTTS | Yes— | 60.2% | 1.66 | 2.41 | +45.1% | 3.00% |
| Randers FCvLyngby | BTTS | Yes— | 47.7% | 2.10 | 3.04 | +45.0% | 3.00% |
One row per market per match: the side the model prefers. The two sides of a two-way line are near mirror images, so showing both would double the table without adding anything. Edges are measured against each pair de-vigged on its own, not against the match-winner margin — books load goals markets more heavily, and borrowing the 1X2 overround here would flatter every row.
Best value on this date
| Match | Selection | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| Randers FCvLyngby | Randers FC H | 52.0% | 1.92 | 2.23 | +15.8% | 3.00% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Draw | 28.6% | 3.50 | 3.58 | +2.5% | — |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | AC Horsens H | 22.0% | 4.54 | 4.43 | -2.3% | — |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Draw | 26.1% | 3.82 | 3.45 | -9.8% | — |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Brondby A | 49.4% | 2.03 | 1.74 | -13.9% | — |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Lyngby A | 21.9% | 4.57 | 3.00 | -34.5% | — |
Stake is blank unless a selection clears every gate: positive expected value, at least 5 percentage points of edge over the de-vigged line, and not more than 25 (a disagreement that large is usually the model missing something, not an opportunity). Most rows will be blank most days. Selections marked longshot are below 10% — their EV figure divides by a very small number and should not be trusted. thin data means one side has too few matches in the model's history for its rating to mean anything; the huge edge shown is the model's ignorance, not the market's mistake.
Goal markets on this date
| Match | Market | Pick | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over3.5 | 28.2% | 3.54 | 8.72 | +146.0% | 3.00% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over2.5 | 49.3% | 2.03 | 3.86 | +90.6% | 3.00% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | BTTS | Yes— | 52.2% | 1.92 | 3.35 | +74.9% | 3.00% |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Totals | Over3.5 | 22.5% | 4.44 | 7.52 | +69.3% | 2.66% |
| AC HorsensvBrondby | Totals | Over1.5 | 73.8% | 1.36 | 2.29 | +69.1% | — |
| Randers FCvLyngby | Totals | Over2.5 | 42.6% | 2.34 | 3.48 | +48.6% | 3.00% |
One row per market per match: the side the model prefers. The two sides of a two-way line are near mirror images, so showing both would double the table without adding anything. Edges are measured against each pair de-vigged on its own, not against the match-winner margin — books load goals markets more heavily, and borrowing the 1X2 overround here would flatter every row.
Randers FC HOME
v Lyngby AWAY
14:00 · DEN1 · expected goals
Randers FC 1.45 – 0.93 Lyngby
Randers FC 52%
· draw 26%
· Lyngby 22%
| Model | Market | Book odds | Edge |
|---|
| Randers FC | 52.0% | 42.3% | 2.23 | +9.7pp |
| Draw | 26.1% | 26.7% | 3.45 | -0.5pp |
| Lyngby | 21.9% | 31.0% | 3.00 | -9.1pp |
| Over 1.5 | 68.4% | 44.3% | 2.13 | +24.0pp |
| Under 1.5 | 31.6% | 55.7% | 1.70 | -24.0pp |
| Over 2.5 | 42.6% | 29.5% | 3.48 | +13.1pp |
| Under 2.5 | 57.4% | 70.5% | 1.46 | -13.1pp |
| Over 3.5 | 22.5% | 13.7% | 7.52 | +8.8pp |
| Under 3.5 | 77.5% | 86.3% | 1.19 | -8.8pp |
| BTTS Yes | 47.7% | 36.3% | 3.04 | +11.4pp |
| BTTS No | 52.3% | 63.7% | 1.73 | -11.4pp |
Randers FC clean sheet
40%
Likeliest scores: 1–1 13% · 1–0 13% · 0–0 10% · 2–0 10%
Correlated combinations
- Lyngby win + Lyngby clean sheet — 14% (fair 7.32); naive multiplication would say 6%, off by +147%
- BTTS Yes + Over 2.5 — 34% (fair 2.97); naive multiplication would say 20%, off by +70%
- Randers FC win + Randers FC clean sheet — 30% (fair 3.36); naive multiplication would say 19%, off by +54%
- BTTS No + Under 2.5 — 45% (fair 2.24); naive multiplication would say 31%, off by +45%
AC Horsens HOME
v Brondby AWAY
16:00 · DEN1 · expected goals
AC Horsens 1.11 – 1.54 Brondby
AC Horsens 22%
· draw 29%
· Brondby 49%
| Model | Market | Book odds | Edge |
|---|
| AC Horsens | 22.0% | 20.2% | 4.43 | +1.8pp |
| Draw | 28.6% | 25.5% | 3.58 | +3.1pp |
| Brondby | 49.4% | 54.3% | 1.74 | -5.0pp |
| Over 1.5 | 73.8% | 40.9% | 2.29 | +32.8pp |
| Under 1.5 | 26.2% | 59.1% | 1.59 | -32.8pp |
| Over 2.5 | 49.3% | 26.3% | 3.86 | +23.0pp |
| Under 2.5 | 50.7% | 73.7% | 1.38 | -23.0pp |
| Over 3.5 | 28.2% | 11.6% | 8.72 | +16.6pp |
| Under 3.5 | 71.8% | 88.4% | 1.14 | -16.6pp |
| BTTS Yes | 52.2% | 31.8% | 3.35 | +20.4pp |
| BTTS No | 47.8% | 68.2% | 1.57 | -20.4pp |
AC Horsens clean sheet
22%
Likeliest scores: 1–1 13% · 0–1 10% · 1–2 9% · 0–2 8%
Correlated combinations
- AC Horsens win + AC Horsens clean sheet — 14% (fair 7.18); naive multiplication would say 6%, off by +140%
- Brondby win + Brondby clean sheet — 25% (fair 3.95); naive multiplication would say 15%, off by +65%
- BTTS No + Under 2.5 — 38% (fair 2.62); naive multiplication would say 24%, off by +60%
- BTTS Yes + Over 2.5 — 41% (fair 2.47); naive multiplication would say 26%, off by +55%
Best value on this date
| Match | Selection | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| SilkeborgvOdense | Silkeborg H | 40.2% | 2.49 | 2.62 | +5.4% | — |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Draw | 24.9% | 4.01 | 3.64 | -9.3% | — |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Odense A | 34.9% | 2.87 | 2.39 | -16.7% | — |
Stake is blank unless a selection clears every gate: positive expected value, at least 5 percentage points of edge over the de-vigged line, and not more than 25 (a disagreement that large is usually the model missing something, not an opportunity). Most rows will be blank most days. Selections marked longshot are below 10% — their EV figure divides by a very small number and should not be trusted. thin data means one side has too few matches in the model's history for its rating to mean anything; the huge edge shown is the model's ignorance, not the market's mistake.
Goal markets on this date
| Match | Market | Pick | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over3.5 | 41.0% | 2.44 | 5.57 | +128.5% | 3.00% |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over2.5 | 62.3% | 1.61 | 2.86 | +78.4% | — |
| SilkeborgvOdense | Totals | Over1.5 | 82.9% | 1.21 | 1.84 | +52.1% | — |
| SilkeborgvOdense | BTTS | Yes— | 60.2% | 1.66 | 2.41 | +45.1% | 3.00% |
One row per market per match: the side the model prefers. The two sides of a two-way line are near mirror images, so showing both would double the table without adding anything. Edges are measured against each pair de-vigged on its own, not against the match-winner margin — books load goals markets more heavily, and borrowing the 1X2 overround here would flatter every row.
Silkeborg HOME
v Odense AWAY
17:00 · DEN1 · expected goals
Silkeborg 1.78 – 1.46 Odense
Silkeborg 40%
· draw 25%
· Odense 35%
| Model | Market | Book odds | Edge |
|---|
| Silkeborg | 40.2% | 35.6% | 2.62 | +4.6pp |
| Draw | 24.9% | 25.2% | 3.64 | -0.2pp |
| Odense | 34.9% | 39.2% | 2.39 | -4.4pp |
| Over 1.5 | 82.9% | 51.4% | 1.84 | +31.5pp |
| Under 1.5 | 17.1% | 48.6% | 1.94 | -31.5pp |
| Over 2.5 | 62.3% | 35.9% | 2.86 | +26.4pp |
| Under 2.5 | 37.7% | 64.1% | 1.60 | -26.4pp |
| Over 3.5 | 41.0% | 18.9% | 5.57 | +22.1pp |
| Under 3.5 | 59.0% | 81.1% | 1.30 | -22.1pp |
| BTTS Yes | 60.2% | 45.4% | 2.41 | +14.8pp |
| BTTS No | 39.8% | 54.6% | 2.00 | -14.8pp |
Likeliest scores: 1–1 11% · 2–1 9% · 1–2 7% · 2–2 7%
Correlated combinations
- Odense win + Odense clean sheet — 13% (fair 7.95); naive multiplication would say 5%, off by +136%
- BTTS No + Under 2.5 — 27% (fair 3.76); naive multiplication would say 13%, off by +100%
- Silkeborg win + Silkeborg clean sheet — 19% (fair 5.32); naive multiplication would say 10%, off by +82%
- Draw + Under 2.5 — 15% (fair 6.68); naive multiplication would say 9%, off by +69%
Best value on this date
| Match | Selection | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| ViborgvAarhus | Aarhus A | 47.0% | 2.13 | 2.84 | +33.3% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | Draw | 24.2% | 4.14 | 3.55 | -14.3% | — |
| ViborgvAarhus | Viborg H | 28.9% | 3.46 | 2.28 | -34.3% | — |
Stake is blank unless a selection clears every gate: positive expected value, at least 5 percentage points of edge over the de-vigged line, and not more than 25 (a disagreement that large is usually the model missing something, not an opportunity). Most rows will be blank most days. Selections marked longshot are below 10% — their EV figure divides by a very small number and should not be trusted. thin data means one side has too few matches in the model's history for its rating to mean anything; the huge edge shown is the model's ignorance, not the market's mistake.
Goal markets on this date
| Match | Market | Pick | Model | Fair | Book | EV | Stake |
|---|
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over3.5 | 33.2% | 3.01 | 6.88 | +128.8% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over2.5 | 54.7% | 1.83 | 3.21 | +75.8% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | BTTS | Yes— | 56.1% | 1.78 | 3.00 | +68.1% | 3.00% |
| ViborgvAarhus | Totals | Over1.5 | 77.8% | 1.29 | 2.05 | +59.7% | — |
One row per market per match: the side the model prefers. The two sides of a two-way line are near mirror images, so showing both would double the table without adding anything. Edges are measured against each pair de-vigged on its own, not against the match-winner margin — books load goals markets more heavily, and borrowing the 1X2 overround here would flatter every row.
Viborg HOME
v Aarhus AWAY
17:00 · DEN1 · expected goals
Viborg 1.37 – 1.51 Aarhus
Viborg 29%
· draw 24%
· Aarhus 47%
| Model | Market | Book odds | Edge |
|---|
| Viborg | 28.9% | 41.3% | 2.28 | -12.5pp |
| Draw | 24.2% | 25.9% | 3.55 | -1.7pp |
| Aarhus | 47.0% | 32.8% | 2.84 | +14.2pp |
| Over 1.5 | 77.8% | 45.9% | 2.05 | +31.9pp |
| Under 1.5 | 22.2% | 54.1% | 1.74 | -31.9pp |
| Over 2.5 | 54.7% | 32.1% | 3.21 | +22.6pp |
| Under 2.5 | 45.3% | 67.9% | 1.52 | -22.6pp |
| Over 3.5 | 33.2% | 15.0% | 6.88 | +18.3pp |
| Under 3.5 | 66.8% | 85.0% | 1.21 | -18.3pp |
| BTTS Yes | 56.1% | 36.6% | 3.00 | +19.4pp |
| BTTS No | 43.9% | 63.4% | 1.73 | -19.4pp |
Likeliest scores: 1–1 12% · 1–2 9% · 2–1 8% · 0–1 8%
Correlated combinations
- Viborg win + Viborg clean sheet — 16% (fair 6.22); naive multiplication would say 8%, off by +112%
- Aarhus win + Aarhus clean sheet — 19% (fair 5.20); naive multiplication would say 10%, off by +89%
- BTTS No + Under 2.5 — 33% (fair 3.03); naive multiplication would say 19%, off by +77%
- Draw + Under 2.5 — 18% (fair 5.49); naive multiplication would say 12%, off by +57%