Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu: match statistics
Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Heilongjiang Lava Spring played Hebei Kungfu in China League One (China). The match was played on 23 August 2026. Final score: 1:2.
Current form
Heilongjiang Lava Spring: 1-2-2, 1.00 points/match. Hebei Kungfu: 2-3-0, 1.80 points/match.
Goal statistics
Heilongjiang Lava Spring scores 1.53 and concedes 1.89 goals per match. Hebei Kungfu scores 0.74 and concedes 1.21. League average: 2.62 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Heilongjiang Lava Spring 84%, Hebei Kungfu 47%. Over 2.5: Heilongjiang Lava Spring 58%, Hebei Kungfu 42%. League level: BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 52%.
xG, shots and style
Heilongjiang Lava Spring has higher xG: 1.28 vs 1.05. Heilongjiang Lava Spring: 10.2 shots per match, Hebei Kungfu: 9.5.
Match halves
Heilongjiang Lava Spring: half-time lead 32%, second-half goals 0.79. Hebei Kungfu: half-time lead 32%, second-half goals 0.26.
Goals by minute
Heilongjiang Lava Spring: 16-30 (6 goals). Hebei Kungfu: 31-45+ (5 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
China League One: 2.62 goals per match, BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 52%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 3 previous H2H matches were available: 1-2-0. Average goals 3.00, BTTS 100%.
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
Heilongjiang Lava Spring have a clear attacking edge at home, averaging 1.44 goals scored and creating chances worth 1.50 xG, while Hebei Kungfu score just 0.67 goals away from home with 0.96 xG. The visitors have lost 56% of their away matches and failed to score in as many as 56% of them, which could prove crucial against a home side averaging 53% possession. Heilongjiang’s defence remains vulnerable, however, conceding 1.67 goals per home game and keeping no clean sheets. Hebei are in better recent form, unbeaten in their last 5 matches with 2 wins and 3 draws, conceding just 5 goals, making a draw a realistic outcome. Despite the hosts’ weaker recent run, their advantage in the quality of chances created and Hebei’s very limited attacking output away from home slightly favour a Heilongjiang win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Both teams are showing a clear increase in matches with goals scored by both sides: over their last five fixtures, the BTTS rate stood at 80% for each team, compared with 50% for the hosts and 44% for the visitors across the full season. Heilongjiang averaged 1.6 goals scored during this run but conceded as many as 2.4, significantly increasing Hebei’s chances of finding the net. The visitors have recently averaged 1.4 goals per match, while the hosts’ defence allowed opponents an xG of 1.94, well above the seasonal figure of 1.11. Hebei kept a clean sheet in only 22% of matches, compared with 20% for the hosts, so neither defence provides a strong argument for a No Goal outcome. However, seasonal attacking averages remain low at 0.8 and 0.67 goals, meaning the BTTS edge is moderate, but current form supports the BTTS - Yes pick.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The strongest signal points to Under 3.5 goals, as matches involving Heilongjiang have never produced 4 or more goals, while this scenario occurred in only 11% of Hebei’s matches. Seasonal attacking averages are low: the hosts score 0.80 goals per match and the visitors 0.67, with xG figures of 1.12 and 0.96, respectively. Recent form has been more open, as both teams recorded Over 2.5 goals in 60% of their last five matches, while Heilongjiang conceded as many as 2.4 goals on average. Even so, the increased tempo produces a projected total of 2.45 goals, clearly below the 3.5 line, while the historical results of both teams significantly reduce the risk of a very high-scoring game. Under 3.5 goals therefore holds an advantage over the other options.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
A draw at half-time and after the final whistle is the most likely outcome, as Hebei were level at the break in 6 of their 9 matches, or 67% of cases, compared with 40% for Heilongjiang. The visitors have yet to concede a goal before half-time, while averaging just 0.44 goals scored in this period, which clearly favours a cautious opening. Across the season, the hosts score only 0.80 goals per match and the visitors 0.67, while their draw rates stand at 30% and 33%, respectively. Heilongjiang have the stronger points return, 1.20 compared with 0.67, but Hebei remain unbeaten in their last 5 matches, recording 3 draws and 2 wins. Therefore, the most logical scenario remains a closely contested draw rather than a decisive outcome.
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
| Heilongjiang Lava Spring | Hebei Kungfu | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 41% | 27% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.13 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.36 | 0.29 |
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.
Hebei Kungfu is 80% better for: last-5 form.
1 pts / match - Heilongjiang Lava Spring · 1.8 pts / match - Hebei Kungfu
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.
Heilongjiang Lava Spring is 107% better for: goals scored per match.
1.53 goals / match - Heilongjiang Lava Spring · 0.74 goals / match - Hebei Kungfu
Hebei Kungfu is 56% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.89 goals / match - Heilongjiang Lava Spring · 1.21 goals / match - Hebei Kungfu
Heilongjiang Lava Spring scores in 89% of matches (17 of 19 matches), while Hebei Kungfu keeps a clean sheet in 21% (4 of 19 matches).
Hebei Kungfu scores in 53% of matches (10 of 19 matches), while Heilongjiang Lava Spring keeps a clean sheet in 5% (1 of 19 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 - Heilongjiang Lava Spring
Over / Under - Hebei Kungfu
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.
Hebei Kungfu is 17% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.26 pts / match - Heilongjiang Lava Spring · 1.47 pts / match - Hebei Kungfu
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Heilongjiang Lava Spring - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 32% of matches and wins 21%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Concedes 0.2 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
Hebei Kungfu - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 32% of matches and wins 21%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Concedes 0.6 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.40 | 0.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 2.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 0% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -1 | -3 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.20 | 0.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.2 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 40% |
| No goal | 20% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +4 | -2 |
* 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 (6 goals). Concedes most in 16-30 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (5 goals). Concedes most in 61-75 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -4 - 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
Heilongjiang Lava Spring
Hebei Kungfu
* 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 (China League One).
Teams vs league
| Heilongjiang Lava Spring | Liga | Hebei Kungfu | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.42 | 2.62 | ▼ 1.95 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 84% | 55% | ▼ 47% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 58% | 52% | ▼ 42% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 5% | 27% | ▼ 21% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 84% | 71% | ▼ 58% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 89% | 72% | ▼ 63% |
^ 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): Heilongjiang Lava Spring 1 - 2 - 0 Hebei Kungfu. Average goals 3.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu?
The China League One match finished Heilongjiang Lava Spring 1:2 Hebei Kungfu. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Heilongjiang Lava Spring and Hebei Kungfu?
In the last 3 head-to-head matches Heilongjiang Lava Spring won 1, Hebei Kungfu won 0 and 2 ended level. These games averaged 3.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu?
Heilongjiang Lava Spring score 1.53 goals per game on average and Hebei Kungfu 0.74. The China League One average is 2.62 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 52% of games. Both teams score in 84% of Heilongjiang Lava Spring's matches and 47% of Hebei Kungfu's.
What form are Heilongjiang Lava Spring and Hebei Kungfu in?
Over the last 5 games Heilongjiang Lava Spring have a 1-2-2 record (1.00 points per game) and Hebei Kungfu 2-3-0 (1.80 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu?
The statistical background for Heilongjiang Lava Spring vs Hebei Kungfu — 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.


