公开检验
19 Jun 2026
下方每个概率都在开赛前发布并锁定。本页面将每个概率与实际结果进行对比评分。
当日均值： Within expectations
Brazil 3–0 Haiti was the outcome the model rated most likely (90.8% before kickoff). The match scores a Brier of 0.015, better than the 0.667 no-skill mark.
胜过市场对结果赋予了更高的概率
Match ratings
Player scores from official highlights analysis. Observational, not a model input.
Brazil8Matheus CunhaSTScored the crucial opening goal with excellent anticipation and predatory instincts.Haiti9Haiti GoalkeeperGKMade numerous crucial saves, including a double save, to prevent a much larger defeat for Haiti.6Dominique SimonCBMade a crucial defensive clearance to prevent a goal for Haiti under significant pressure.Morocco 1–0 Scotland was the outcome the model rated most likely (48.7% before kickoff). The match scores a Brier of 0.396, better than the 0.667 no-skill mark.
市场对结果赋予了更高的概率
Match ratings
Player scores from official highlights analysis. Observational, not a model input.
Morocco8Ismael SaibariAMScored the winning goal and was a constant attacking threat, nearly adding a second.7Bilal El KhannoussCMContributed to Morocco's attacking set pieces with a header on target that required a save.7Brahim DíazAMDisplayed good movement and skill to create a shot opportunity inside the penalty area.Scotland8Angus GunnGKMade several crucial saves throughout the match, preventing Morocco from extending their lead and keeping Scotland in contention.7Ryan ChristieAMCreated one of Scotland's clearer scoring opportunities with a shot on target that was saved.7AmmouniSTWas a persistent threat in Morocco's attack, registering multiple shots on target that tested the opposition goalkeeper.- 已评分锁定于 10 Jun2 – 0
- United States · 实际31.0%
- 平局28.2%
- Australia40.8%
结论Within expectationsUnited States 2–0 Australia was an outcome the model rated at 31.0% (31.0% before kickoff). The match scores a Brier of 0.722, worse than the 0.667 no-skill mark.
市场对结果赋予了更高的概率
Match ratings
Player scores from official highlights analysis. Observational, not a model input.
United States9Matt TurnerGKMade multiple crucial saves, especially in the second half, to secure the clean sheet and the team's victory.8DestAMScored a crucial goal that doubled the USA's lead and contributed to offensive pressure.7BalogunSTCreated a good scoring opportunity through a strong run and shot, demonstrating his direct attacking style.Australia7LeckieRWProvided a quality cross that contributed to Australia's attacking build-up from a wide position.6LuqueCMShowed offensive ambition by attempting a shot, but it was blocked and didn't lead to a significant chance.6MetcalfeCMContributed to Australia's attacking build-up by delivering a cross into the box. Paraguay 1–0 Turkey was an outcome the model rated at 31.3% (31.3% before kickoff). The match scores a Brier of 0.717, worse than the 0.667 no-skill mark.
胜过市场对结果赋予了更高的概率
Match ratings
Player scores from official highlights analysis. Observational, not a model input.
Paraguay9Paraguay's GoalkeeperGKDelivered an exceptional performance with multiple crucial saves, single-handedly preserving the clean sheet and the team's lead, especially after playing with ten men.8Player #23STScored the decisive early goal with clinical finishing, which proved to be the match-winner.2AldareteCBReceived an early red card for a dangerous challenge, severely disadvantaging his team for the majority of the match.Turkey6Arda GülerAMShowed creative intent and good positioning in attack, but his efforts were consistently blocked without leading to a goal.6KökçüCMDemonstrated his ability from dead-ball situations by forcing a save from a dangerous free-kick.6YılmazSTActively involved in multiple attacking movements, creating chances for himself and others, but lacked the clinical finish or precise pass to convert.
See how the forecast holds up
OnThePitch grades every probability against what actually happens, and publishes the calibration in the open. Subscribe to follow the retrospectives and research as they ship — one email per post, no marketing.
Already read on Substack? Follow OnThePitch there — same posts, slightly different format.