Sparta KW vs Chełmianka Chełm: match statistics

The favorites are the visitors: Chełmianka have 15 wins, 7 draws and only 4 losses this season, while Sparta have managed just 3 wins, 1 draw and as many as 22 losses. Last 5-match form also favors the visitors — Chełmianka scored 13 goals and conceded 4, whereas Sparta scored 6 and conceded 17 over the same period. In the home/away split there is a large discrepancy: Sparta concede on average 3.23 goals at home (xG against 2.02) and score 1.23 goals (xG 1.09), while Chełmianka on the road average 1.69 goals scored (xG 1.40) and concede only 1.15 goals (xG against 1.06). Additionally, the visitors have 38% clean sheets away and a +7 away goal difference, whereas Sparta have only 8% clean sheets at home and a -26 home goal difference. In summary, considering the 17 goals Sparta conceded in their last 5 matches, the average xG and the higher points per game for the visitors in the last 5 fixtures (2.0 vs 0.6), I assign a 75% chance to a Chełmianka win, 15% to a draw and 10% to a Sparta win.

Seasonal and league metrics favor BTTS: Sparta has a seasonal BTTS rate of 62%, Chełmianka 54%, and the league average BTTS is 56%. In the last 5 matches both teams have BTTS at 60% (3/5), with Chełmianka scoring 13 goals in those 5 games (2.6 per match), and Sparta conceding 17 goals (3.4 per match), while Sparta’s seasonal average goals conceded was 0.69 per match — a sign of defensive deterioration for the home side. xG data shows Sparta creates more chances season-long (xG_for 2.18 vs xG_against 1.03), but in the last 5 matches Sparta has xG_for 0.34 and xG_against 1.97, whereas Chełmianka’s recent xG_for is 1.8 and xG_against 1.08, which favors the visitors’ attacks and Sparta conceding. Sparta averages 19 shots and 8.5 on target per match versus Chełmianka’s 11 and 3.6; with conversion rates 26% vs 20%—despite creation advantage, recent results indicate the hosts are more prone to conceding. Considering the seasonal 62%/54%, 60% BTTS in the last 5 matches for both teams, and the fact Sparta concedes 3.4 goals per match in the last 5 while Chełmianka scores 2.6, I pick BTTS "Yes" with a probability of 70% vs 30%.

I forecast Over 1.5 as the best pick: expected goals based on xG are 1.62 for Sparta (xG attack 2.18 vs xG conceded 1.06 → average 1.62) and 1.22 for Chełmianka (1.40 and 1.03 → 1.22), totaling 2.84 goals. With a combined lambda of 2.84, the probability of more than 1.5 goals is approximately 78% (probability of 0–1 goals ≈22%), Over 2.5 is ~54%, and Over 3.5 only ~32%. Additionally, the home side averages 19 shots and 8.5 on target per match with a conversion rate of 26%, while the visitors average 11 shots and 3.6 on target with a 20% conversion, which increases the chance of at least 2 goals. Seasonal metrics also support Over 1.5: Sparta has 69% of matches over 1.5, Chełmianka 85%, and the league averages 3.14 goals per match. Given the strongest signal (78% vs 22%), I back the 'over' on the 1.5 line as the most probable and best value play.

Sparta KW led at half-time in 8 matches (67%), scoring an average of 1.08 goals by the 45th minute and conceding only 0.08, and keeping a half-time clean sheet in 92% of games, which strongly indicates their dominance before the break. Over the full match Sparta have an xG of 2.18 versus Chełmianka’s 1.40, average 1.85 goals scored and 0.69 conceded, while registering 8.5 shots on target per game compared to the opponent’s 3.6 and displaying higher finishing efficiency (26% vs 20%). Chełmianka are, however, in good form (last 5 matches: wwwld, 60% wins in that period) and score 0.73 goals in second halves, whereas Sparta concede 0.58 after the break, which gives some chance of a turnaround. Considering Sparta’s xG and SOT advantage and their frequent lead at the break (67%), the most likely scenario is 1/1 — I assign it a 56% probability; lower probabilities are given to 1/X at 6% and 1/2 at 5%. Additionally, scenarios starting level (X/X 14%) reflect the hosts’ 25% share of half-time draws, while turnarounds after the break are judged unlikely, hence the recommendation of 1/1.