Pittsburgh Riverhounds vs Loudoun United 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.
Pittsburgh Riverhounds v Loudoun United — Team-Based Signals
Pittsburgh Riverhounds vs Loudoun United Head-to-Head — Last 6 Meetings
3-1
HT 2-0
Loudoun United
USLP
0-1
HT 0-0
Pittsburgh Riverhounds
USLP
1-2
HT 0-1
Pittsburgh Riverhounds
USLP
2-0
HT 0-0
Loudoun United
USLP
5-0
HT 1-0
Loudoun United
USLP
1-0
HT 1-0
Loudoun United
USLP
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 1-1 Loudoun United — Actual Match Statistics
Pittsburgh Riverhounds and Loudoun United shared the points in a 1-1 draw. It was 1-0 at half-time, meaning the result turned around in the second half.
Our pre-match lean was Pittsburgh Riverhounds at 50%, but a lead that slim is closer to a coin-flip than a call — and it fell the other way. We had also flagged under 2.5 goals (57%), and that read landed as well.
On the day, Pittsburgh Riverhounds had 33% of the ball to Loudoun United's 67%, shots finished 13-10, expected goals 2.13 to 0.49.
Coming into the game, across their last 6 meetings in our records, Pittsburgh Riverhounds had the better of it with 6 wins. Those games averaged 2.33 goals for Pittsburgh Riverhounds and 0.33 for Loudoun United.
What was the final score of Pittsburgh Riverhounds vs Loudoun United?
Pittsburgh Riverhounds 1-1 Loudoun United in the USL Championship on 28/07/2024. The analysis above shows what our model predicted before kick-off next to what actually happened.
What did the model predict for Pittsburgh Riverhounds vs Loudoun United?
Before kick-off our model rated a Pittsburgh Riverhounds win the most likely single outcome at about 50%, with the full match-result split Pittsburgh Riverhounds 50%, draw 31%, Loudoun United 20%. The final score 1-1 confirmed our model's pre-match leads on Under 2.5 — while Match Result (Pittsburgh Riverhounds), BTTS No went the other way.