Nottingham Forest0 - 0Wolves
Nottingham ForestWhy did AI enter 4 times at 22', 39', 47', 70' — and still finish $-736?
Match Overview
Nottingham Forest hosted Wolves in the Premier League, finishing 0-0. OddsFlow deployed 4 trades across 4 waves, achieving 0% precision with a net result of $-736.48 (ROI: -96.1%).
Pre-Match Odds
The Asian Handicap held at -0.75 but home odds shifted from 1.86 to 1.93; the Over/Under line shifted from 2.25 to 2.5.
Trade Wave Analysis
### Wave 1 — Minute 22' (Score: 0-0) **Context:** Scoreless at 22'. 1 model (oddsflow_core_v8.1) entered Asian Handicap markets, targeting Nottingham Forest -0.75. Average expected value was 1.0%, with a combined stake of $31. **Result:** All 1 trades lost, netting $-31.39. ### Wave 2 — Minute 39' (Score: 0-0) **Context:** Scoreless at 39'. 1 model (oddsflow_core_v8.1) entered Moneyline markets, targeting Nottingham Forest. Average expected value was 3.0%, with a combined stake of $567. **Result:** All 1 trades lost, netting $-566.61. ### Wave 3 — Minute 47' (Score: 0-0) **Context:** Scoreless at 47'. 1 model (oddsflow_core_v8.1) entered Asian Handicap markets, targeting Nottingham Forest -0.5. Average expected value was 3.6%, with a combined stake of $108. **Result:** All 1 trades lost, netting $-108.35. ### Wave 4 — Minute 70' (Score: 0-0) **Context:** Scoreless at 70'. 1 model (oddsflow_core_v8.1) entered Asian Handicap markets, targeting Nottingham Forest -0.25. Average expected value was 6.3%, with a combined stake of $60. The sharpest edge was on Nottingham Forest -0.25 (Asian Handicap): OddsFlow calculated 63.4% probability versus the market's implied 57.1% — a 6.3 percentage point gap at odds of 1.75. **Result:** All 1 trades lost, netting $-30.13.
Model Performance
- **oddsflow_core_v8.1**: 4 trades, 0W/3L/1V, $-736.48 (ROI: -96.1%)
Match Statistics
Possession was 62%–38% in Nottingham Forest's favor. Nottingham Forest had 32 shots (10 on target) versus Wolves's 5 (2 on target). Expected goals: Nottingham Forest 2.64 — Wolves 0.22. Corners: 8-2.
Verdict
A tough session at -96.1% ROI. The market moved against OddsFlow's positions, though the underlying probability assessments may still prove correct over a larger sample.
What the closing market expected
The prices bookmakers settled on before kick-off, with the margin removed, next to what actually happened.
| Market | Line | Implied probability |
|---|---|---|
| 1X2 (home / draw / away) | Favourite: Home | 58.5% / 25.5% / 19.5% |
| Asian handicap | -0.75 | 51.8% |
| Over / Under | 2.5 | 53.8% |
Probabilities are de-vigged, so they describe the market's view rather than the price you would have been offered.
The most significant market inefficiency was in the Totals (Under 2.5 Goals).
The Premier League clash between Nottingham Forest and Wolves concluded in a goalless 0-0 draw. The 1x2 market heavily favored a Nottingham Forest victory with a 58.48% implied probability. However, the match ended in a draw, which had only a 25.51% market probability, indicating a significant mispricing of the draw outcome. Nottingham Forest was set as a -0.75 Asian Handicap favorite with a 51.81% probability to cover. Given the 0-0 scoreline, Nottingham Forest failed to cover the spread, presenting negative Closing Line Value (CLV) for those backing the favorite. The market leaned towards Over 2.5 goals with a 53.76% probability. The actual outcome of 0 total goals represents a stark market inefficiency, as the Under 2.5, with only a 48.78% implied probability, was the correct side.
A tough session at -96.1% ROI. The market moved against OddsFlow's positions.
See AI signals as they happen
This report shows settled results. Get real-time AI signals during live matches.