Chongqing Tongliang Long vs Henan Jianye: match statistics

Chongqing Tongliang Long holds a clear table and home advantage: they sit 2nd versus Henan Jianye’s 12th, win 60% of home matches and remain unbeaten at home (0% defeats), while Henan have only a 25% win rate away and 50% defeats on the road. Offensively the hosts are superior — they average 1.8 goals per home match and have scored 7 goals in the last 5 fixtures, with an average of 11 shots and 4.4 on target and a 16% conversion rate; Henan away average 0.75 goals per game, 9.75 shots and 3 on target with only 8% conversion and failed to score in 50% of their away matches. Defensively the hosts also look better in quality terms — average xG against for Chongqing is 0.88 versus 1.47 for Henan, and the hosts keep clean sheets in 40% of home games versus 25% for the visitors; nominally both teams concede around 1 goal per match, but xG indicates fewer clear chances against Chongqing. Form confirms the edge: in the last 5 games Chongqing have 3 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss, averaging 2 points per match, while Henan have 1 win, 1 draw and 3 losses, just 0.8 points per match and have conceded 6 goals versus 4 for the hosts. Considering possession control (59% vs 47%), better efficiency (16% vs 8%), an unbeaten home record and the xG advantage, I assess the probability of a home win at about 68%, a draw at 18% and an away win at 14%.

Chongqing Tongliang Long averages 1.4 goals per match (xG_for 1.4) and produces 12.2 shots, 3.4 on target, demonstrating the hosts' genuine attacking potential. Henan Jianye has a seasonal goals average of 0.75 and xG_for 1.16, but their xG_against is 1.47 and they concede on average 1.0 goal per season, so they are vulnerable to conceding. Clean sheets are rare: hosts have 20% clean sheets, visitors 25%, while the league BTTS level is 56%, which increases the likelihood of both teams scoring; additionally the hosts recorded BTTS in 60% of their last 5 matches versus 20% for the guests. Against BTTS speaks Henan's low finishing rate (8% shot conversion) and their overall season goal-scoring issues (0.75), which weakens the BTTS signal. Overall, given the hosts' higher xG and shot activity (1.4 xG and 12.2 shots) and the league trend of 56% BTTS, I favor the 'Yes' scenario and rate BTTS at 60% vs 40% for 'No'.

Combining attack xG and defensive xG yields expected goals: (1.4 + 1.47)/2 = 1.435 ≈ 1.44 for Chongqing and (1.16 + 1.2)/2 = 1.18 for Henan, giving a total around 2.62 goals. For lambda = 2.62 the Poisson distribution gives ~74% probability of over 1.5 goals (≥2), ~49% for over 2.5 (≥3) and ~27% for over 3.5 (≥4). Season data support Over 1.5 — the home team has 80% of matches with over 1.5 goals and averages 1.4 goals (xG 1.4) with 12.2 shots and an 11% conversion, while the away team has 50% of such matches and averages 0.75 goals. At the same time over 3.5 goals looks unlikely: home team has 20% of matches above 3.5, away team 0%, and in the last 5 matches the home scored 7 goals (1.4 avg) and the away 5 goals (1.0 avg) — totaling 2.4 goals. As a result the strongest signal is Over 1.5 (recommendation), the 2.5 line is effectively even (49% vs 51%), and 3.5 clearly favors Under (73%).

I select the draw at half-time and home win (X/1) as the strongest signal: the hosts have won 3 of their last 5 matches (60%, form: wwwdl), while Henan has only 1 win in 5 (20%, lldlw). Creativity metrics confirm Chongqing’s edge — xG_for 1.4 versus the visitors’ 1.16, with an average of 12.2 shots and 3.4 on target compared to Henan’s 9.75 and 3.0, and conversion rates of 11% vs 8%. A draw at the break is more likely: the hosts have been level at half-time in 3 of their last 5 matches (60%) and average 1.0 goals by half-time versus 0.6 for the visitors, which favors a decision after the break. Henan’s defense is less stable (xG_against 1.47 and in 40% of the last 5 matches the visitors were trailing at half-time), therefore I expect a half-time draw and a decisive home goal after the break.