Round of 32 · Match 10
BelgiumvsSenegal
2026-07-01·13:00 local·Lumen Field · SeattlePredictions finalised
Match signals
Factors that favour each side, from statistical models to group stage form and match conditions. Longer bars = stronger advantage.
Belgium are strong favourites at 58% vs Senegal's 17%. Most signals point the same way. Senegal will need to outperform their rating.
📊What the Models Say
Rates teams by a single strength number updated after every match. Simpler but fast to react. It rates Belgium at 46% to win vs Senegal at 32%.
Simulates the goal-scoring process using attack and defence strength. The heaviest-weighted model. It rates Belgium at 49% to win vs Senegal at 23%.
Groups teams by confederation to share information. Helps for teams with fewer matches. It rates Belgium at 52% to win vs Senegal at 21%.
The published probability after calibration and adjustments. This is what the model says. It rates Belgium at 58% to win vs Senegal at 17%.
All 3 models agree: Belgium is favoured. When models agree, the signal is stronger.
⚽Tournament Form
Belgium collected 11 points (3W 2D 1L) vs Senegal's 3 (1W 0D 3L). A stronger tournament record.
Similar attacking output: Belgium 2.33 goals/match, Senegal 2.5.
Belgium conceded just 1.17 goals/match vs Senegal's 2.25. Tighter at the back.
Belgium's goal difference of +7 is better than Senegal's +1. They outperformed opponents by more.
📈Momentum
Belgium's rating rose +19.5 during the tournament while Senegal's moved -38.6. The tournament has been kinder to Belgium.
Belgium's players improved their form ratings during the tournament (+0.0046) vs Senegal (-0.0007). Players trending upward.
🏆Team Quality
Very close in strength: Belgium 1867, Senegal 1878.
The model expects Belgium to create 1.43 expected goals vs Senegal's 0.91. More and better chances projected.
Similar star-player quality in both squads.
Belgium's starters play together at club level more often (0.019 cohesion) than Senegal's (0.003). More shared understanding on the pitch.
🌍Match Conditions
Belgium traveled 7,980km vs Senegal's 10,107km. A shorter journey means less fatigue.
Senegal face a 7h timezone shift vs Belgium's 9h. Less jet lag disruption.
17 signals across 5 categories. Signal strength reflects how large the gap is between the two teams on each factor. Signals are descriptive, not prescriptive.
التوقعات
Match-outcome probability
- Belgium win44.8%
- Draw28.7%
- Senegal win26.5%
A clash of identities: Belgium's balanced approach meets Senegal's transition-heavy style in a fixture the model gives to Belgium at 58%.
▸الأهداف والنتائج
Likeliest score 1–1 (13.3%) · xG 1.4 - 0.9
Expected goals
Mean of the Dixon-Coles joint goal distribution. Same fit that produces the most-likely-scoreline list below.
Most likely scorelines
- 1–113.3%
- 1–013.1%
- 0–010.5%
- 2–09.8%
- 2–18.9%
From the Dixon-Coles joint Poisson with the low-score correction. Scorelines are listed in probability order; this is a description of the model's distribution, not a recommendation.
Most likely half-time scorelines
- 0–031.7%
- 1–021.6%
- 0–113.5%
- 1–110.7%
- 2–07.9%
Same Dixon-Coles fit as the full-time list above, with rates halved to a 45-minute window and the low-score correction applied to that 1st-half block. The 0-0 row sits higher here than at full-time because fewer minutes have elapsed.
Goal totals
- More than 0.5 goals89.5%
- More than 1.5 goals68.5%
- More than 2.5 goals41.3%
- More than 3.5 goals20.8%
- More than 4.5 goals8.8%
- More than 5.5 goals3.2%
- Both teams score46.1%
Each row is the probability the match finishes with more than the listed number of goals. Both-teams-to-score is the probability each side scores at least once. All values are marginals of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid that produces the scoreline list above — not market lines or any other operator construct.
Event-typed probabilities
- Belgium clean sheetOpposing team scores zero40.3%
- Senegal clean sheetOpposing team scores zero24.0%
Derived from the same Dixon-Coles joint distribution as the scoreline list. These are descriptive event probabilities — see CLAUDE.md §3/§4 (formerly COMPLIANCE.md §4.2.7) for the framing the project uses.
Win-margin probability
- Belgium by 4+2.9%
- Belgium by 3+9.3%
- Belgium by 2+24.2%
- Belgium by 1+48.3%
- Draw28.5%
- Senegal by 1+23.2%
- Senegal by 2+8.1%
- Senegal by 3+2.1%
- Senegal by 4+0.4%
Each row is the probability the match ends with the listed margin or larger in that direction. Marginal of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid; the “by 1+” rows plus the draw row sum to 1.
▸كيف تتطور المباراة
Over 2.5 goals 41.3% · BTTS 46.1%
Game state through the match
- Belgium ahead49.1%
- Level26.9%
- Senegal ahead24.0%
Probability of each game state at minutes 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90 — derived from two independent thinned-Poisson processes with the Dixon-Coles per-team rates. The three lines always sum to 1 at each minute. The right column shows the state at the match's closing minute.
When the first goal arrives
- 0–1532.2%
- 15–3021.8%
- 30–4514.8%
- 45–6010.0%
- 60–756.8%
- 75–904.6%
- No goal9.7%
Probability the match's first goal arrives in each 15-minute window. Homogeneous Poisson with combined rate λ = λh + λa from the Dixon-Coles fit; the seven rows (six windows + no-goal tail) sum to 1.
Half-time / full-time grid
| HT ↓ / FT → | HBelgium win | DDraw | ASenegal win |
|---|---|---|---|
| HBelgium ahead | 31.0% | 4.5% | 1.1% |
| DLevel | 16.1% | 18.2% | 9.0% |
| ASenegal ahead | 1.9% | 4.5% | 13.8% |
Each cell is P(half-time result, full-time result). All nine cells sum to 1. Derived from a halved-λ Dixon-Coles fit for the first half plus an independent-Poisson second-half convolution.
Comeback probability
- Belgium trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT6.3%
- Senegal trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT5.6%
Joint probability — P(side trailing at half-time AND avoiding defeat at full-time). NOT conditional on trailing at HT. Derived from the same half-time / full-time decomposition that produces the HT/FT grid above; a tied first half is neither a home nor an away comeback opportunity.
PK shootout simulator
If the match ends level after extra time, the model estimates the shootout outcome from each team's Bayesian-smoothed conversion / save rate (Model #15). The bracket simulator uses the symmetric (averaged) ordering; the two what-if scenarios below show how the win probabilities shift when conditioning on which team kicks first.
- Belgium42.4%
- Senegal57.6%
- Belgium53.5%
- Senegal46.5%
- Belgium31.2%
- Senegal68.8%
First-kicker advantage
The first kicker's per-kick conversion rate is scaled by ×1.050 (about +5.0%), stacked on the Markov chain's structural asymmetry. Real World Cup shootouts use a coin toss for kicker order, so on average the order is 50/50 — the symmetric path above is the relevant number for a single fixture. The ordering-conditioned probabilities are a descriptive what-if scenario.
Literature: first kickers win ≈ 60% historically (Apesteguia & Palacios-Huerta, American Economic Review 2010; Vandebroek et al. 2016).
Per-team posteriors: Belgium conv 71.4%, save 22.9%; Senegal conv 72.5%, save 27.5%. Smoothed against the global prior with prior strength 20 — see /docs/methodology/.
▸الفرق واللاعبون
Top scorer: Dieng (7.0%)
Match detail
Belgium
Model-rated key players: Kevin De Bruyne (MF) — P(scores) 6.7%; Loïs Openda (FW) — P(scores) 3.3%; Leandro Trossard (FW) — P(scores) 2.1%.
Belgium under Rudi Garcia play a balanced game, holding 54% of the ball — among the highest in the tournament field. Their likely shape is a other, though they have also used 4-2-3-1. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 23.1) and build patiently through midfield with 7.7 passes per attacking sequence.
Belgium will need to leverage their strengths while managing the physical demands of a tournament spread across three host countries. Managing minutes for Axel Witsel across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
Senegal
Model-rated key players: Bamba Dieng (FW) — P(scores) 7.0%; Nicolas Jackson (FW) — P(scores) 6.5%; Boulaye Dia (FW) — P(scores) 5.2%.
Senegal under Pape Thiaw play a transition heavy game with 47% possession. Their likely shape is a 4-2-3-1, though they have also used 4-3-3. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 21.2) and move the ball forward quickly at 5.3 passes per attack.
Senegal rely on defensive discipline and quick transitions — absorbing pressure and converting turnovers into attacking chances. Concentration and defensive organisation for full 90-minute stretches will determine whether the approach holds against top opposition. Managing minutes for Idrissa Gueye across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
Senegal's predicted XI averages 1,712 club minutes over the 2024-25 season (light load).
Belgium coverage: 58.0% (10/11 XI matched against the FBref Big-5) · Senegal: 73.0% (10/11).
Belgium historically converts 14.6% of xG from set-pieces, contributing 0.21 expected set-piece goals in this fixture. Senegal converts 8.1% from set-pieces (0.07 expected). Combined, the model expects 0.28 set-piece goals across the 90 minutes.
- P(Belgium scores set-piece goal) 18.9%
- P(Senegal scores set-piece goal) 7.0%
- P(set-piece goal in match) 24.6%
Belgium: Kevin De Bruyne on corners (25 corners), Axel Witsel on free kicks (per fbref 2022 23) · Senegal: Pape Matar Sarr on corners (7 corners) (per fbref 2021 22)
If a penalty is awarded to Belgium, the model gives 71.4% conversion, 72.5% for Senegal. If this match goes to a shootout, the symmetric (coin-toss averaged) win probability is 42.4% Belgium / 57.6% Senegal.
Belgium primary PK: Kevin De Bruyne (2/3 in 2020-21, per fbref 2022 23) · Senegal primary PK: Boulaye Dia (5/5 in 2020-21, per fbref 2021 22).
Derived from the model's per-fixture forecast joint and supporting reference data (predicted squads, set-piece xG share, PK posteriors, club minutes). See /docs/methodology/ for the full methodology.
Squad depth
Most irreplaceable starters
Belgium
- Youri TielemansCentral midfieldNo natural backup0.41gap
- Romelu LukakuStrikerNo natural backup0.37gap
- Zeno DebastCentre-backCover: Brandon Mechele · 0.560.32gap
Senegal
- Sadio ManéWingerCover: Ibrahim Mbaye · 0.440.38gap
- Nicolas JacksonStrikerCover: Cherif Ndiaye · 0.520.34gap
- Édouard MendyGoalkeeperCover: Yehvann Diouf · 0.490.29gap
Gap = how far a side's rating at the position falls from the starter to his likely in-squad replacement (named under each name). Larger = harder to replace. Descriptive metric, does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →
Match conditions
- AltitudeNear sea level16 m
- Avg temperatureFive-year mean over the tournament window18.0 °C
- Avg humidity68%
- Heat stressShade WBGT ~19.6 °CLow heat stress
- Pitch surfacetemporary natural grass over artificial turf
Artificial-turf NFL stadium laying a temporary natural-grass pitch for the tournament.
Heat stress is a shade Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature proxy from the venue's climatology mean temperature and humidity; FIFA mandates cooling breaks at WBGT 32 °C. Afternoon kickoff (local time). These are long-window averages, not a match-day forecast, and they are not inputs to the forecast.
Top scorers · P(scores in this match)
- Kevin De BruynePKMF6.7%
- Loïs OpendaFW3.3%
- Leandro TrossardFW2.1%
- Bamba DiengFW7.0%
- Nicolas JacksonFW6.5%
- Boulaye DiaPKFW5.2%
Per-player scoring rate from Model #5 (`p_score_per_match`). Reflects each player's npxG/90, expected minutes, team xG share, and the average opposing-team defence. See /docs/methodology/.
Recent match form
Last match player ratings
Belgium
vs New Zealand · avg 8.0
Senegal
vs Iraq · avg 8.2
Player scores from official highlight analysis of each team's most recent match. Observational, not a model input. Methodology →
Video analysis: player performance
Per-player ratings and event breakdowns from official highlights analysis. Tap a player to see their full match timeline.
8Thibaut Courtois7'–87'Made multiple critical saves, keeping Belgium in contention despite conceding two goals.
3saves▼
Made multiple critical saves, keeping Belgium in contention despite conceding two goals.
Match timeline
8Romelu Lukaku61'–61'Scored a crucial header that sparked Belgium's comeback from a two-goal deficit.
1goals▼
Scored a crucial header that sparked Belgium's comeback from a two-goal deficit.
Match timeline
8Dodi LukébakioDelivered a crucial and accurate cross for Belgium's first goal, initiating the comeback.
Delivered a crucial and accurate cross for Belgium's first goal, initiating the comeback.
8Ismaïla SarrScored Senegal's second goal with excellent pace and finishing, and created an early chance.
Scored Senegal's second goal with excellent pace and finishing, and created an early chance.
7Habib DialloScored the opening goal for Senegal with a well-placed finish.
Scored the opening goal for Senegal with a well-placed finish.
7Sadio ManéScored an impressive individual goal, showcasing his dribbling and finishing skills.
Scored an impressive individual goal, showcasing his dribbling and finishing skills.
3El Hadji Malick Diouf90'–90'Was involved in the incident that led to the decisive penalty conceded by Senegal.
1fouls▼
Was involved in the incident that led to the decisive penalty conceded by Senegal.
Match timeline
Match observations
- The match was a thrilling encounter, with Senegal initially taking a commanding two-goal lead.
- Belgium displayed remarkable resilience, fighting back to equalize with two goals in the second half.
- The game's outcome was ultimately decided by a late penalty awarded to Belgium.
▸خلف الكواليس
Model-by-model comparison
Belgium vs Senegal
| Model | Weight | Home | Draw | Away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EloRating-based strength estimate | 32% | 45.7% | 22.0% | 32.3% |
| Dixon-ColesGoal-process model with low-score correction | 63% | 48.8% | 28.0% | 23.2% |
| Hierarchical PoissonBayesian model with confederation pooling | 6% | 52.4% | 26.2% | 21.4% |
| Bayesian stackingLearned-weight combination | — | 50.8% | 26.1% | 23.1% |
| Ensemble (published)Uniform average + isotonic calibration | — | 57.6% | 24.9% | 17.4% |
How each model works
- Elo
- Each team carries a single strength rating updated after every match by a margin-aware K-factor. Match probabilities come from the logistic function of the rating gap. Elo is fast-adapting but coarse — it sees only who won and by how much, not how the goals were scored.
- Dixon-Coles
- A Poisson regression on team-level attack and defence parameters, fitted via maximum likelihood with an exponential time-decay weighting. The Dixon-Coles correction adjusts the four low-score cells (0-0, 1-0, 0-1, 1-1) where independent Poisson underestimates dependence. Produces full scoreline distributions, not just H/D/A.
- Hierarchical Poisson
- A Bayesian Poisson model fitted via MCMC (PyMC) with hierarchical priors that pool attack and defence parameters within confederations. Shrinks small-sample teams toward their confederation mean — helpful for nations with few recent competitive fixtures. Slower to fit but better-calibrated on the tails.
- Bayesian stacking
- Optimises simplex weights (w_elo, w_dc, w_hp) to maximise the leave-one-out log-score across a walk-forward backtest (Yao et al. 2018). The result is a weighted average of the three component models' probabilities, then isotonic-calibrated. Adds no extra features — just learns which component to trust more from historical accuracy.
- Ensemble (published)
- Equal-weight average of all three component models, followed by per-class isotonic regression calibration fitted on 24 months of walk-forward out-of-fold predictions. This is the probability published on the site. The uniform mean is deliberately simple — it avoids overfitting to the stacking weights' training window.
Three independent component models feed two combination strategies. The uniform ensemble is the published probability; Bayesian stacking uses learned weights. Amber bars flag >5pp divergence from the published number. Full methodology
Latest news & match context
- Folarin Balogun tells Donald Trump his World Cup red card intervention DID impact USA team before Belgium loss · Daily Mail — Football · 14 Jul
- Stage:
- Round of 32 · Match 10
- Date:
- 1 Jul
- Venue:
- Lumen Field, Seattle
Ranked by likely importance. None of these feed the forecast: the probabilities rest on team strength, venue conditions and the style matchup.
- 1.Elimination stakes: A one-off elimination tie. Motivation, risk appetite and game management under tournament pressure are not model inputs; the forecast rests on team strength and the style matchup.
Belgium and Senegal both come in at close to full strength, so the forecast rests on baseline team strength rather than late team-news swings.
Availability from the predicted squads and injury feed; forecast adjustments from the model's own decomposition. See /docs/methodology/.
Standard Pass
هذه المباراة معاينة مجانية
أنت تشاهد التوقعات الكاملة للنموذج لهذه المباراة مجاناً. افتح نفس العمق: الاحتمالات، والأهداف المتوقعة، وتوزيعات النتائج، وتهديف كل لاعب، لجميع المباريات الـ 104 مع Standard Pass، صالح طوال البطولة.
Every forecast graded against the real result, scored on 987 matches since 2014. See the scorecard.
24h money-back, no questions asked·No subscription, no auto-renewal·Access through 31 Dec 2026. See refund policy.