Match prediction·USA: MLS·Wednesday 22 Jul, 23:30 UTC

Inter Miami CF vs Chicago Fire FC

Bawler weighs each team's recent scoring and defending, then adjusts for home advantage and injuries to work out how this match is likely to go. This page shows the full chain — every number we used.

Why the model calls it this way

Over 1.5 Goals lands at 83% because Inter Miami's 1.91 xG and Messi's creative dominance (35% of team output) edge Chicago's 1.53 in a matchup tilted toward open play.

📊 Win probability
44.1% home26.9% draw29.0% away
📈 xG chain — base → adjustments → final goal estimate
Inter Miami CFstepChicago Fire FC
1.69Base xG · rolling 26-match1.63
× 1.13Home advantage · Home× 0.94
no injury adjustment — full squads available per FotMob
1.91Final goal estimate — what the model uses1.53

Inter Miami average 5.1 corners per game at home this season (29 competitive matches). Chicago Fire average 3.8 corners per game away from home this season (24 competitive matches).

🎯 Scoreline distribution · chance of each scoremodel estimate
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
3
5
4
2
1
1
6
9
7
4
1
2
6
9
7
4
1
3
4
6
4
2
1
4
2
3
2
1
5
1
1
1
6
home windrawaway win
Most likely outcomes
Over 1.5 goals
83%
Under 2.5 goals
30%

Model probabilities for this fixture, ordered by likelihood. Estimates from rolling expected goals — not guarantees.

More predictions for these teams

Inter Miami vs Chicago Fire — Head-to-Head

This is the first meeting Bawler has on record between Inter Miami and Chicago Fire — the model's ledger starts at model launch, so no earlier fixtures between these two sides have been logged and settled yet.

The model's verdict for this fixture: Inter Miami 44% · draw 27% · Chicago Fire 29%.

Model probabilities are edge estimates for entertainment — not betting advice, and past performance does not guarantee future results. 18+.

⚡ Full-time recap available
Inter Miami CF 32 Chicago Fire FC
See how the model called it · call-by-call verdict · xG vs actual →
More match predictions ▶

Model estimates from rolling expected goals — not guaranteed outcomes. Past accuracy does not guarantee future results.