Louisville City vs San Antonio: match statistics
Louisville City vs San Antonio: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Louisville City played against San Antonio in USL Championship (United States). The game was played on August 9, 2026. Final score: 1:1.
Recent form
Louisville City has 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 1.60 points per game. San Antonio has 1 win, 2 draws and 2 losses, with 1.00 points per game.
Scoring records
Louisville City scores 1.63 goals per game and allows 1.56. San Antonio scores 1.31 and allows 1.19. Games in this league average 2.79 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 56% of Louisville City's games and 50% of San Antonio's. The Over 2.5 rates are 50% and 44%, compared with league averages of 58% for BTTS and 52% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Louisville City has the higher season xG average, 1.95 to 1.32 per game. Louisville City takes 16.5 shots per game, while San Antonio takes 11.7.
First-half and second-half trends
Louisville City leads at halftime in 6% of its games and scores 1.00 goals per game after halftime. San Antonio leads at halftime in 38% and scores 0.69 after halftime.
When the teams score
Louisville City's most productive scoring window is minutes 76-90+ (7 goals). For San Antonio, it is minutes 16-30 (4 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
USL Championship games average 2.79 goals. Both teams score in 58% of games, and 52% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
Before this game, one previous meeting was available. The record was 0 home wins, 1 draw and 0 away wins. Those games averaged 2.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% of them.
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
Louisville City have a clear edge in chance creation at home: they average 20.22 shots, 6.67 shots on target and an xG of 2.33, compared with San Antonio’s 11 shots, 3.33 attempts on target and xG of 1.21 away from home. The hosts win 56% of their home matches and score an average of 1.56 goals there, while the visitors win only 33% of their away matches and draw as many as 44% of them. San Antonio, however, have shown very solid recent defensive form, conceding just 3 goals in their last 5 matches, compared with 11 conceded by Louisville City. Both teams have won 3 of their last 5 matches, but Louisville have scored 12 goals during that period, while San Antonio have scored 7. The hosts’ advantage in the quality and volume of chances created, combined with home advantage, gives them a slight edge to win, although the visitors’ strong defense increases the risk of a draw.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Louisville City has strong offensive credentials: across their last 5 matches, they averaged 2.4 goals with an xG of 2.27, while San Antonio conceded just 0.6 goals during this period but allowed opponents an xG of 1.24. The hosts are also vulnerable to conceding, having let in 11 goals in their last five matches—an average of 2.2 per game—with BTTS landing in 80% of those fixtures. San Antonio averaged 1.4 goals over the same period and generated a high xG of 1.73, providing a solid basis for exploiting Louisville’s recently weaker defense. The main risks to the pick are San Antonio’s 44% rate of matches without scoring this season and Louisville’s 44% clean-sheet rate; however, the hosts’ current form clearly shifts the assessment towards BTTS - Yes.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Louisville City create an average of 1.64 xG per match, while San Antonio allow opponents 1.45 xG, indicating a realistic chance for the hosts to score around 1.6 goals. The visitors generate 1.21 xG, while Louisville’s defense allows an average of 1.32 xG, so their attacking projection remains closer to 1.2 goals. Both teams have recorded a maximum of three goals in 78% of their league matches, while only 22% of their games went over the 3.5-goal line. Louisville’s last five outings have been more open, averaging 4.6 goals per match with 80% of games going Over 2.5 goals, although San Antonio conceded only 3 goals during this period. The combined expected total of 2.8 goals supports goals being scored, but the most stable edge lies with Under 3.5, as four or more goals would require a clear deviation from both teams’ seasonal profile.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
A draw at half-time followed by a Louisville City win is the most likely HT/FT outcome, as the hosts were level at the break in 44% of their matches, while San Antonio recorded the same figure. Louisville City, however, have a clear advantage over the full match: they score an average of 1.56 goals and concede 0.89, compared with San Antonio’s figures of 1.22 and 1.33, respectively. The hosts also create more chances, as reflected by their xG of 1.64 versus 1.21 and an average of 5.0 shots on target compared with the visitors’ 3.33. San Antonio have recently been difficult to break down before half-time, having not conceded in the opening 45 minutes in their last five matches, which increases the likelihood of a cautious start and a level score at the break. After the interval, Louisville City’s greater attacking quality and their season-long win rate of 56%, compared with the visitors’ 33%, should tip the balance in the hosts’ favor.
View first-half and second-half statisticsStats by half
Game stats
Pre-game profile— what do the season numbers say?
This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.
Shooting quality
| Louisville City | San Antonio | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 30% | 33% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.33 | 0.34 |
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 form— who is in better shape?
Last five games and season record, overall, at home and away.
Louisville City is 60% better for: last-5 form.
1.6 pts / game - Louisville City · 1 pts / game - San Antonio
Goals— how 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.
Louisville City is 24% better for: goals scored per game.
1.63 goals / game - Louisville City · 1.31 goals / game - San Antonio
San Antonio is 31% better for: goals allowed per game.
1.56 goals / game - Louisville City · 1.19 goals / game - San Antonio
Louisville City scores in 81% of games (13 of 16 games), while San Antonio keeps a clean sheet in 38% (6 of 16 games).
San Antonio scores in 63% of games (10 of 16 games), while Louisville City keeps a clean sheet in 25% (4 of 16 games).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* 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.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
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)
Over / Under - Louisville City
Over / Under - San Antonio
1st half
2nd half
Game halves— when do the teams score more often?
How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.
San Antonio is 85% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.88 pts / game - Louisville City · 1.63 pts / game - San Antonio
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Louisville City - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 6% of games and wins 44%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
San Antonio - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 38% of games and wins 38%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Allows 0.2 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.00 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 0.8 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 40% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 60% | 20% |
| Goal difference | 0 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.20 | 1.40 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| Average goals per game | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -2 | 0 |
* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (7 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): +4 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (4 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.
* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.
Additional team indicators— what do xG, efficiency and form show?
A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.
Game profile
Louisville City
San Antonio
* 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 context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (USL Championship).
Teams vs league
| Louisville City | Liga | San Antonio | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▲ 3.19 | 2.79 | ▼ 2.50 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 56% | 58% | ▼ 50% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 50% | 52% | ▼ 44% |
| Clean sheets | • 25% | 26% | ▲ 38% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 63% | 67% | ▼ 63% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 94% | 80% | ▼ 69% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Lineups and player events
Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.
Home team
Starting lineup
Substitutes
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
Head-to-head
Record from Louisville City's perspective: 0 wins, 1 draw and 0 losses against San Antonio. Games average 2.00 goals, and both teams scored in 100% of them.
FAQ
What was the result of Louisville City vs San Antonio?
The USL Championship match finished Louisville City 1:1 San Antonio. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Louisville City vs San Antonio?
Louisville City score 1.63 goals per game on average and San Antonio 1.31. The USL Championship average is 2.79 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 52% of games. Both teams score in 56% of Louisville City's matches and 50% of San Antonio's.
What form are Louisville City and San Antonio in?
Over the last 5 games Louisville City have a 2-2-1 record (1.60 points per game) and San Antonio 1-2-2 (1.00 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Louisville City vs San Antonio?
The statistical background for Louisville City vs San Antonio — 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.


