Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph: match statistics
Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Forward Madison played Greenville Triumph in USL League One (United States). The match was played on 13 August 2026. Final score: 1:1.
Current form
Forward Madison: 4-0-1, 2.40 points/match. Greenville Triumph: 1-1-3, 0.80 points/match.
Goal statistics
Forward Madison scores 2.06 and concedes 1.06 goals per match. Greenville Triumph scores 1.11 and concedes 1.72. League average: 2.88 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Forward Madison 56%, Greenville Triumph 39%. Over 2.5: Forward Madison 61%, Greenville Triumph 56%. League level: BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 60%.
xG, shots and style
xG is very similar for both teams. Forward Madison: 13.1 shots per match, Greenville Triumph: 13.3.
Match halves
Forward Madison: half-time lead 67%, second-half goals 0.89. Greenville Triumph: half-time lead 22%, second-half goals 0.39.
Goals by minute
Forward Madison: 16-30 (10 goals). Greenville Triumph: 0-15 (7 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
USL League One: 2.88 goals per match, BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 60%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 3 previous H2H matches were available: 1-0-2. Average goals 2.67, BTTS 33%.
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
Forward Madison are in an excellent run of five consecutive wins, scoring 18 goals in the process, while Greenville have won just once in their last five matches and conceded 11 goals. The hosts win 88% of their home games, score an average of 3.25 goals and remain unbeaten on home soil, whereas the visitors lose 75% of their away matches. Madison’s superiority is also evident in chance creation: they average 18 shots and 6.75 shots on target per match, compared with Greenville’s 10.88 shots and 3.38 on target. The hosts’ defence concedes just 0.75 goals per home game, while the visitors score only 0.5 goals away from home and have failed to score in 75% of such matches. Forward Madison’s home xG stands at 2.01, compared with Greenville’s 1.36 away from home, further supporting a convincing home win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Forward Madison has recorded BTTS in 67% of their matches this season, while in their last five games, both teams have scored in 60%—the same figure as for Greenville. The hosts have recently averaged 3.6 goals per match and created 1.89 xG, whereas Greenville, despite their weaker season-long efficiency, have produced a strong 2.14 xG across their last five appearances. Forward Madison’s defense allows an average of 1.4 xG this season, while the visitors have conceded 11 goals in their last five matches, or 2.2 per game, which strongly supports a home goal. The risk to BTTS is Greenville’s season average of just 0.5 goals and 75% of matches without scoring, but the visitors’ current attacking form and the opponent’s weaker defense slightly favor the “yes” option.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Forward Madison average 1.78 goals per game this season, rising to as many as 3.6 goals per match across their last five fixtures, with xG at 1.89. Greenville concede an average of 1.75 goals in the competition and 2.2 over their last five matches, clearly strengthening the prospect of at least two goals for the hosts or an open game. The 1.5 line has been covered in 78% of Forward Madison matches and 75% of Greenville games, while the league average stands at 2.88 goals. The visitors have scored just 0.5 goals per match this season, so their projected goal tally remains limited to 0.91; however, their recent xG of 2.14 suggests they can contribute to the scoreline. Over 1.5 is the strongest pick, as it combines the high consistency of both teams with a projected total of 2.87 goals.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Forward Madison have won all of their last five matches, scoring an average of 3.6 goals while conceding just 1.2, whereas Greenville have lost three of their five games during this period and conceded an average of 2.2 goals. The home side led at the break in each of their last five appearances, scoring an average of 1.8 goals before half-time, while the visitors failed to go into the interval with a lead on any occasion and conceded an average of 1.25 goals before the break. Madison’s advantage is also evident over the course of the season: they win 44% of their matches compared with Greenville’s 13%, while the visitors’ opponents have kept a clean sheet in 75% of their games. The hosts’ attack generates 1.76 xG and averages 5.67 shots on target, compared with Greenville’s 1.36 xG and 3.38 shots on target, supporting the HT/FT scenario of Madison leading at half-time and maintaining their advantage through to the final whistle.
View first-half and second-half statisticsHalf-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| Forward Madison | Greenville Triumph | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 36% | 33% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.43 | 0.25 |
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 matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Forward Madison is 200% better for: last-5 form.
2.4 pts / match - Forward Madison · 0.8 pts / match - Greenville Triumph
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.
Forward Madison is 86% better for: goals scored per match.
2.06 goals / match - Forward Madison · 1.11 goals / match - Greenville Triumph
Forward Madison is 62% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.06 goals / match - Forward Madison · 1.72 goals / match - Greenville Triumph
Forward Madison scores in 83% of matches (15 of 18 matches), while Greenville Triumph keeps a clean sheet in 17% (3 of 18 matches).
Greenville Triumph scores in 50% of matches (9 of 18 matches), while Forward Madison keeps a clean sheet in 28% (5 of 18 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under - Forward Madison
Over / Under - Greenville Triumph
1st half
2nd half
Match 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.
Forward Madison is 80% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
2.11 pts / match - Forward Madison · 1.17 pts / match - Greenville Triumph
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Forward Madison - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 67% of matches and wins 61%. Usually protects the lead until full-time.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Greenville Triumph - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 22% of matches and wins 28%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.2 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.40 | 2.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 20% | 0% |
| Goal difference | +4 | +6 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.60 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 0.6 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 0% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 80% | 80% |
| Goal difference | -3 | -1 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (10 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (5). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (7 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -7 - late phases are a weakness.
* 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Forward Madison
Greenville Triumph
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (USL League One).
Teams vs league
| Forward Madison | Liga | Greenville Triumph | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.11 | 2.88 | • 2.83 |
| Both teams scored | • 56% | 55% | ▼ 39% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | • 61% | 60% | ▼ 56% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 28% | 26% | ▼ 17% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 94% | 70% | ▼ 67% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 72% | 78% | ▼ 72% |
^ 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.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (3): Forward Madison 1 - 0 - 2 Greenville Triumph. Average goals 2.67, both teams scored in 33% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph?
The USL League One match finished Forward Madison 1:1 Greenville Triumph. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Forward Madison and Greenville Triumph?
In the last 3 head-to-head matches Forward Madison won 1, Greenville Triumph won 2 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 2.67 goals, with both teams scoring in 33% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph?
Forward Madison score 2.06 goals per game on average and Greenville Triumph 1.11. The USL League One average is 2.88 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 60% of games. Both teams score in 56% of Forward Madison's matches and 39% of Greenville Triumph's.
What form are Forward Madison and Greenville Triumph in?
Over the last 5 games Forward Madison have a 4-0-1 record (2.40 points per game) and Greenville Triumph 1-1-3 (0.80 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph?
The statistical background for Forward Madison vs Greenville Triumph — 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.