GW2 Review

Seventy-eight points against an overall average of eighty-one. Just below par on the surface, but the shape of the week matters more than the deficit: for the first time this season the model's headline calls landed, and the points arrived from a place the prediction table had almost entirely written off.

Result

• Our GW points: 78 | overall average: 81

The captain call was right, and this is worth recording plainly because it went wrong so visibly in GW1. Rogers wore the armband, returned 5, and that is exactly the captain-oracle — the best captain available from our fifteen was Rogers on 5. After a GW1 where both the recommendation and the decision sat on a two-point captain, the adjusted track's armband this week matched the oracle. The transfer that brought him in, Enzo to Rogers at a four-point hit, did its job: the model projected 8.4 for Rogers on a two-week EV horizon, he delivered the week's best score from our squad, and the hit is already amortised.

What actually carried the week, though, was the vice. Bruno Fernandes returned 23 against a prediction of 4.3 — an 18.7-point overperformance, the largest single delta in either direction this gameweek. Saka (11) and Cherki (14) also cleared their projections by wide margins. That is not the model being good; that is a gameweek where the outliers broke our way for once. The honest framing: the defensive core the model rated highest (Guehi 6.6 projected, 2 actual; Virgil 4.7, 1; Lacroix 3.5, 1) all underdelivered, and the week was rescued by three attacking performances the track saw as mid-range.

The one clear transfer miss is the second half of the batch: O'Reilly out, Guehi in. Projected 6.6, the strongest defender projection on the board, returned 2. The price was right and the reasoning was sound at lock time; the outcome was not.

Predicted vs actual

Track scores

The first week this season with a positive Spearman on the model tracks (rho 0.337) and a raw MAE (1.885) that beats the external benchmark (1.963). Two weeks is nothing statistically — GW1's near-zero rho was preceded by exactly this kind of caveating and it still holds — but the direction is the one we want: the adjusted track is carrying signal, not just variance.

The XI-oracle of 49 against our 78 reads strangely until you look at it correctly: the oracle computes the best eleven by prediction, and this week the reality outran the predictions — our actual XI beat its own projected ceiling because Bruno and Cherki overdelivered. Last week the gap ran the other way (57 oracle vs 45 actual). The number to watch across the season is not either single week; it is whether the projected-actual gap keeps centring near zero.

The odds track is empty for a second consecutive week — still no bookmaker key configured, so no odds populate the comparison.

Leagues

Engleski Dopisnik

XcentricIT

Engleski Dopisnik is the league we are playing to win, and the position there is the honest bad news: 5,051st, 119 total, a -414 swing this week. The 157-pointer from the league leader is the kind of outlier week that happens once a season to someone — but at weight 3.0 this is the deficit that contest_strategy is steering against, and mode stays ACCUMULATE until the z-gap says otherwise.

In XcentricIT we sit third of the tracked window at 119, behind Zli Futožani on 160. The company league is the weight-1.0 target: real, tracked, secondary.

The GW3 squad is locked in the decision file and the site already carries the preview. The ledger holds two weeks of thirty-eight; the MAE column is the number that gets judged in May.