Lincoln 1–3 Birmingham
What the chances were worth
The scoreline says 1–3; by chance quality the match ran 1.63–2.09.
What the model expected
Its probabilities for this match, logged before kick-off and never changed. The result is highlighted.
The model made Birmingham to win its most likely call before kick-off, and that is what happened. It had the result at 44% beforehand.
One match tells you nothing on its own — whether these percentages are any good is the whole point of the calibration page, where every one of them is scored.
The brain read
Birmingham created the better chances — the xG read 1.6–2.1, with the shot count roughly even (12–17, 6–7 on target). Lincoln got into the box far more often (11 shots inside it to 8). Birmingham's finishing ran hot — 3 from 2.1 xG, 7 of 17 shots on target (a finishing read inferred from shots on target and goals vs xG — not measured shot placement). On the balance of chances, the 1–3 reads fair.
A second opinion written by rule from the numbers on this page — where the shot picture and the xG disagree, it says so rather than picking a winner. Backward-looking only; it claims nothing about any future result.
The match in numbers
As returned by the data feed at full time. Bars show each side’s share of the stat.
Confirmed line-ups
Captured from the official team sheets in the last hour before kick-off. The pick test requires these to be in before any call counts.
Lincoln 4-2-3-1
- 1 G. Wickens (G)
- 3 A. Reach (D)
- 4 A. Coubiș (D)
- 7 R. Hackett (M)
- 11 M. Ladefoged (F)
- 15 S. Bradley (D)
- 16 D. Jefferies (M)
- 18 B. House (M)
- 24 I. Varfolomeev (M)
- 25 D. Elerewe (D)
- 26 Y. Konak (M)
Bench: R. Towler, J. Gauci, F. Draper, T. Bayliss, C. Ogbene, I. Olaofe, D. Oyegoke, C. Elder, R. Street
Birmingham 4-2-3-1
- 1 J. Beadle (G)
- 2 E. Laird (D)
- 4 C. Klarer (D)
- 5 P. Neumann (D)
- 9 A. Priske (F)
- 14 J. Solis (M)
- 16 P. Roberts (M)
- 17 L. Millar (M)
- 20 A. Cochrane (D)
- 24 T. Iwata (M)
- 28 J. Stansfield (M)
Bench: M. Bird, L. Buchanan, M. Ducksch, T. Gardner-Hickman, D. Gray, B. Osayi-Samuel, Carlos Vicente, R. Allsop, L. Vázquez
The market’s read
| Market | Consensus price | Implied chance | Move |
|---|---|---|---|
| Double chance Lincoln or draw | 1.69 | 55.3% | +0.1 pts |
| Double chance Birmingham or draw | 1.30 | 71.6% | +0.1 pts |
| Double chance either team | 1.28 | 73.1% | -0.2 pts |
| Draw no bet — Lincoln | 2.37 | 39.2% | +0.1 pts |
| Draw no bet — Birmingham | 1.53 | 60.8% | -0.1 pts |
| Over 1.5 goals | 1.28 | 72.7% | +0.2 pts |
| Over 2.5 goals | 1.92 | 49.3% | -0.3 pts |
| Over 3.5 goals | 3.25 | 28.7% | -0.4 pts |
| Both teams to score | 1.72 | 54.1% | +0.3 pts |
| Lincoln over 1.5 team goals | 2.84 | 32.8% | +0.2 pts |
| Birmingham over 1.5 team goals | 2.11 | 44.2% | -0.4 pts |
| Lincoln clean sheet | 4.00 | 23.4% | +0.0 pts |
| Birmingham clean sheet | 2.75 | 33.7% | +0.0 pts |
Shortest-priced scorelines: 1-1 6.21 · 0-1 7.48 · 1-2 8.39 · 1-0 9.73 · 0-0 10.03
Prices are observations, not offers. Nothing here is advice or staked.
How to read this table
Consensus of bookmaker prices captured 2026-10-31 12:25 UTC. These are the closing prices — the market’s last word before kick-off. The Move column is how each market’s implied chance has shifted since the first price we captured: green = the chance has risen (the price shortened, backing coming in), red = the chance has fallen (the price eased out — what punters call the price ‘drifting’).