Tukums vs Liepāja: match statistics
Tukums vs Liepāja: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Tukums played Liepāja in Virsliga (Latvia). The match was played on 2 August 2026. Venue: Tukuma pilsētas stadions. Final score: 2:1.
Current form
Tukums: 0-0-5, 0.00 points/match. Liepāja: 2-0-3, 1.20 points/match.
Goal statistics
Tukums scores 1.58 and concedes 2.00 goals per match. Liepāja scores 1.30 and concedes 1.48. League average: 2.95 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Tukums 88%, Liepāja 52%. Over 2.5: Tukums 75%, Liepāja 57%. League level: BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 55%.
xG, shots and style
Liepāja has higher xG: 1.54 vs 1.41. Tukums: 11.8 shots per match, Liepāja: 12.9.
Match halves
Tukums: half-time lead 25%, second-half goals 0.79. Liepāja: half-time lead 39%, second-half goals 0.65.
Goals by minute
Tukums: 76-90+ (12 goals). Liepāja: 31-45+ (7 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Virsliga: 2.95 goals per match, BTTS 55%, Over 2.5 55%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 6 previous H2H matches were available: 0-3-3. Average goals 3.33, BTTS 67%.
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
I back the away win (Liepāja). Hosts Tukums score an average of 1.83 goals per home match and register 5 shots on target, but they have 0 points and 11 goals conceded in their last 5 matches, indicating serious defensive issues. Liepāja sit 4th (9 wins this season) and have 3 wins in their last 5, scoring 5 and conceding 4; away they generate average xG 1.65 with 14.42 shots and 53% possession, suggesting an advantage in chance creation. Tukums have the edge in home goal average (1.83 vs 0.83 for Liepāja away) and a higher conversion rate 16% vs 6% for the visitors, but Liepāja’s superiority in creating quality chances and the form differential (1.8 points per game over the last 5 for the visitors vs 0 for the hosts) favour the away side. I therefore assign higher probability to an away win, with a distribution 25% home, 20% draw and 55% Liepāja.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Seasonal data show Tukums has BTTS at 64% versus Liepāja's 42%, with the league BTTS average at 55%, indicating a tilt toward a Goal/Goal scenario. In the last 5 matches Tukums recorded BTTS in 80% of games and conceded on average 2.2 goals (11 in 5), while Liepāja had BTTS in only 20% and conceded 0.8 on average (4 in 5), highlighting significant defensive instability from the home side. xG indicates balanced chances (xG_for 1.42 for Tukums vs 1.65 for Liepāja, xG_against 1.43 vs 1.53), but Tukums converts shots far more efficiently (conversion rate 16% vs 6% for the visitors), increasing realistic threat from both sides. Liepāja, however, has a low away goals average of 0.83 and failed to score in 42% of season matches, which reduces BTTS confidence, yet Tukums’ low clean sheet rate (18%) and the league average of 2.95 goals support both teams scoring. Considering these figures I assign BTTS 62% vs 38% and recommend BTTS - Yes.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Statistical analysis indicates a high goal potential: average xG is 1.42 for Tukums and 1.65 for Liepāja, while xG against is 1.43 and 1.53, yielding preliminary ratings of about 1.47 and 1.54. Considering actual goals per game (Tukums 1.82, Liepāja 0.83) and the difference in shot conversion (conversion 16% vs 6%), I adjust the estimate to 1.67 goals for the home side and 1.23 for the away side, totaling 2.90. Seasonal metrics support the Over markets: Over 1.5 occurs in 91% of Tukums matches and 75% of Liepāja matches, and the league average is 2.95 goals per game; Over 2.5 appears in 64% of home matches and 50% of away matches, so I estimate Over 2.5 at around 62%. For these reasons the strongest signal is a bet on Over 1.5 (probability 92%), since the combination of xG, goal averages (1.67 vs 1.23) and high Over 1.5 percentages offers a clear edge. Over 3.5 is less likely (forecast 28%) given seasonal rates of 18% for the home team and 42% for the away team.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Seasonal statistics strongly favor Tukums in the first half: the hosts led at the break in 7 matches (64%), with Tukums scoring 22 points by halftime (an average of 2.0 per match) versus 8 points (0.67 per match) for Liepāja. Over the full match Tukums averages 1.82 goals scored and concedes 1.00, while Liepāja averages 0.83 scored and 1.92 conceded, giving the hosts an advantage in converting a lead at the break into a Half-Time/Full-Time win. Additionally, Tukums has better finishing efficiency: a 16% conversion rate on an average of 11.18 shots and 5.0 shots on target, whereas the visitors convert only 6% from 14.42 shots and 4.08 on target. Between the 31st and 45th minutes Tukums scored 6 goals while Liepāja conceded 5 in that interval; in the second half the hosts average 0.82 goals while the visitors average 0.83 conceded, which supports the scenario of maintaining the lead. Therefore the most likely HT/FT outcome is 1/1 (46%), with 1/X (12%) and X/1 (6%) as realistic alternatives, and reverse scenarios favoring the visitors assessed as less likely.
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
| Tukums | Liepāja | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 39% | 35% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.34 | 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.
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.
Tukums is 22% better for: goals scored per match.
1.58 goals / match - Tukums · 1.3 goals / match - Liepāja
Liepāja is 35% better for: goals conceded per match.
2 goals / match - Tukums · 1.48 goals / match - Liepāja
Tukums scores in 92% of matches (22 of 24 matches), while Liepāja keeps a clean sheet in 17% (4 of 23 matches).
Liepāja scores in 70% of matches (16 of 23 matches), while Tukums keeps a clean sheet in 4% (1 of 24 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 — Tukums
Over / Under — Liepāja
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.
Liepāja is 25% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.04 pts / match - Tukums · 1.3 pts / match - Liepāja
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Tukums - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 25% of matches and wins 13%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Liepāja - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 39% of matches and wins 39%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.40 | 0.40 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 1.6 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 20% |
| No goal | 40% | 80% |
| Goal difference | -1 | -6 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.40 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.8 | 1.0 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +1 | -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 76-90 (12 goli). Concedes most in 16-30 (11). Late-goal balance (76-90): +5 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (7 goli). Concedes most in 0-15 (8). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - 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
Tukums
Liepāja
* 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 (Virsliga).
Teams vs league
| Tukums | Liga | Liepāja | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.58 | 2.95 | ▼ 2.78 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 88% | 55% | ▼ 52% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 75% | 55% | ▲ 57% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 4% | 24% | ▼ 17% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 92% | 76% | ▲ 87% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 88% | 82% | • 83% |
^ 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
Substitutes
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
- LiepājaYellow cardAfonso Torcato Tavares Leite
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (6): Tukums 0 - 3 - 3 Liepāja. Average goals 3.33, both teams scored in 67% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Tukums vs Liepāja?
The Virsliga match finished Tukums 2:1 Liepāja. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Tukums and Liepāja?
In the last 6 head-to-head matches Tukums won 0, Liepāja won 3 and 3 ended level. These games averaged 3.33 goals, with both teams scoring in 67% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Tukums vs Liepāja?
Tukums score 1.58 goals per game on average and Liepāja 1.30. The Virsliga average is 2.95 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 55% of games. Both teams score in 88% of Tukums's matches and 52% of Liepāja's.
What form are Tukums and Liepāja in?
Over the last 5 games Tukums have a 0-0-5 record (0.00 points per game) and Liepāja 2-0-3 (1.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Tukums vs Liepāja?
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.