Round of 32 · Match 9
United StatesvsBosnia and Herzegovina
2026-07-02·17:00 local·Levi's Stadium · San Francisco Bay AreaPredictions finalised
Match signals
Factors that favour each side, from statistical models to group stage form and match conditions. Longer bars = stronger advantage.
United States are strong favourites at 55% vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 18%. Most signals point the same way. Bosnia and Herzegovina 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 United States at 60% to win vs Bosnia and Herzegovina at 18%.
Simulates the goal-scoring process using attack and defence strength. The heaviest-weighted model. It rates United States at 51% to win vs Bosnia and Herzegovina at 20%.
Groups teams by confederation to share information. Helps for teams with fewer matches. It rates United States at 49% to win vs Bosnia and Herzegovina at 23%.
The published probability after calibration and adjustments. This is what the model says. It rates United States at 55% to win vs Bosnia and Herzegovina at 18%.
All 3 models agree: United States is favoured. When models agree, the signal is stronger.
⚽Tournament Form
United States collected 9 points (3W 0D 2L) vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 4 (1W 1D 2L). A stronger tournament record.
United States averaged 2.2 goals per match vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 1.25. More firepower coming in.
United States conceded just 1.6 goals/match vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 2.0. Tighter at the back.
United States's goal difference of +3 is better than Bosnia and Herzegovina's -3. They outperformed opponents by more.
📈Momentum
United States's rating rose +32.5 during the tournament while Bosnia and Herzegovina's moved +1.6. The tournament has been kinder to United States.
Bosnia and Herzegovina's players improved their form ratings during the tournament (+0.0064) vs United States (+0.0021). Players trending upward.
🏆Team Quality
United States is rated 1721 vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 1594 (gap: 127). That's a significant gap in historical team strength.
The model expects United States to create 1.44 expected goals vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 0.79. More and better chances projected.
Bosnia and Herzegovina's top 3 starters are harder to replace (avg VORP 0.45) than United States's (0.25). More star power in key positions.
United States's starters play together at club level more often (0.009 cohesion) than Bosnia and Herzegovina's (0.000). More shared understanding on the pitch.
🌍Match Conditions
United States traveled 2,962km vs Bosnia and Herzegovina's 10,102km. A shorter journey means less fatigue.
United States face a 3h timezone shift vs Bosnia and Herzegovina'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.
예측
Match-outcome probability
- United States win54.8%
- Draw28.2%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina win17.0%
The model rates United States as favourites at 55%, with Bosnia and Herzegovina projected at 18% to win.
▸골 및 스코어라인
Likeliest score 1–0 (14.8%) · xG 1.4 - 0.8
Expected goals
Mean of the Dixon-Coles joint goal distribution. Same fit that produces the most-likely-scoreline list below.
Most likely scorelines
- 1–014.8%
- 1–113.0%
- 0–011.6%
- 2–011.2%
- 2–18.8%
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
- 0–033.5%
- 1–023.1%
- 0–112.4%
- 1–19.8%
- 2–08.5%
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 goals88.4%
- More than 1.5 goals65.8%
- More than 2.5 goals38.3%
- More than 3.5 goals18.5%
- More than 4.5 goals7.5%
- More than 5.5 goals2.6%
- Both teams score42.2%
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
- United States clean sheetOpposing team scores zero45.6%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina clean sheetOpposing team scores zero23.8%
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
- United States by 4+3.3%
- United States by 3+10.3%
- United States by 2+26.3%
- United States by 1+51.7%
- Draw28.5%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina by 1+19.8%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina by 2+6.2%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina by 3+1.4%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina by 4+0.3%
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.
▸경기 전개 양상
Over 2.5 goals 38.3% · BTTS 42.2%
Game state through the match
- United States ahead52.5%
- Level27.0%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead20.5%
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
- 0–1530.9%
- 15–3021.4%
- 30–4514.8%
- 45–6010.2%
- 60–757.0%
- 75–904.9%
- No goal10.8%
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 → | HUnited States win | DDraw | ABosnia and Herzegovina win |
|---|---|---|---|
| HUnited States ahead | 33.4% | 4.2% | 0.9% |
| DLevel | 17.2% | 18.9% | 7.9% |
| ABosnia and Herzegovina ahead | 1.8% | 4.1% | 11.6% |
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
- United States trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT5.9%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT5.1%
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.
- United States53.0%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina47.0%
- United States65.5%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina34.4%
- United States40.5%
- Bosnia and Herzegovina59.5%
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: United States conv 71.4%, save 22.9%; Bosnia and Herzegovina conv 72.0%, save 20.0%. Smoothed against the global prior with prior strength 20 — see /docs/methodology/.
▸팀 및 선수
Top scorer: Balogun (10.9%)
Match detail
United States
Model-rated key players: Folarin Balogun (FW) — P(scores) 10.9%; Diego Luna (FW) — P(scores) 4.6%; Haji Wright (FW) — P(scores) 3.4%.
United States under Mauricio Pochettino play a balanced game with 50% possession. Their likely shape is a 4-3-3. They sit deeper and pick their moments to press (PPDA 27.7).
United States will need to leverage their strengths while managing the physical demands of a tournament spread across three host countries. Managing minutes for Tim Ream across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Model-rated key players: Ermin Bičakčić (DF) — P(scores) 4.4%; Edin Džeko (FW) — P(scores) 3.3%; Ermedin Demirović (FW) — P(scores) 3.2%.
Limited recent tournament data is available for Bosnia and Herzegovina's tactical profile. Early indicators suggest a balanced approach.
Bosnia and Herzegovina will need to leverage their strengths while managing the physical demands of a tournament spread across three host countries. Managing minutes for Edin Džeko across what could be seven matches will test the coaching staff's rotation planning.
United States historically converts 5.2% of xG from set-pieces, contributing 0.07 expected set-piece goals in this fixture. Bosnia and Herzegovina converts 8.1% from set-pieces (0.06 expected). Combined, the model expects 0.14 set-piece goals across the 90 minutes.
- P(United States scores set-piece goal) 7.1%
- P(Bosnia and Herzegovina scores set-piece goal) 6.2%
- P(set-piece goal in match) 12.9%
United States: Timothy Tillman on corners (42 corners), Gianluca Busio on free kicks (per fbref 2021 22) · Bosnia and Herzegovina: Amer Gojak on corners (14 corners) (per fbref 2020 21)
If a penalty is awarded to United States, the model gives 71.4% conversion, 72.0% for Bosnia and Herzegovina. If this match goes to a shootout, the symmetric (coin-toss averaged) win probability is 53.0% United States / 47.0% Bosnia and Herzegovina.
United States primary PK: Folarin Balogun (2/2 in 2022-23, per fbref 2021 22) · Bosnia and Herzegovina primary PK: Ermin Bičakčić (0/1 in 2013-14, per fbref 2020 21).
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
United States
- Christian PulisicWingerCover: Alejandro Zendejas · 0.570.27gap
- Tyler AdamsDefensive midfieldNo natural backup0.26gap
- Antonee RobinsonFull-backCover: Joe Scally · 0.770.22gap
Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Amar DedićFull-backCover: Arjan Malić · 0.270.56gap
- Ermedin DemirovićStrikerCover: Haris Tabaković · 0.360.47gap
- Edin DžekoStrikerCover: Haris Tabaković · 0.360.33gap
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 level4 m
- Avg temperatureFive-year mean over the tournament window19.6 °C
- Avg humidity62%
- Heat stressShade WBGT ~20.6 °CLow heat stress
- Pitch surfacenatural grass
Natural-grass NFL stadium; FIFA-standard hybrid 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. Evening 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)
- Folarin BalogunPKFW10.9%
- Diego LunaFW4.6%
- Haji WrightFW3.4%
- Ermin BičakčićPKDF4.4%
- Edin DžekoFW3.3%
- Ermedin DemirovićFW3.2%
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
United States
vs Turkey · avg 7.0
Bosnia and Herzegovina
vs Qatar · avg 7.8
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.
7Sergiño DestShowed good attacking intent from his defensive position, nearly scoring with a header.
1shots1headers▼
Showed good attacking intent from his defensive position, nearly scoring with a header.
Match timeline
4Folarin Balogun13'–54'Scored a goal but was sent off with a red card, significantly impacting his team's numerical advantage.
1goals1 red▼
Scored a goal but was sent off with a red card, significantly impacting his team's numerical advantage.
Match timeline
8FrizMade several crucial saves, including a close-range stop and punching away dangerous corners, keeping his team in the game.
Made several crucial saves, including a close-range stop and punching away dangerous corners, keeping his team in the game.
5Amar Memić140'–140'Registered one of his team's few attacking attempts, though his low shot went wide.
1shots▼
Registered one of his team's few attacking attempts, though his low shot went wide.
Match timeline
Match observations
- The match saw the United States of America create numerous attacking opportunities, with two goals disallowed for offside before their first legitimate strike.
- Bosnia and Herzegovina struggled to establish a consistent attacking rhythm, relying mostly on defensive solidity and occasional long-range efforts.
- A red card for a USA player altered the dynamic, yet the home side managed to extend their lead from a set piece.
▸분석 내부
Model-by-model comparison
United States vs Bosnia and Herzegovina
| Model | Weight | Home | Draw | Away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EloRating-based strength estimate | 32% | 60.3% | 22.0% | 17.7% |
| Dixon-ColesGoal-process model with low-score correction | 63% | 51.0% | 28.5% | 20.5% |
| Hierarchical PoissonBayesian model with confederation pooling | 6% | 49.1% | 28.4% | 22.6% |
| Bayesian stackingLearned-weight combination | — | 59.0% | 28.9% | 12.1% |
| Ensemble (published)Uniform average + isotonic calibration | — | 55.3% | 27.1% | 17.6% |
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
No recent headlines for United States or Bosnia and Herzegovina.
- Stage:
- Round of 32 · Match 9
- Date:
- 2 Jul
- Venue:
- Levi's Stadium, San Francisco Bay Area
Ranked by likely importance. None of these feed the forecast: the probabilities rest on team strength, venue conditions and the style matchup.
- 1.Squad availability: 1 carrying a fitness doubt across the two squads, 1 of them projected starters. The forecast does not adjust for who is missing: its lineup channel currently contributes zero, so this is context the probabilities do not include.
- 2.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.
- 3.Rest differential: Bosnia and Herzegovina have had 8 days since their previous match versus 7 for United States. Rest and recovery are not model inputs.
United States
United States: 1 carrying a fitness doubt.
- DoubtChristian Pulisic, the first-choice forward, is recovering from Calf injury and is a fitness watch item; if unavailable the projected XI shifts.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina come in at close to full strength.
Availability runs in Bosnia and Herzegovina's favour here: United States are managing a fitness concern over Christian Pulisic, while Bosnia and Herzegovina's projected XI looks intact.
Availability from the predicted squads and injury feed; forecast adjustments from the model's own decomposition. See /docs/methodology/.
Standard Pass
이 경기는 무료 미리보기입니다
이 경기의 모델 전체 예측을 무료로 보고 계십니다. 확률, 기대 골, 스코어라인 분포, 선수별 득점 확률 등 동일한 수준의 분석을 전체 104경기에서 잠금 해제하려면 Standard Pass를 이용하세요. 대회 기간 내내 유효합니다.
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.