“St Johnstone has a marginal 38.2% model probability vs 35.0% for Motherwell, with a +0.004 edge.”

“Model gives BTTS No a 52.2% probability, and St Johnstone's stronger defence rating (1.279) vs Motherwell's poor attack (1.058) supports a low-scoring game.”

“The model predicts 'No' for BTTS with a 52.17% probability, which is the highest probability among all market selections.”

“The model predicts BTTS 'No' at 0.5217, aligning with St Johnstone's weak attack.”

“The model gives double-chance 12 a 73% probability (DC 12 = 0.73) while 1X2 is close: H 37.82% vs A 35.17% (D 27.01%), so avoiding the draw is the safest play.”

“Model 1X2 is tight (H 0.378/D 0.270/A 0.352) but Motherwell’s six straight losses and weaker table (8pts 9th vs 12pts 7th) support 1X at 0.648; BTTS N 0.522 and OU25 U edge +0.011 vs market also lean low-scoring.”

“The model gives Under 2.5 a 48.1% probability vs 47.0% market, yielding a +1.1% edge—our only positive edge.”

“The model predicts a relatively low probability of over 2.5 goals (0.5186) and both teams scoring (0.4783), suggesting a closely contested and potentially low-scoring match, supported by the recent form of both teams.”

“St Johnstone have better form (2 wins, 2 draws in last 6) and higher model probability (37.82% H vs 35.17% A).”

“The model gives a 52.17% chance for under 2.5 goals and 52.17% for neither team to score, supported by both teams' poor attack ratings and recent low-scoring losses.”