Charleston Battery vs Tulsa Roughnecks: match statistics

Charleston Battery has a clear home advantage: they average 2.4 goals per home match with an average xG of 1.88, registering 14.6 shots per game of which 6.8 are on target, while Tulsa averages 1.4 goals away with xG 1.37 and 11.6 shots, 4.2 on target. The hosts concede 0.8 goals on average at home and keep 40% clean sheets, and additionally have 0% of home matches without scoring; the visitors concede 1.0 goals on average away and have 40% of away games without scoring. Charleston converts chances more efficiently (16% shot conversion vs 12% for Tulsa) and maintains greater possession (57% vs 45%), translating into superior chance quality (xG For 1.88 vs 1.37 and xG Against 1.03 vs 1.19). Tulsa, however, has better short-term form: 3 wins in the last 5 matches and an average of 2.0 points in that period versus Charleston’s 2 wins and 1.6 points, so the visitors can be dangerous on the counter. Considering the hosts’ statistical dominance in attack at home and stronger defense, I tip a Charleston win.

Statistical analysis favors BTTS - Yes with an estimated 60% vs 40% for No. Both teams register similar xG: Charleston 1.26 and Tulsa 1.37, with xG against of 1.24 and 1.19 respectively, indicating both sides generate roughly 1.2–1.4 xG per game and have realistic chances to score. Tulsa creates more opportunities (4.2 SOT and 11.6 shots per game) compared to Charleston (3.2 SOT and 10.6 shots) and has a higher conversion rate 12% vs 11%, increasing the likelihood that the visitors will find the net at least once. The counterpoint is Charleston’s clean sheets in 40% of matches and their season BTTS of 40% (in their last 5 games BTTS occurred only 20%), but Tulsa’s season BTTS of 60% and the league average of 55% partially offset that defensive edge. Considering Tulsa’s higher xG and chance volume along with the 55% league BTTS trend, I regard BTTS - Yes as the stronger betting selection.

Based on xG: Charleston has offensive xG 1.26 and xG against 1.24, Tulsa has offensive xG 1.37 and xG against 1.19; this yields expected 1.23 goals for Charleston and 1.31 for Tulsa, totaling 2.54 goals. Both teams have a high share of matches over 1.5 goals: Charleston 60% and Tulsa 80%, and season Over 0.5 is 80% for both, which further supports a minimum-2-goal scenario. A Poisson distribution with λ=2.54 gives roughly a 72% chance of at least 2 goals (Over 1.5), while the probability of Over 2.5 is about 47% (Under 53%). Over 3.5 looks unlikely — season Over 3.5 for both teams is 20% and the model indicates about a 25% chance of 4+ goals. Therefore I recommend backing Over 1.5: the 72% probability is the strongest signal, corroborated by Tulsa’s higher shots on target (4.2 vs 3.2) and goals in the last 5 matches (Charleston 8, Tulsa 6).

The most likely scenario is a half-time draw and an away win (X/2). The home side draw at half-time in 80% of their matches, the visitors in 40%, yielding an average of approximately 60% probability of a draw after 45 minutes. Few goals are scored in the first half: the hosts average 0.4 goals at the break, the visitors 0.2, and the hosts concede 0.2 goals by half-time versus 0.4 for the visitors, indicating a low scoring frequency in the opening 45 minutes. In the second half the visitors’ advantage is pronounced — they average 1.2 goals after the break compared to 0.8 for the hosts, and in the last five matches the visitors record 2.0 points per game versus 1.6 for the hosts, which increases the likelihood of a turnaround. Additionally, the visitors register more shots on target (4.2 vs 3.2) and have a higher xG (1.37 vs 1.26), supporting the X/2 outcome.