Torino vs Udinese Correct Score
Quick Answer
See original Torino vs Udinese software screenshots showing the 2–1 correct-score selection, its 7.12% model estimate and displayed odds of 10.00.
Original software screenshot supplied by 1Football Prediction. The 2–1 score is the second-ranked option.
The 1Football Prediction software listed Torino 2–1 Udinese among its three displayed correct-score predictions. The accompanying selection card shows a 2–1 tip, a matching 2–1 score in the Result column and decimal odds of 10.00.
These original screenshots let readers compare the software output with the recorded selection. However, the card carries an orange “P” status rather than a confirmed win marker. It documents a matching displayed score; it does not yet establish final settlement.
What the software predicted
The original software screenshot above displays three possibilities:
| Software position | Correct score | Displayed model estimate |
|---|---|---|
| Score 1 | 2–2 | 7.21% |
| Score 2 | 2–1 | 7.12% |
| Score 3 | 1–2 | 6.39% |
The selected 2–1 score was the second-ranked option, just 0.09 percentage points behind 2–2.
That distinction matters when reviewing correct-score examples. The screenshot supports saying that the software included 2–1 in its displayed shortlist. It would be inaccurate to call 2–1 its highest-ranked prediction.
The percentages are model estimates for individual scorelines. A 7.12% estimate is not a certainty, and this single example cannot establish the software’s overall accuracy.
The original 2–1 selection card
Original selection card. The tip and displayed result match at 2–1, while the status remains “P”.
The card shows Torino as the home team and Udinese as the away team, with “Tip: 2:1 (CS)”. Here, CS means correct score: the selection requires that exact scoreline under the market’s settlement rules.
The Result column also displays 2:1, alongside odds of 10.00. No stake, payout or settled-win confirmation is visible, so the image does not establish a cash return.
The screenshot also does not provide a full fixture date or a verifiable pre-match publication timestamp. Those details would be needed for a complete, independently checkable prediction record.
What the goals panel adds
The same software image includes total-goals estimates:
| Market | Over | Under |
|---|---|---|
| 0.5 goals | 98.27% | 1.73% |
| 1.5 goals | 92.36% | 7.64% |
| 2.5 goals | 79.70% | 20.30% |
| 3.5 goals | 61.63% | 38.37% |
A 2–1 score contains three total goals. If confirmed as the final score, it would satisfy over 2.5 goals and under 3.5 goals.
This also illustrates why separate markets should be reviewed separately. The software assigned a higher estimate to over 3.5 than under 3.5, even though it included 2–1 in its correct-score shortlist. A matching score selection would not mean every displayed market prediction was successful.
How to assess correct-score wins fairly
A useful results record connects the original prediction with the final outcome. Keep the fixture date, the prediction timestamp, the selected score, the available odds and the settled result together.
Record unsuccessful selections too. Showing individual matches can explain how software works, but a reliable success-rate or profitability claim requires the complete record over a defined period.
For this Torino–Udinese example, the evidence currently supports a precise conclusion: the second-ranked software score and the selection card’s displayed result both read 2–1. A final result and settlement confirmation would complete the record.
For more examples of how ranked scorelines relate to selection cards, read our 1X2 football correct-score software guide.
Football predictions are uncertain. Individual examples do not guarantee future results.