What this team's results have earned: every match in the database is replayed in date order, both sides start at 1500 and the winner takes points from the loser. The rating is the one it held after its last rated match, and the rank counts every club ever rated, sides that no longer play included. A measure of strength, not a forecast of the next result. Computed 3 Nov 2026.
| # | Run | From → To | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 9 | 13 Jul 2019 → 31 Aug 2019 | ▸ matches |
| 2 | 8 | 27 May 2017 → 07 Aug 2017 | ▸ matches |
| 3 | 5 | 21 Aug 2018 → 23 Feb 2019 | ▸ matches |
| 4 | 5 | 26 Apr 2017 → 18 May 2017 | ▸ matches |
| 5 | 4 | 21 Apr 2019 → 04 May 2019 | ▸ matches |
| 6 | 4 | 09 Sep 2017 → 25 Sep 2017 | ▸ matches |
| 7 | 4 | 13 Apr 2006 → 03 Aug 2006 | ▸ matches |
| 8 | 3 | 20 Feb 2021 → 07 Mar 2021 | ▸ matches |
| 9 | 3 | 22 Sep 2019 → 29 Sep 2019 | ▸ matches |
| 10 | 3 | 25 May 2019 → 02 Jun 2019 | ▸ matches |
| Competition | P | D | Draw% | N | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swedish Cup | 63 | 16 | 25.4% | 1 | 4 |
| Allsvenskan | 62 | 16 | 25.8% | 1 | 8 |
| Year | P | D | Draw% | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 |
| 2022 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 |
| 2021 | 4 | 0 | 0.0% | 3 |
| 2020 | 4 | 1 | 25.0% | 2 |
| 2019 | 37 | 11 | 29.7% | 9 |
| 2018 | 3 | 0 | 0.0% | 3 |
| 2017 | 31 | 9 | 29.0% | 8 |
| 2016 | 4 | 0 | 0.0% | 3 |
| 2015 | 4 | 1 | 25.0% | 3 |
| 2014 | 5 | 1 | 20.0% | 3 |
| 2013 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 2 |
| 2012 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 |
| 2011 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 |
| 2010 | 3 | 2 | 66.7% | 1 |
| 2009 | 3 | 0 | 0.0% | 3 |
| 2008 | 2 | 1 | 50.0% | 1 |
| 2007 | 5 | 2 | 40.0% | 1 |
| 2006 | 4 | 0 | 0.0% | 4 |
| 2005 | 2 | 1 | 50.0% | 1 |
| 2004 | 3 | 2 | 66.7% | 1 |
| 2003 | 2 | 1 | 50.0% | 1 |
| 2002 | 2 | 0 | 0.0% | 2 |
| 2000 | 1 | 0 | 0.0% | 1 |
Over 125 matches (Aug 2000 – Aug 2023), AFC Eskilstuna drew 32 where the draw model expected 25.5 from those particular fixtures — about 7 more, or 1.5 standard errors, a gap most teams show over a stretch this long.
As unusual as a coin landing the same way 3 times running. A flat league average would have expected 27.0 instead — "more draws than the league" and "more draws than these fixtures deserved" are different claims. These matches were part of the model's own training set, so its chances were fitted already knowing the results.