Match ☆ 06 Feb 2002
NED · Eredivisie · 2001
HT 0–0
View head-to-head record →
Betting odds
1X2 (match) betting odds
Gamebookers home win odds 1.15
Gamebookers draw odds 6
Gamebookers away win odds 11.5
Interwetten home win odds 1.15
Interwetten draw odds 5.5
Interwetten away win odds 11
Sportingbet home win odds 1.143
Sportingbet draw odds 6
Sportingbet away win odds 12
Stanleybet home win odds 1.111
Stanleybet draw odds 6.5
Stanleybet away win odds 15
William Hill home win odds 1.15
William Hill draw odds 5.5
William Hill away win odds 12
The models what they said before kick-off
Draw predictor · this site's own figures
Figure Feyenoord Fortuna Sittard
N — no-draw runmatches in a row without a draw 1 2
Max Nthis team's longest run ever 16 14
E — draw debtexpected draws over the current run 0.21 0.41
p50 — last 50draw rate over its last 50 matches 22.0% 20.0%
p100 — last 100draw rate over its last 100 matches 21.0% 21.0%
Draw % — all timeshare of every match drawn 23.5% 25.7%
Σ Nboth sides' runs added 3
Σ Eboth sides' draw debt added 0.63

These are the figures that held before kick-off: each side's record over every match it had played before 6 Feb 2002, computed exactly as the predictor computes today's. Draw score and rank are left out: both place a team against the whole field, and the field can only be scored as it stands now.

Team strength · Elo
Feyenoord 1,741 after: 1,743
Fortuna Sittard 1,390 after: 1,388
Rating gap +416 home advantage included
Draws at this gap 14.0% 300+ · 22,504 matches
Goals model · Dixon-Coles
Expected goals 2.92 – 0.77 home – away
Home win 80.5%
Draw 12.8% every level score added up
Away win 6.7%
Both together · the blend
Blended draw chance 13.1% 75% goals model · 25% Elo gap
Goals model said 12.8% form only
This Elo gap said 14.0% strength only

The mix is the one that scored best over 544,576 matches — the two are averaged on the log-odds scale, not simply added.

The regression · the logistic model
Logistic draw chance 9.7% five signals, then recalibrated
95% band 9.7% – 10.5% how unsure the fit is, not the match
The blend says 13.1% the older published reading

A regression over five signals — the goals model, the draw rate at this Elo gap, the expected goals in the fixture and the competition's own base draw rate — with an isotonic map on top to put the level back where reality is. Held out on a decade it never saw it beat the blend above, which is why both are shown here while one is chosen. Unlike the two readings above it, this one is not leak-free: the model was fitted on all of history, this match included, so for a played match it is a description rather than a prediction.

Both figures are what the models knew before this match — neither ever reads the result it is describing, so they can be compared with what actually happened. Measured over 160,869 priced matches the goals model is slightly worse than the bookmakers (how it is scored), so a high draw chance means an even, low-scoring match rather than value. Descriptive statistics, not betting advice.