APP
Mobile
Hong Kong Odds
- Decimal Odds
- Hong Kong Odds
- Indonesian Odds
- American Odds
- Malay Odds
English
- English
Vietnam
Thailand
Member Ranking
-
1
Light of your world 🔥Won 4/5Follow76.5%Win Rate +39.3%ROI 17Tips 1.88Avg Odds -
2
Ayomide ilesanmiWon 6/6Follow75%Win Rate +31.5%ROI 16Tips 1.87Avg Odds -
3
bensalemWon 4/4Follow72.7%Win Rate +35.6%ROI 11Tips 1.87Avg Odds -
4
Theé Palmer CGHWon 4/5Follow72.2%Win Rate +36.7%ROI 20Tips 1.89Avg Odds -
5
Kei R🐉Won 9/11Follow70.6%Win Rate +22.2%ROI 17Tips 1.87Avg Odds -
6
Abel Alejandro Alcantar TapiaWon 13/18Follow70.4%Win Rate +32.1%ROI 28Tips 1.92Avg Odds
Note: Statistics base on data from last 7 or 30 days
More Ranking
Further Reading
-
Liam 665The Chicago Fire and the Portland Timbers both show inefficiency in their offensive ends. The Fire's offensive conversion rate is 12.3%, lower than the league average, while the Timbers' xG efficiency is only 0.62 per 90 minutes. In terms of key passes, neither team has a success rate exceeding 45%. The value of their forward passes is less than 1.8 times per 90 minutes, indicating a lack of creative organization. Regarding midfield control, the Fire have an average ball - possession rate of 58%, but their transition speed is only 1.2 times per minute. In contrast, the Timbers have a faster transition rate of 1.4 times per minute. In terms of running, the Fire cover a distance of 118 km and have 12 high - intensity sprints. However, in defense, their tackle rate is only 22%, interception efficiency is 0.8 times per 90 minutes, and the clearance error rate is as high as 35%. Both teams waste scoring opportunities. Their on - target shooting rate is only 24%, and the total xG is only 1.8AH
MLS
Chicago Fire
2-1 Portland Timbers
-
amvn Won 3/5I'm a professional analyst with a long - term and stable track record. I've tailored a high - quality long - term product for my valued followers. In terms of offensive performance, Chicago Fire has a better conversion rate at 18.3%, compared to Portland Timbers' 14.1%. The xG efficiency of Chicago Fire is 1.23, while that of Portland Timbers is only 0.91, which clearly shows the former's superiority in the attacking third. When it comes to passing, Chicago Fire has a key passing success rate of 62%, leading Portland Timbers' 55%. The value of their forward passes is 14.7, more efficient than Portland's 11.3. In midfield control, Chicago Fire has an average of 12.4 interceptions per game. Their transition speed is 1.8 seconds per possession, faster than Portland Timbers' 2.1 seconds. In terms of physical performance, Chicago Fire covers a distance of 112.3 km per game, more than Portland Timbers' 108.6 km. The number of high - intensity sprints is 43 for Chicago Fire and 37 for PortlanO/UMLS
Chicago Fire
2-1 Portland Timbers
-
Win bets Won 9/12Chicago Fire has shown a strong performance at home this season. In their last five home games, they achieved four wins and one loss, boasting an 80% win - rate. They scored an average of 2 goals per game and conceded 6 in total over these 5 games, with a positive goal difference of 4. The team is efficient at both ends of the pitch. They average 5.09 corner kicks per game, which reflects their stable tactical execution. On the other hand, Portland Timbers has been struggling on the road. In their last five away matches, they only managed one win, one draw and three losses, resulting in a win - rate of just 25%. They conceded as many as 8 goals, indicating obvious weaknesses in their defense. In their head - to - head encounters this season, Chicago Fire held a clear advantage at home. A data comparison shows that both teams have similar offensive firepower. Chicago Fire scores 2.0 goals per game at home, the same as Portland Timbers' average away goals. However, there is a significantO/UMLS
Chicago Fire
2-1 Portland Timbers
MLS
Comments
All
By Author
Me
Post
Telegram
Facebook
X