Skip to content

Category: Math & Statistics

World Cup Model Accuracy and Round of 16 Probabilities

Below is the basic analysis of model accuracy through the end of the Round of 32. The blue bars represent the distribution of expected results and the red bar represents the actual model performance.

The model continues to over-predict the match results. The cumulative over-prediction is statistically significant with the 90-percent confidence interval between 53 and 67. This means that through the Round of 32, the FIFA rankings and my adjustments underestimate the chances a team has of winning the match. This effect is driven largely by the second round of the group stage and the Round of 32. Indeed, the Group of 32 only saw one upset (Germany on penalty kicks) where we would have expected five or six upsets. See the chart below where the blue line and dots with error bars represent the actual performance with 90% confidence intervals and the gray dash represents the expected model performance.

Here are the Round of 16 probabilities based on rankings updated from the Round of 32 results. Scores will be updated periodically throughout the round.

TeamFTETPK
20%Paraguay
80%France
32%Canada
68%Morocco
41%Portugal
59%Spain
47%United States
53%Belgium
68%Brazil
32%Norway
44%Mexico
56%England
77%Argentina
23%Egypt
45%Switzerland
55%Colombia

World Cup Model Accuracy and Round of 32 Probabilities

Below is the basic analysis of model accuracy through the end of the group stage. The blue bars represent the distribution of expected results and the red bar represents the actual model performance.

The model continues to slightly over-predict the match results, though the cumulative over-prediction is not statistically significant. This means that through the third round and the completion of the group stage, the FIFA rankings and my adjustments are good indicators of the chances a team has of winning the match. It is interesting to note that the second round over-prediction by itself was a statistical anomaly with the expected model performance falling below the lower 90% confidence interval of the actual performance. See the chart below where the blue line and dots with error bars represent the actual performance with 90% confidence intervals and the gray dash represents the expected model performance.

Here are the round of 32 probabilities based on rankings updated from the third round results. Scores will be updated periodically throughout the round.

TeamFTETPK
67%Germany103
33%Paraguay104
82%France3
18%Sweden0
38%South Africa0
62%Canada1
49%Netherlands102
51%Morocco103
55%Portugal2
45%Croatia1
74%Spain3
26%Austria0
76%United States2
24%Bosnia and Herzegovina0
57%Belgium3
43%Senegal2
62%Brazil2
38%Japan1
48%Ivory Coast1
52%Norway2
65%Mexico2
35%Ecuador0
78%England2
22%DR Congo1
88%Argentina12
12%Cape Verde11
49%Australia102
51%Egypt104
59%Switzerland2
41%Algeria0
79%Colombia1
21%Ghana0

World Cup Model Accuracy and Third Round Probabilities

With the conclusion of the second round, below is the basic analysis of model accuracy. The blue bars represent the distribution of expected results and the red bar represents the actual model performance.

The model now seems to slightly over-predict the match results, though the over-prediction is not statistically significant. This means that through the second round, the FIFA rankings and my adjustments are good indicators of the chances a team has of winning the match.

It is interesting to note that favored teams did perform slightly better in the second round as seen in this trend chart. The dots represent the match result; 0 means the favored team lost, 0.5 means the match was a tie, and 1 means the favored team won. The heavy red line is the four-game moving average. The light gray dashed line is the expected model mean. The red dashed line is the actual model mean. The vertical lines separate the different tournament stages.

From this, we can see the favored team performance improving in the second round. Perhaps this is to be expected.

With that, here are the third round probabilities based on rankings updated from the second round results. Scores will be updated periodically throughout the round.

HomeAway
25%Scotland03Brazil75%
87%Morocco42Haiti13%
54%Switzerland21Canada46%
45%Bosnia and Herzegovina31Qatar55%
26%Czechia03Mexico74%
34%South Africa10Korea66%
27%Curaçao02Côte d’Ivoire73%
33%Ecuador21Germany67%
65%Japan11Sweden35%
23%Tunisia13Netherlands77%
32%Türkiye32USA68%
46%Paraguay00Australia54%
24%Norway14France76%
70%Senegal50Iraq30%
48%Egypt11IR Iran52%
15%New Zealand15Belgium85%
47%Cabo Verde00Saudi Arabia53%
32%Uruguay01Spain68%
22%Panama02England78%
76%Croatia21Ghana24%
48%Algeria33Austria52%
10%Jordan13Argentina90%
47%Colombia00Portugal53%
54%Congo DR31Uzbekistan46%

World Cup Model Accuracy and Second Round Probabilities

My model for World Cup match win probabilities is based on the FIFA rankings which are based on an Elo ranking system. I made adjustments to each team’s ranking score based on the geography. It is well established that teams from the continent of play perform better than those who have to travel farther. I do give consideration to where team players are based for club play. Below is the basic analysis of model accuracy. The blue bars represent the distribution of expected results and the red bars represent the actual model performance.

The model is right on target. This means that the FIFA rankings and my adjustments are good indicators of the chances a team has of winning the match.

With that, here are the second round probabilities based on rankings updated from the first round results. Scores will be updated periodically throughout the round.

HomeAway
56%Czechia11South Africa44%
72%Switzerland41Bosnia and Herzegovina28%
63%Canada60Qatar37%
61%Mexico10Korea39%
86%Brazil30Haiti14%
28%Scotland01Morocco72%
62%USA20Australia38%
57%Türkiye01Paraguay43%
65%Germany21Côte d’Ivoire35%
76%Ecuador00Curaçao24%
69%Netherlands51Sweden31%
31%Tunisia04Japan69%
75%Uruguay22Cabo Verde25%
83%Spain40Saudi Arabia17%
62%Belgium00IR Iran38%
25%New Zealand03Egypt75%
41%Norway32Senegal59%
86%France30Iraq14%
76%Argentina20Austria24%
33%Jordan12Algeria67%
85%England00Ghana15%
34%Panama01Croatia66%
77%Portugal50Uzbekistan23%
71%Colombia10Congo DR29%

World Cup First Round Probabilities

The World Cup started today. Here are my probabilities of all the first round matches. Scores updated at the end of the first round.

HomeAway
75%Mexico20South Africa25%
59%Korea21Czechia41%
69%Canada11Bosnia and Herzegovina31%
68%USA41Paraguay32%
31%Qatar11Switzerland69%
52%Brazil11Morocco48%
33%Haiti01Scotland67%
47%Australia20Türkiye53%
84%Germany71Curaçao16%
59%Netherlands22Japan41%
44%Côte d’Ivoire10Ecuador56%
52%Sweden51Tunisia48%
87%Spain00Cabo Verde13%
66%Belgium11Egypt34%
27%Saudi Arabia11Uruguay73%
79%IR Iran22New Zealand21%
67%France31Senegal33%
40%Iraq14Norway60%
78%Argentina30Algeria22%
69%Austria31Jordan31%
75%Portugal11Congo DR25%
61%England42Croatia39%
32%Ghana10Panama68%
27%Uzbekistan13Colombia73%

Final 2025-2026 College Football Rankings

RankTeam
1Indiana
2Ohio State
3Oregon
4Texas Tech
5Miami
6Notre Dame
7Utah
8Ole Miss
9Georgia
10BYU
11USC
12Iowa
13Texas A&M
14Washington
15UConn
16Arizona
17North Texas
18James Madison
19Vanderbilt
20Virginia
21SMU
22Illinois
23Louisville
24Michigan
25Oklahoma

College Football Rankings

Going into the championship game tomorrow, here are the current rankings.

RankTeam
1Indiana
2Texas Tech
3Ohio State
4Notre Dame
5Utah
6Ole Miss
7Georgia
8Oregon
9Miami
10BYU
11Texas A&M
12Arizona
13Vanderbilt
14UConn
15Oklahoma
16Alabama
17North Texas
18Texas
19USC
20Iowa
21James Madison
22Houston
23Washington
24Tennessee
25Virginia

College Football Rankings

With conference championship games behind us, here are the new rankings.

RankTeam
1Texas Tech
2Indiana
3Ohio State
4Notre Dame
5Georgia
6Texas A&M
7Oregon
8Ole Miss
9UConn
10Utah
11Vanderbilt
12BYU
13Arizona
14Oklahoma
15Miami
16Alabama
17James Madison
18USC
19North Texas
20Iowa
21Tennessee
22Texas
23South Florida
24Michigan
25Missouri

College Football Rankings

Adjustments once again to the division power and conference strengths as well as a top four upset resulted in some shifting of the rankings for the last week of the regular season.

RankTeam
1Ohio State
2Indiana
3Texas Tech
4Notre Dame
5BYU
6Oregon
7Georgia
8Utah
9Texas A&M
10UConn
11Ole Miss
12Arizona
13Vanderbilt
14Alabama
15Miami
16Oklahoma
17North Texas
18USC
19James Madison
20Iowa
21Michigan
22South Florida
23Houston
24Tennessee
25Texas

College Football Rankings

Several out-of-conference games last week shifted the conference strengths around a bit which resulted in different starting ratings for the teams. That translated downstream to some shifts in the rankings this week, notably Texas Tech ranking 4th this week, down from 1st the last few weeks.

RankTeam
1Ohio State
2Indiana
3Texas A&M
4Texas Tech
5Notre Dame
6Georgia
7Ole Miss
8Oregon
9UConn
10Alabama
11Oklahoma
12Vanderbilt
13BYU
14Utah
15Tennessee
16Arizona
17Michigan
18Miami
19Texas
20Washington
21USC
22North Texas
23James Madison
24Missouri
25Iowa