Quilmes vs San Martin Tucuman
No sharp market price is available for this match. Our own model makes Quilmes the most likely outcome at 42%; we make no value call without a sharp benchmark. Recent form — Quilmes: LLDWL; San Martin Tucuman: WLWDL.
The most likely result is not the same as value: value is where a bookmaker pays more than the fair price, and the two can point to different outcomes.
Value check
No fresh sharp price right now, so we make no value call.
Most likely result
When no single result is likely enough, our pick covers the two most probable outcomes (double chance).
| 1 | X | 2 |
|---|
Other estimates
| Our model | 42% | 29% | 30% |
|---|
Sharp, recorded = Pinnacle when we logged the match (it can be days old). Our model = our own estimate, which on average predicts worse than the market.
All markets at the fair price
Fair probability from Pinnacle with the margin removed, line by line, next to the best price at other bookmakers. Pinnacle prices from 4 hours ago. We read these markets every 3 hours; the source itself refreshes them every few hours (more often close to kick-off).
Goals: over / under
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5 | 67% fair 1.50 best 1.53 · Bet365 | 33% fair 3.02 best 2.59 · 1xBet |
| 2 | 1.85 fair best 1.88 · Betano | 2.18 fair best 1.90 · 1xBet |
| 2.5 | 39% fair 2.55 best 2.60 · Bet365 | 61% fair 1.64 best 1.50 · Betano |
All lines (6)
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5 | 67% fair 1.50 best 1.53 · Bet365 | 33% fair 3.02 best 2.59 · 1xBet |
| 1.75 | 1.63 fair best 1.53 · 1xBet | 2.60 fair best 2.21 · 1xBet |
| 2 | 1.85 fair best 1.88 · Betano | 2.18 fair best 1.90 · 1xBet |
| 2.25 | 2.19 fair best 2.02 · 1xBet | 1.84 fair best 1.64 · 1xBet |
| 2.5 | 39% fair 2.55 best 2.60 · Bet365 | 61% fair 1.64 best 1.50 · Betano |
| 3.5 | 18% fair 5.48 best 5.50 · Bet365 | 82% fair 1.22 best 1.17 · Betano |
Asian handicap (home team line)
| Line | Quilmes | San Martin Tucuman |
|---|---|---|
| −1 | 3.61 fair best 3.45 · Bet365 | 1.38 fair best 1.30 · Bet365 |
| −0.75 | 2.61 fair best 2.50 · Bet365 | 1.62 fair best 1.50 · 1xBet |
| −0.5 | 46% fair 2.16 best 2.10 · Bet365 | 54% fair 1.86 best 1.75 · Betano |
| −0.25 | 1.82 fair best 1.82 · Bet365 | 2.21 fair best 2.00 · 1xBet |
| 0 | 1.49 fair best 1.52 · Bet365 | 3.03 fair best 2.60 · 1xBet |
All lines (9)
| Line | Quilmes | San Martin Tucuman |
|---|---|---|
| −1.5 | 20% fair 4.96 best 4.40 · Bet365 | 80% fair 1.25 best 1.20 · Bet365 |
| −1.25 | 4.26 fair best 3.90 · Bet365 | 1.31 fair best 1.24 · Bet365 |
| −1 | 3.61 fair best 3.45 · Bet365 | 1.38 fair best 1.30 · Bet365 |
| −0.75 | 2.61 fair best 2.50 · Bet365 | 1.62 fair best 1.50 · 1xBet |
| −0.5 | 46% fair 2.16 best 2.10 · Bet365 | 54% fair 1.86 best 1.75 · Betano |
| −0.25 | 1.82 fair best 1.82 · Bet365 | 2.21 fair best 2.00 · 1xBet |
| 0 | 1.49 fair best 1.52 · Bet365 | 3.03 fair best 2.60 · 1xBet |
| +0.25 | 1.36 fair best 1.40 · Bet365 | 3.76 fair best 3.08 · 1xBet |
| +0.5 | 78% fair 1.29 best 1.30 · Bet365 | 22% fair 4.50 best 3.45 · Bet365 |
Goals by team
Quilmes goals
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5 | 38% fair 2.61 best 2.62 · Bet365 | 62% fair 1.62 best 1.53 · 1xBet |
All lines (2)
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 77% fair 1.31 best 1.36 · Bet365 | 23% fair 4.28 best 3.42 · Marathonbet |
| 1.5 | 38% fair 2.61 best 2.62 · Bet365 | 62% fair 1.62 best 1.53 · 1xBet |
San Martin Tucuman goals
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 61% fair 1.64 best 1.62 · Bet365 | 39% fair 2.56 best 2.25 · Betfair Sportsbook |
All lines (2)
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 61% fair 1.64 best 1.62 · Bet365 | 39% fair 2.56 best 2.25 · Betfair Sportsbook |
| 1.5 | 20% fair 4.95 best 4.00 · Bet365 | 80% fair 1.25 best 1.24 · Betano |
First half
First-half result
| 1 | X | 2 |
|---|---|---|
| 34% fair 2.92 best 2.88 · Bet365 | 46% fair 2.16 best 2.00 · William Hill | 19% fair 5.14 best 4.76 · 1xBet |
First-half goals
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 65% fair 1.55 best 1.57 · Bet365 | 35% fair 2.83 best 2.50 · William Hill |
| 0.75 | 1.80 fair best 1.72 · 1xBet | 2.25 fair best 1.96 · 1xBet |
All lines (4)
| Line | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 | 65% fair 1.55 best 1.57 · Bet365 | 35% fair 2.83 best 2.50 · William Hill |
| 0.75 | 1.80 fair best 1.72 · 1xBet | 2.25 fair best 1.96 · 1xBet |
| 1 | 2.42 fair best 2.42 · Betano | 1.70 fair best 1.55 · 1xBet |
| 1.25 | 3.24 fair best 2.79 · 1xBet | 1.45 fair best 1.34 · 1xBet |
These prices come from a feed that refreshes every few hours, so a bookmaker above the fair price here is not a value flag: we only flag value against a sharp price at most 90 minutes old. Double chance comes from the 1X2 fair probabilities. On whole and quarter lines part or all of the stake can be refunded, so we show only the fair price there: the break-even price of that bet, not a win probability. Bookmaker prices more than 12% above the fair price are left out as feed errors.
Team stats: recent matches
Up to the last 10 matches, all competitions; in brackets: Quilmes at home, San Martin Tucuman away.
| Team statistics, recent matches | Quilmes | San Martin Tucuman |
|---|---|---|
| Goals scored per game | 0.60 (1.20) | 1.60 (0.90) |
| Goals conceded per game | 0.80 (0.50) | 1.50 (1.50) |
| Over 2.5 goals | 20% (20%) | 60% (40%) |
| Both teams scored | 0% (20%) | 60% (50%) |
| Clean sheets | 40% (50%) | 20% (20%) |
| Failed to score | 70% (30%) | 20% (40%) |
Over 2.5 goals: Quilmes in 20% and San Martin Tucuman in 60% of their recent matches; the market prices it at 39% for this match.
From 10 matches for Quilmes and 10 for San Martin Tucuman. Form is public information, so the fair price already includes it: a team's record is context, not a reason to bet.
Match context
The last 1 head-to-head meetings we tracked split 0–1–0 (Quilmes wins – draws – San Martin Tucuman wins).
Quilmes scored 0.4 and conceded 1 across their last 5 matches in our results database; San Martin Tucuman scored 1.6 and conceded 1.8 in 5.
These figures come from our own tracked results and odds snapshots for this fixture — not from a generic stats feed.
Market-relevant trends
We show the trend and whether it is already in the price. Most sites show the streak and let you assume you should bet it.
Why this price?
Recent form and head-to-head from our settled results — context behind the fair price. The price itself comes from the sharp market, not from these alone.
Public, timestamped record
This hash fingerprints the prediction as recorded: teams, kick-off time, our model probabilities, the Pinnacle prices recorded for it (at logging or, if there were none, the first quoted after logging and before kick-off, which can be written in after the match) and the log time. A later edit to any of them would change it (a rescheduled kick-off changes it too). It does not cover closing prices, the result or the value-bet record above; value flags recorded live have their own seal in the public record. Verify in the public record →
Every day a snapshot of the full public record is published to a public Git repository and timestamped with OpenTimestamps. Timestamped snapshots are never overwritten and the Git history shows any difference, so a later change to a past row is visible by comparing two snapshots. The corrections file lists the corrections we announced. Verify on the public log →
Since 20 June 2026 the public record is snapshotted daily (07:40 Bucharest time: 04:40 UTC in summer time, 05:40 UTC in winter) to an external log. A prediction is externally timestamped before kick-off only if it was in a snapshot taken before the match; predictions logged on match day, or whose Pinnacle price was added after logging, first appear there after kick-off. Value flags have been recorded live only since 26 September 2026; earlier value flags were reconstructed on that date.
Methodology
The fair price comes from the sharp market itself: we strip the margin from Pinnacle-style odds — the most accurate public predictor in existence — and use our calibrated Elo + form model as a cross-check and as the fallback where no sharp price exists. Value is flagged only where a softer bookmaker prices a selection above that fair price, never on long shots (implied probability under 30%), and never beyond a plausible band. Most of the time there is no value — and we say so.
Measured by TipsAudit
- Most accurate football prediction site? Ranked against the closing line
- Is Statarea accurate? Audited against the closing line
- Is ProSoccer.gr accurate? Audited against the closing line
- Is FootballPredictions.net accurate? Audited against the closing line
- Independent tipster audit: verified track records
- How to check if a tipster is legit
- Can you verify a Telegram tipster? What we found reading their tips
- Are free football prediction sites accurate? We measure them in public
- Which bookmaker has the lowest margin? Live index
- Free value bet finder for football
- What is closing line value (CLV)?
- Free football predictions dataset with closing odds (CSV)
- Our full track record: every prediction, losses included