Auda vs RFS
Virsliga, Latvia · 2026-09-20 · 17:00 CET
DWDWL
WDWWWThe score model made an RFS win the most likely outcome at 53%, split on goals (Over 2.5 at 50%). It finished 1:1 (HT 1:1) — the most likely outcome did not come in. Generated from the data — the market usually knows why it disagrees.
Scoreline probabilities
Priced from the same score distribution as every market below.
First goal · head-to-head
Full Market Baseline (Dixon-Coles)
One statistical model of the final score — every probability below derives from the same score distribution, so they can never contradict each other. Expected goals: Auda 1.00 – 1.68 RFS.
| Market | Data % | Implied | Divergence | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Auda win | 22.4% | 18.5% | +3.9% | ✗ |
| Draw | 24.4% | 23.0% | +1.4% | ✓ |
| RFS win | 53.2% | 58.5% | -5.3% | ✗ |
| Over 1.5 goals | 75.0% | — | — | ✓ |
| Over 2.5 goals | 50.3% | 58.4% | -8.2% | ✗ |
| Over 3.5 goals | 28.2% | 37.3% | -9.1% | ✗ |
| Both teams to score | 51.6% | 56.1% | -4.5% | ✓ |
| HT over 0.5 goals | 72.2% | — | — | ✓ |
| HT over 1.5 goals | 35.0% | 39.9% | -4.9% | ✓ |
Model dc_v2.0 · rating sample: Auda 52.3 / RFS 51.4 weighted matches · positive divergence means the model sits above the market — descriptive, not a recommendation; the market usually knows why.
Open Auda vs RFS in the interactive Dixon–Coles & Asian Handicap calculator →
How to read this page: probabilities are what this league's historical first-goal-time and scoring data alone imply — they know nothing about injuries, motivation or weather, and the market usually does. We publish every output, including when the data and the market agree. Statistics, not betting advice — never bet more than you can afford to lose.