JDFS Alberts vs Tukums II: match statistics
JDFS Alberts vs Tukums II: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
JDFS Alberts played Tukums II in 1. Liga (Latvia). The match was played on 31 May 2026. Venue: Rīgas 49. vidusskolas sporta komplekss. Final score: 6:1.
Current form
JDFS Alberts: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match. Tukums II: 2-1-2, 1.40 points/match.
Goal statistics
JDFS Alberts scores 1.88 and concedes 1.63 goals per match. Tukums II scores 1.63 and concedes 2.00. League average: 3.39 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: JDFS Alberts 88%, Tukums II 88%. Over 2.5: JDFS Alberts 75%, Tukums II 75%. League level: BTTS 62%, Over 2.5 69%.
xG, shots and style
JDFS Alberts has higher xG: 1.70 vs 1.40. JDFS Alberts: 12.9 shots per match, Tukums II: 8.5.
Match halves
JDFS Alberts: half-time lead 25%, second-half goals 1.13. Tukums II: half-time lead 25%, second-half goals 0.88.
Goals by minute
JDFS Alberts: 61-75 (4 goals). Tukums II: 76-90+ (5 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
1. Liga: 3.39 goals per match, BTTS 62%, Over 2.5 69%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 2 previous H2H matches were available: 2-0-0. Average goals 5.00, 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
JDFS Alberts holds a clear advantage in key home metrics: at home they average 2.67 goals per match with 14.33 shots and 6.67 on target, maintain 59% possession and concede only 0.67 goals per match. Tukums II away average 2.33 goals with 8 shots and 3.5 on target, but concede as many as 2.33 goals per match and have recorded 0 clean sheets (0% clean sheets). The quality-of-chances differential is confirmed by xG: hosts have home xG 1.92 versus visitors' away xG 1.24, with xG against 1.57 vs 1.43, suggesting JDFS’ superiority in creating better opportunities and limiting the opponent. Recent form over the last five matches also favors the hosts — JDFS scored 14 goals in the last 5 and hold a 3-1-1 record (2.0 points per match), while Tukums have 9 goals and a 2-1-2 record with 1.4 points per match. Given the defensive edge (0.67 vs 2.33 goals conceded), higher shot volume (14.33 vs 8) and greater possession (59% vs 46%), I predict a JDFS Alberts victory.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Both teams strongly favor a BTTS scenario: seasonal BTTS is 80% for JDFS Alberts and 100% for Tukums II, with both at 80% in their last 5 matches. Tukums II averages 2.33 goals scored and 2.33 conceded per game; JDFS has seasonal 1.20 scored and 1.80 conceded, but in the last 5 matches JDFS raised their average to 2.8 scored vs 1.6 conceded. xG also points to a goal-heavy match: seasonal attacking xG is 1.47 for JDFS and 1.24 for Tukums, while xG against are 1.8 and 1.43, supporting an exchange of chances. Tukums has no clean sheets this season (0%), JDFS only 20% clean sheets, and the league average is 3.39 goals per match, which further increases BTTS likelihood. Based on this, I estimate BTTS - Yes probability at ~88% and No at 12%.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The xG model estimates about 1.45 expected goals for JDFS Alberts (1.47 xG for vs 1.43 xG against Tukums II) and 1.52 for Tukums II (1.24 xG for vs 1.80 xG against JDFS Alberts), totaling ~2.97 goals. Both teams have 100% of season matches over 1.5 goals (seasonOver15Percentage_home=100%, seasonOver15Percentage_away=100%) and BTTS rates of 80% and 100% respectively, which strongly supports at least two goals in the match. The home side averages 10.6 shots with 5.2 on target, the visitors 8.0 with 3.5 on target, and shot conversion is 11% vs 19% in favor of the visitors, increasing the likelihood of chances turning into goals. In the last 5 matches JDFS Alberts averaged 2.8 goals, Tukums II 1.8 goals, and the league average is 3.39 goals per game, so Over 2.5 is also realistic; I do not consider the 3.5 threshold certain since the expected 2.97 goals is below that line. Based on this, I recommend playing Over 1.5 as the strongest and most reliable signal.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
The most likely scenario is the away team leading at half-time and winning the match (2/2) — I assess this at 39%. Key figures: the away side average 1.33 goals by the break versus the home side’s 0.4, and the home team have been behind at half-time in 60% of matches, which strongly supports HT=2. Over the full 90 minutes the away team average 2.33 goals scored and 2.33 conceded, while the home team average 1.2 scored and 1.8 conceded, so the away side holding their lead is probable. Although the hosts have a higher xG (1.47 vs 1.24), the away team are more efficient in finishing (shot conversion 19% vs 11%), and given the high incidence of both teams scoring (BTTS: 80% for the home team and 100% for the away team) I also allow for X/2 scenarios (12%) and 2/X turnarounds (15%). Additionally, the home team are losing 60% of their matches this season, which further increases the likelihood of an away win at full-time.
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
| JDFS Alberts | Tukums II | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 38% | 47% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.13 | 0.16 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.39 | 0.41 |
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.
JDFS Alberts is 43% better for: last-5 form.
2 pts / match - JDFS Alberts · 1.4 pts / match - Tukums II
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.
JDFS Alberts is 15% better for: goals scored per match.
1.88 goals / match - JDFS Alberts · 1.63 goals / match - Tukums II
JDFS Alberts is 23% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.63 goals / match - JDFS Alberts · 2 goals / match - Tukums II
JDFS Alberts scores in 100% of matches (8 of 8 matches), while Tukums II keeps a clean sheet in 13% (1 of 8 matches).
Tukums II scores in 100% of matches (8 of 8 matches), while JDFS Alberts keeps a clean sheet in 13% (1 of 8 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 - JDFS Alberts
Over / Under - Tukums II
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.
JDFS Alberts is 13% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.13 pts / match - JDFS Alberts · 1 pts / match - Tukums II
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
JDFS Alberts - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 25% of matches and wins 50%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Tukums II - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 25% of matches and wins 25%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.60 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 1.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 2.2 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 80% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 0% |
| No goal | 60% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 1.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.6 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 20% |
| Goal difference | -2 | +3 |
* 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 61-75 (4 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): +4 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (5 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): +3 - wins late phases.
* 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
JDFS Alberts
Tukums II
* 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 (1. Liga).
Teams vs league
| JDFS Alberts | Liga | Tukums II | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.50 | 3.39 | ▲ 3.63 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 88% | 62% | ▲ 88% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 75% | 69% | ▲ 75% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 13% | 22% | ▼ 13% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 63% | 67% | ▲ 88% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 88% | 84% | ▲ 100% |
^ 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
Other recorded players
Away team
Other recorded players
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
- JDFS AlbertsGoalMarkus Prohorenkovs
- JDFS AlbertsGoalMarkus Prohorenkovs
- Tukums IIGoalIlja Atligins
- JDFS AlbertsGoalDāvis Indrāns
- JDFS AlbertsGoalMarkus Prohorenkovs
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (2): JDFS Alberts 2 - 0 - 0 Tukums II. Average goals 5.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of JDFS Alberts vs Tukums II?
The 1. Liga match finished JDFS Alberts 6:1 Tukums II. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between JDFS Alberts and Tukums II?
In the last 2 head-to-head matches JDFS Alberts won 2, Tukums II won 0 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 5.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before JDFS Alberts vs Tukums II?
JDFS Alberts score 1.88 goals per game on average and Tukums II 1.63. The 1. Liga average is 3.39 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 69% of games. Both teams score in 88% of JDFS Alberts's matches and 88% of Tukums II's.
What form are JDFS Alberts and Tukums II in?
Over the last 5 games JDFS Alberts have a 3-1-1 record (2.00 points per game) and Tukums II 2-1-2 (1.40 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for JDFS Alberts vs Tukums II?
This page shows the full statistical context — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under. The tip, value assessment and full reasoning are in the NoFluffPicks app.