Match context

The upcoming match between Chesterfield and Gillingham is scheduled for 01.09.2026 18:45 in League Two. The analysis uses only stored statistics, form, head-to-head records, trend percentages and active Premium market signals. It does not guarantee a particular result.

Standings and season form
Chesterfield are in position 17 with 0 points after 2 matches. The season record is 1 wins, 0 draws and 1 losses. The goals record is 1 scored and 1 conceded. The stored form sequence is L. Gillingham are in position 24 with 0 points after 2 matches. The season record is 0 wins, 1 draws and 1 losses. The goals record is 0 scored and 3 conceded. The stored form sequence is L.

Recent results

Chesterfield recorded 2 wins, 3 draws and 5 losses across the last 10 completed matches. The newest-to-oldest result sequence is LWLLDLDDLW. The averages are 0.70 goals scored and 1 goals conceded per match. Both teams scored in 40% of those matches, while 30% finished with over 2.5 goals. Gillingham recorded 4 wins, 2 draws and 4 losses across the last 10 completed matches. The newest-to-oldest result sequence is DDLLWWLWWL. The averages are 1 goals scored and 1.50 goals conceded per match. Both teams scored in 30% of those matches, while 50% finished with over 2.5 goals.

Head-to-head

Across the last 10 head-to-head matches, Chesterfield recorded 4 wins, there were 3 draws, and Gillingham recorded 3 wins. The average total was 3.20 goals per match. Both teams scored in 70% of those matches, while 60% finished with over 2.5 goals.

Trend indicators

The highest stored values are: Under 3.5 goals — 90%; Over 0.5 first-half goals — 70%; Under 2.5 goals — 60%; Over 1.5 goals — 50%; Over 2.5 goals — 40%. They are statistical indicators and are not automatically converted into a prediction.

PMV3 model and market price

The PMV3 model classifies the leading outcome as Chesterfield to win with 60% confidence. The stored fair probabilities for home, draw and away are 60.39%, 24.00% and 15.60%. The model momentum difference is 44.79 points in favour of Chesterfield. The input data quality score is 99/100. The stored price for the selected market is 1.55 with Bet365. The stored estimated EV is -6.39%. Despite the model probability, the price is marked NO_VALUE. The signal is therefore not treated automatically as a value bet.

Asian handicap market movement

The normalized movement for the Asian pair Chesterfield -0.5 / Gillingham +0.5 supports Chesterfield by an average 5.10 percentage points across 1 bookmakers (Bet365) with up to 3 stored observations. This is a market signal, not a result guarantee.

Discipline profile

The discipline profile for Chesterfield at home is based on 1 matches. The team averages 1.00 yellow cards, 0.00 red cards and 1.00 total cards per match. At least 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 cards were recorded in 100.0%, 0.0%, 0.0%, 0.0% and 0.0% of those matches respectively, while a red card occurred in 0.0%. Season card data is available for 3 of 3 completed matches (100.0% coverage). The discipline profile for Gillingham away from home is based on 1 matches. The team averages 2.00 yellow cards, 0.00 red cards and 2.00 total cards per match. At least 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 cards were recorded in 100.0%, 100.0%, 0.0%, 0.0% and 0.0% of those matches respectively, while a red card occurred in 0.0%. Season card data is available for 3 of 3 completed matches (100.0% coverage).

What happened in the match

The match between Chesterfield and Gillingham ended 1-1. The game produced 2 goals in total. The first half contained 1 goal. The following review compares the final result only with historical data, the discipline profile, trend values and Premium signals locked before kickoff.

Comparison with the head-to-head history

The previous 10 head-to-head meetings averaged 3.2 goals, while this match produced 2. The final scoring profile differed by more than one goal from that average. Across the previous 10 head-to-head meetings, the leading historical direction was BTTS at 70%. The actual outcome for this indicator was BTTS. The final result aligned with that historical profile. Across the previous 10 head-to-head meetings, the leading historical direction was Over 2.5 at 60%. The actual outcome for this indicator was Under 2.5. The final result did not align with that historical profile.

Which pre-match trends were confirmed and which were not

Before kickoff, the stored trend indicated No BTTS at 70%. The actual outcome was BTTS. The stored trend was not confirmed by the result. Before kickoff, the stored trend indicated Under 2.5 at 60%. The actual outcome was Under 2.5. The stored trend was confirmed by the result. Before kickoff, the stored trend indicated Under 3.5 at 90%. The actual outcome was Under 3.5. The stored trend was confirmed by the result. Before kickoff, the stored trend indicated Over 0.5 HT at 70%. The actual outcome was Over 0.5 HT. The stored trend was confirmed by the result. Before kickoff, the stored trend indicated Under 1.5 HT at 90%. The actual outcome was Under 1.5 HT. The stored trend was confirmed by the result.

Discipline profile review

Before kickoff, the discipline profile for Chesterfield at home was based on 1 matches, with averages of 1 yellow cards, 0 red cards and 1 total cards per match. In this game, Chesterfield received 1 yellow cards and 0 red cards, 1 in total. The total was effectively equal to the stored average. In the pre-match sample, 3+ cards occurred in 0% of matches, 5+ in 0%, and a red card in 0%. Before kickoff, the discipline profile for Gillingham away from home was based on 1 matches, with averages of 2 yellow cards, 0 red cards and 2 total cards per match. In this game, Gillingham received 2 yellow cards and 0 red cards, 2 in total. The total was effectively equal to the stored average. In the pre-match sample, 3+ cards occurred in 0% of matches, 5+ in 0%, and a red card in 0%.

Asian handicap review

The Asian-handicap signal locked before kickoff supported Chesterfield at -0.5. The stored market movement was 5.1 percentage points across 1 bookmaker. At the final score of 1-1, the line settled as a full loss. The Asian-handicap signal was not confirmed.

Summary

Of 9 verifiable pre-match indicators, 5 aligned with the final result and 4 were not confirmed. This is a post-match verification of data stored before kickoff, not a revision of the analysis after the match ended.