United States - USL League OneData current as of September 13, 2026

Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves: match statistics

Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves: form, goals and key statistics

Game details

Athletic Club Boise played against Chattanooga Red Wolves in USL League One (United States). The game was played on May 3, 2026. Final score: 2:1.

Recent form

Athletic Club Boise has 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 1.60 points per game. Chattanooga Red Wolves has 1 win, 1 draw and 1 loss, with 1.33 points per game.

Scoring records

Athletic Club Boise scores 2.00 goals per game and allows 1.20. Chattanooga Red Wolves scores 1.33 and allows 1.33. Games in this league average 2.77 goals.

BTTS and goal totals

Both teams score in 60% of Athletic Club Boise's games and 67% of Chattanooga Red Wolves's. The Over 2.5 rates are 60% and 67%, compared with league averages of 58% for BTTS and 56% for Over 2.5.

xG and shots

Athletic Club Boise has the higher season xG average, 1.43 to 1.38 per game. Athletic Club Boise takes 11.2 shots per game, while Chattanooga Red Wolves takes 11.0.

First-half and second-half trends

Athletic Club Boise leads at halftime in 20% of its games and scores 1.20 goals per game after halftime. Chattanooga Red Wolves leads at halftime in 33% and scores 0.33 after halftime.

When the teams score

Athletic Club Boise's most productive scoring window is minutes 16-30 (3 goals). For Chattanooga Red Wolves, it is minutes 16-30 (2 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.

League scoring profile

USL League One games average 2.77 goals. Both teams score in 58% of games, and 56% finish with at least three goals.

Head-to-head record

There is not enough head-to-head history for a meaningful comparison.

Archived pre-match analysis

This analysis was prepared before kick-off. The conclusions use only information available before the match and do not include the final result or post-match statistics.

General match analysis

The favorite is Athletic Club Boise: the hosts dominate possession (60% vs 28%) and create more shots (avg. 13.5 shots and 5.5 on target at home vs 10 shots and 3.5 on target for Chattanooga away), giving them greater match control. Offensively Boise averages 2.5 goals per home game with xG 1.64, while visitors average 2.0 goals away with xG 1.18, so the hosts generate noticeably more high-quality chances despite similar conversion (19% vs 20%). Defensively the hosts’ advantage is even clearer — they concede 0.5 goals per home game on average with 50% of matches keeping a clean sheet, whereas Chattanooga concedes 1.5 goals away and has zero clean sheets. Form also favors Boise: 1.2 points on average in the last 5 matches vs 0.8 for the visitors, and the hosts’ last five results are lddwd compared to Chattanooga’s wldll, indicating a weaker run for the visitors. Considering the possession edge, higher xG (1.64 vs 1.18), better shots-on-target stats (5.5 vs 3.5) and lower average goals conceded (0.5 vs 1.5), I estimate probabilities of 70% for a home win, 20% for a draw and 10% for an away win.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

I back BTTS - Yes — primary signals are a high share of matches with both teams scoring: Athletic has 80% BTTS in the last 5 matches, Chattanooga 40% in the last 5, and the league records 59% matches with both teams scoring. Both teams create genuine scoring opportunities: the home side has xG 1.78 and averages 13.0 shots with 2.0 on target, the visitors have xG 1.18 with 10.0 shots and 3.5 on target and a high conversion rate of 20.0%. Forms confirm goal potential: in the last 5 matches the home team scored 10 goals (2.0 avg) and conceded 7 (1.4), the away team scored 4 goals (0.8) and conceded 6 (1.2), which indicates a realistic possibility that both sides will score. There are, however, seasonal discrepancies — season BTTS rate is 0% for the home side vs 100% for the visitors, and season average goals scored is 0.0 vs 2.0 — this reduces certainty and suggests caution. Considering the dominant offensive signals (xG 1.78 vs 1.18 and 80% vs 40% in L5) I assign a 70% probability to BTTS and 30% against, so the optimal pick is Yes.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

The model projects 1.62 xG for Athletic Club Boise and 0.99 xG for Chattanooga Red Wolves, for a combined expected goals total of 2.61. This 2.61 is close to the league average of 2.76 and clearly exceeds the 1.5 threshold (by 1.11), while only marginally exceeding the 2.5 threshold (by 0.11), providing a strong signal for at least 2 goals and a moderate signal for Over 2.5. Form data support this: the home side scored 10 goals in the last 5 matches (2.0 avg), the away side scored 4 in the last 5 (0.8 avg), and the home xG of 1.78 versus away conceded xG of 1.45 boosts the home expected goals to ~1.62. The league has 54% of matches Over 2.5, and the home team had 60% Over 2.5 in the last 5, however the outlook for Over 3.5 is weak due to the projected 2.61 goals, limited away xG (1.18) and low home conceded xG (0.8). I prefer Over 1.5 as the best line: the model forecasts Over 1.5 at 88% versus 58% for Over 2.5 and only 26% for Over 3.5, so Over 1.5 is the most confident and valuable option.

View Over/Under statistics
HT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario

Statistics show a clear advantage for the away side: the home team has 0% wins and 100% losses this season and averages 0.0 goals per match and 0.0 goals before the break, so they rarely lead at the break. Chattanooga averages 2.0 goals per match and 1.5 goals by half-time, and leads at the break in 50.0% of cases, which strongly supports them leading on HT. Although the hosts generate higher xG (1.78 vs 1.18), their conversion rate is 0% versus 20% for the visitors, so the greater number of created chances does not translate into goals. The visitors also score on average 1.0 goal after the break and have 50.0% wins in second halves; therefore the most likely scenario is the away team leading at half-time and the away team winning at full-time (HT/FT: away/away).

View first-half and second-half statistics

Stats by half

2 : 0
First half
0 : 1
Second half

Game stats

65Possession (%)35
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
13Shots12
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
3Shots on target4
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.64xG1.42
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
7Corners5
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
84Dangerous attacks53
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
11Fouls18
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0Cards2
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Pre-game profilewhat do the season numbers say?

This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.

Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
2Goals scored / game1.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.2Goals allowed / game1.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
52%Average possession36%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
4.4Shots on target / game3
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Team statswho is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

11.2Shots per game11
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
4.4Shots on target3
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
17.9%Shot conversion12.1%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
52%Possession36%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.43xG for1.38
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.37xG against1.23
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Shooting quality

Athletic Club Boise: Efficient finishingChattanooga Red Wolves: Counter-attacking
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Accuracy (shots on target)39%27%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.130.13
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.450.44

xG per shot around 0.08 usually means long-range attempts; 0.15+ usually means box chances. The style label comes from possession, shot volume and conversion.

* xG (expected goals) says how many goals a team should score from its chances. If actual goals are above xG, finishing is above average; if below xG, chances are being missed.

Team formwho is in better shape?

Last five games and season record, overall, at home and away.

Athletic Club Boise is 20% better for: last-5 form.

1.6 pts / game - Athletic Club Boise · 1.33 pts / game - Chattanooga Red Wolves

Athletic Club Boise
WLDDW
Season result split
40% W40% D20% L
Season (W-D-L)
2-2-1
1.60 pts / game · goal difference +4
Last 5 (W-D-L)
2-2-1
1.60 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
1-1-0
Last 5 at home
1-1-0
DW
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 2.0Goals conceded: 1.2xG: 1.43Opponent xG: 1.37BTTS: 60%Over 2.5: 60%
Chattanooga Red Wolves
WDL
Season result split
33% W33% D33% L
Season (W-D-L)
1-1-1
1.33 pts / game · goal difference 0
Last 5 (W-D-L)
1-1-1
1.33 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
1-1-0
Last 5 away
1-1-0
WD
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.3Goals conceded: 1.3xG: 1.38Opponent xG: 1.23BTTS: 67%Over 2.5: 67%

Goalshow do both teams score and concede?

How many goals both teams score and concede, plus how often they keep a clean sheet or fail to score.

Athletic Club Boise is 50% better for: goals scored per game.

2 goals / game - Athletic Club Boise · 1.33 goals / game - Chattanooga Red Wolves

Athletic Club Boise is 11% better for: goals allowed per game.

1.2 goals / game - Athletic Club Boise · 1.33 goals / game - Chattanooga Red Wolves

Athletic Club Boise scoring profile: very strong

Athletic Club Boise scores in 100% of games (5 of 5 meczów), while Chattanooga Red Wolves keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 3 meczów).

Chattanooga Red Wolves scoring profile: strong

Chattanooga Red Wolves scores in 67% of games (2 of 3 meczów), while Athletic Club Boise keeps a clean sheet in 40% (2 of 5 meczów).

10Goals scored (season)4
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
6Goals conceded (season)4
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
3.2Average goals per game2.67
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
10Goals scored (last 5)4
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
6Goals conceded (last 5)4
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

How often they score at least...

100%1 goal67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%2 goals67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
20%3 goals0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
20%4 goals0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

How often they concede at least...

60%1 goal100%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
40%2 goals33%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
20%3 goals0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0%4 goals0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

* Statistics include both teams' home and away games this season.

Both teams scored (BTTS)how often do both teams score?

How often games involving these teams produce goals at both ends, compared with the league average.

60%
Athletic Club Boise - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.3 of 5 meczów
67%
Chattanooga Red Wolves - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.2 of 3 meczów
58%
League average

Goal patterns

40%BTTS at half-time67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
40%BTTS in both halves0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%Scored in both halves33%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

BTTS and goal count

40%Min. 3 goals and BTTS67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
20%Min. 3 goals without BTTS0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%BTTS - last 567%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Goal count (Over/Under)how often do these games cross the goal lines?

See how often games involving these teams clear each goal line, for the full game and each half.

Full game - team comparison (Over)

Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

1st half

80%Min. 1 goal before half-time100%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%Min. 2 goals before half-time67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0%Min. 3 goals before half-time33%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

2nd half

100%Min. 1 goal after half-time67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%Min. 2 goals after half-time0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
20%Min. 3 goals after half-time0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Game halveswhen do the teams score more often?

How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.

Chattanooga Red Wolves is 11% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1.2 pts / game - Athletic Club Boise · 1.33 pts / game - Chattanooga Red Wolves

Athletic Club Boise - half-time state
20% leading60% draw20% trailing
Chattanooga Red Wolves - half-time state
33% leading33% draw33% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1.2Points per game (1st half)1.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0.8Goals scored (1st half)1
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0.6Goals conceded (1st half)1
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.4Average goals (1st half)2
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
40%Clean sheet before half-time0%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
40%No goal before half-time33%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

After half-time (2nd half)

2Points per game (2nd half)1.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.2Goals scored (2nd half)0.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0.6Goals conceded (2nd half)0.33
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
1.8Average goals (2nd half)0.67
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
60%Clean sheet after half-time67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves
0%No goal after half-time67%
Athletic Club BoiseChattanooga Red Wolves

Athletic Club Boise - second-half results

60% W20% D20% L
6
Half-time points
4
Half-time goals
+1
Goal difference (1st half)
10
Second-half points
+3
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.20
PPG before half-time
Lead holding200%

Leads at halftime in 20% of games and wins 40%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime0.0

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

Chattanooga Red Wolves - second-half results

33% W33% D33% L
4
Half-time points
3
Half-time goals
0
Goal difference (1st half)
4
Second-half points
0
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.33
PPG before half-time
Lead holding100%

Leads at halftime in 33% of games and wins 33%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime-0.7

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

Athletic Club Boise - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.202.00
Goals scored / game0.81.2
Goals allowed / game0.60.6
Average goals per game1.41.8
1 goal80%100%
2 goals60%60%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet40%60%
No goal40%0%
Goal difference+1+3
Half-time: 20% leading - 60% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 60% won - 20% draw - 20% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 40% - Half-time goals total: 4
Chattanooga Red Wolves - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.331.33
Goals scored / game1.00.3
Goals allowed / game1.00.3
Average goals per game2.00.7
1 goal100%67%
2 goals67%0%
3 goals33%0%
Clean sheet0%67%
No goal33%67%
Goal difference00
Half-time: 33% leading - 33% draw - 33% trailing
2nd half: 33% won - 33% draw - 33% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 67% - Half-time goals total: 3

* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.

Goals by minutewhen do goals arrive?

The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.

Athletic Club Boise
ScoredConceded
1
0
0-15
3
3
16-30
0
0
31-45
3
0
46-60
2
1
61-75
1
2
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (3 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (3). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.

Chattanooga Red Wolves
ScoredConceded
0
3
0-15
2
0
16-30
1
0
31-45
1
0
46-60
0
1
61-75
0
0
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (2 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (3). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.

* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.

Additional team indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.

Game profile

2.93
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
1.7 : 1.3
Estimated goal split
home : away
106%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
64%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-100%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
67%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
0%
0:0 risk
practically zero
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

Athletic Club Boise

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.06
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.74
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-3.0 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+0.57
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.17
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
121%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
107%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.4
Late goals
10% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 10% come in the first quarter-hour.
10%

Chattanooga Red Wolves

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.15
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.15
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-0.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.05
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
-0.10
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
119%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
81%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
-0.7
Late goals
0% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 0% come in the first quarter-hour.
0%

* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range use public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical game profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed games from the season.

League contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (USL League One).

Teams vs league

Athletic Club BoiseLigaChattanooga Red Wolves
Average goals per game 3.202.77 2.67
Both teams scored 60%58% 67%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) 60%56% 67%
Clean sheets 40%25% 0%
Goal before half-time 80%75% 100%
Goal after half-time 100%75% 67%

^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.

2.77
Average goals per game
58%
Both teams scored
56%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
25%
Clean sheets
1.65
Home goals / game
1.12
Away goals / game
+47%
Home attack advantage
+32%
Home defensive advantage
+27%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
75%
1 goal
48%
2 goals
21%
3 goals
6%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
75%
1 goal
38%
2 goals
12%
3 goals
2%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. Athletic Club BoiseGoalTumi MoshobaneAssist: Jacob Crull
  2. Chattanooga Red WolvesYellow cardOluwatobilba Adewole
  3. Chattanooga Red WolvesGoalOmar Gómez
  4. Chattanooga Red WolvesGoalOmar HernandezAssist: Pedro Hernandez
  5. Chattanooga Red WolvesSubstitutionOn: Matthew BentleyOff: Greyson Mercer
  6. Chattanooga Red WolvesYellow cardWynand Wessels
  7. Athletic Club BoiseSubstitutionOn: Omar YehyaOff: Thomas Olivier Amang
  8. Chattanooga Red WolvesSubstitutionOn: Kwamina Ropapa MensahOff: Omar Hernandez
  9. Athletic Club BoiseSubstitutionOn: Joseph HansonOff: Denys Kostyshyn

Referee and managers

Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.

FAQ

What was the result of Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?

The USL League One match finished Athletic Club Boise 2:1 Chattanooga Red Wolves. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What do the goal statistics show before Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?

Athletic Club Boise score 2.00 goals per game on average and Chattanooga Red Wolves 1.33. The USL League One average is 2.77 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 56% of games. Both teams score in 60% of Athletic Club Boise's matches and 67% of Chattanooga Red Wolves's.

What form are Athletic Club Boise and Chattanooga Red Wolves in?

Over the last 5 games Athletic Club Boise have a 2-2-1 record (1.60 points per game) and Chattanooga Red Wolves 1-1-1 (1.33 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves?

The statistical background for Athletic Club Boise vs Chattanooga Red Wolves — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under — is on this page. The tip with full reasoning and a value assessment is in the NoFluffPicks app.