Racing Club Montevideo vs Liverpool FC (Montevideo) Prediction — Model Probabilities
Edge (pp): green = we see more probability than the market · gold = essentially even (±0.5pp) · red = we see less. The Decision above outranks any single row: the engine backs well-supported edges, not merely big ones.
Racing Club Montevideo v Liverpool FC (Montevideo) — Team-Based Signals
Racing Club Montevideo vs Liverpool FC (Montevideo) Head-to-Head — Last 6 Meetings
2-3
HT 1-0
Racing Club Montevideo
URU
3-2
HT 0-0
Racing Club Montevideo
URU
1-1
HT 0-1
Liverpool FC (Montevideo)
URU
0-2
HT 0-0
Liverpool FC (Montevideo)
URU
Racing Club Montevideo 1-1 Liverpool FC (Montevideo) — Actual Match Statistics
Racing Club Montevideo and Liverpool FC (Montevideo) couldn't be separated, finishing 1-1. Half-time: 0-0.
We called this one close before kick-off — 34% / 28% / 37% — and a draw is about as on-script as that read gets. On goals, under 2.5 goals (68%) landed while no to both teams scoring (64%) missed.
On the day, Racing Club Montevideo had 44% of the ball to Liverpool FC (Montevideo)'s 56%, shots finished 10-10.
Coming into the game, across their last 6 meetings in our records, Liverpool FC (Montevideo) led the recent series with 2 wins, 3 drawn. Those games averaged 1.50 goals for Racing Club Montevideo and 1.83 for Liverpool FC (Montevideo).
What was the final score of Racing Club Montevideo vs Liverpool FC (Montevideo)?
Racing Club Montevideo 1-1 Liverpool FC (Montevideo) in the Uruguay - Premier League on 14/04/2025. The analysis above shows what our model predicted before kick-off next to what actually happened.
What did the model predict for Racing Club Montevideo vs Liverpool FC (Montevideo)?
Before kick-off our model rated an Liverpool FC (Montevideo) win the most likely single outcome at about 37%, with the full match-result split Racing Club Montevideo 34%, draw 28%, Liverpool FC (Montevideo) 37%. The final score 1-1 confirmed our model's pre-match leads on Under 2.5 — while Match Result (Liverpool FC (Montevideo)), BTTS No went the other way.