0-0 Odds When Both Teams Win Few Corners: Last-Five Corner Form
Low pre-match corner form nudges the goalless draw upwards, but the 1X2 and over/under prices already absorb most of it. Here is what is left over, band by band.
Written by Lucía PereyraCorrect Score Predictions specialistReviewed by Halldóra Sigurðardóttir, Editor-in-Chief
| of all matches ended 0-0 | 7.5% |
|---|---|
| 0-0 when both won under 3.8 corners per game | 9.2% |
| 0-0 when both won 7.0+ | 5.9% |
| low-corner band against price-matched rate | +0.8 points |
- Market
- Correct Score
- The question
- When both teams have been winning few corners over their last five league games, how often does the next match end 0-0, and is that already in the price?
- Sample
- 22 European league divisions with match statistics (gaps by division and season), 2005/06-2025/26, 95,163 matches
When both teams have been winning few corners over their last five league games, does the next match end 0-0 more often? And if it does, has the price already caught up? This is pre-match form, not the stat line of a game in progress. Every figure here comes from each side's previous five league games, measured before kick-off.
The short answer is yes, a little, and mostly priced. Across 95,163 matches 0-0 came in 7.5%. When both sides averaged under 3.8 corners per game it rose to 9.2%, against 8.4% for matches with the same prices. I use this sheet as a filter before I build the scoreline fan on my correct score predictions today page. It does not replace that work.
Stat line 1Fewer corners won, more goalless draws, prices close behind
Each row pairs the actual 0-0 rate with the price-matched rate. The price-matched rate is how often 0-0 happened in other matches with the same 1X2 balance and over 2.5 chance. Both markers slide down as corner form rises: from 9.2% in the under-3.8 band to 5.9% in the 7.0+ band, while the price-matched line falls from 8.4% to 6.5%.
The key comparison is the size of the slopes. The actual rate moved by −3.3 points from the lowest band to the highest, and the price-matched rate moved by −1.9 points. So the market sees the pattern but flattens it slightly at both ends. In the middle, the 5.0-5.5 band sits at 7.3% against 7.4%, which is no meaningful difference.
Price-matched = 0-0 rate in other matches with the same 1X2 and over/under prices.
View the data: 0-0 rate by both sides' corner form
| Price-matched | Actual | 95% range | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Under 3.8 (8,616 matches) | 8.4% | 9.2% | ±0.6 |
| 3.8-4.3 (14,814 matches) | 8.0% | 8.5% | ±0.4 |
| 4.4-4.9 (21,279 matches) | 7.7% | 7.9% | ±0.4 |
| 5.0-5.5 (20,883 matches) | 7.4% | 7.3% | ±0.4 |
| 5.6-6.1 (15,076 matches) | 7.1% | 6.5% | ±0.4 |
| 6.2-6.9 (10,163 matches) | 6.9% | 6.6% | ±0.5 |
| 7.0+ (4,332 matches) | 6.5% | 5.9% | ±0.7 |
| All matches (95,163 matches) | 7.5% | 7.5% | ±0.2 |
What I take from it: low corner counts tell me something real about a match that will be short of chances. Most of that information is already in the goals line, though, so the leftover signal is thin.
Stat line 2Fair 0-0 odds stretch from 10.91 to 16.86
Fair odds here are simply 1 divided by the actual frequency. Over all matches that gives 13.29. In the under-3.8 band the fair price shortens to 10.91, and in the 3.8-4.3 band it is 11.75. At the other end it drifts to 15.29 in the 5.6-6.1 band and 16.86 in the 7.0+ band.
The last column is the one I watch. The gap against price is +0.8 at the bottom and +0.5 in the next band, then it turns negative from the 5.0-5.5 band upwards. The 95% ranges of ±0.6 and ±0.4 are about as wide as those gaps, which tells you how fragile each one is on its own.
| Form band | Matches | Actual | 95% range | Fair odds | Gap vs price |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under 3.8 | 8,616 | 9.2% | ±0.6 | 10.91 | +0.8 |
| 3.8-4.3 | 14,814 | 8.5% | ±0.4 | 11.75 | +0.5 |
| 4.4-4.9 | 21,279 | 7.9% | ±0.4 | 12.73 | +0.2 |
| 5.0-5.5 | 20,883 | 7.3% | ±0.4 | 13.67 | −0.1 |
| 5.6-6.1 | 15,076 | 6.5% | ±0.4 | 15.29 | −0.6 |
| 6.2-6.9 | 10,163 | 6.6% | ±0.5 | 15.24 | −0.3 |
| 7.0+ | 4,332 | 5.9% | ±0.7 | 16.86 | −0.6 |
In practice I treat these as reference prices for the goalless draw in a correct score fan. If the quoted 0-0 is shorter than the fair figure for its band, the profile gives me no reason to touch it.
Stat line 3Top flights carry most of the low-corner edge
This chart shows the flat-stake result of backing 0-0 at a margin-free price built from 1X2 and over/under odds. In top-flight matches between sides winning under 4.4 corners per game, the return was +10.7%. The lower-division equivalent was +4.1%, well under half that. In the 5.6+ band both tiers ran clearly negative.
Overall, the top flights finished slightly positive and the lower divisions slightly negative. That fits the broad picture of 0-0 at 7.1% against 7.0% price-matched in the top flights, and 7.9% against 8.0% lower down. Split by the extremes alone, the under-3.8 band returned +9.6% and the 7.0+ band −8.9%.
View the data: return at price-matched fair odds
| Top flights | Lower divisions | |
|---|---|---|
| Under 4.4 | +10.7% | +4.1% |
| 4.4-5.5 | +0.1% | +0.6% |
| 5.6+ | −6.7% | −7.8% |
| All | +1.6% | −1.2% |
Here is the caveat that matters most. These are model returns at margin-free prices, not results against real exact-score odds, which carry a bookmaker's margin and would cut them down. Corner counts also partly measure style, because crossing sides win more corners without necessarily creating more chances. This is a historical description, not a system.
Stat line 4The low-corner gap has narrowed in recent seasons
The heatmap splits actual minus price-matched by era. From 2005/06-2015/16 the under-4.4 band ran +1.0 points. From 2016/17-2025/26 that shrank to +0.4 points. The high-corner side drifted slightly further below the price, reaching −0.6 points in the 5.6+ band over 14,916 matches in the recent era.
I read that as prices getting better at reading quiet, low-chance fixtures while still slightly overrating the 0-0 when both sides pin opponents back with corners. The recent low-corner edge is now small enough to sit comfortably inside normal variation.
View the data: actual minus price-matched, by era
| Under 4.4 | 4.4-5.5 | 5.6+ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2005/06-2015/16 | 1 pts | 0.3 pts | −0.4 pts |
| 2016/17-2025/26 | 0.4 pts | −0.1 pts | −0.6 pts |
Sheet verdict
- Shorten your goalless reference
When both sides average under 3.8 corners over their last five, I treat 10.91 as the fair 0-0 price rather than the all-match 13.29. It is a reference point, not a reason to bet.
- Fade 0-0 in corner-heavy matches
In the 7.0+ band 0-0 came in 5.9% against 6.5% price-matched. I give it less weight in my scoreline fan there, even when the price looks generous.
- Respect the margin and range
Gaps of +0.8 points sit inside a 95% range of ±0.6 to ±0.7. Any real exact-score margin can absorb an edge that size, so I compare the quoted price against fair odds before anything else.
Questions bettors ask
How often does a football match end 0-0?
Across 95,163 matches in 22 European divisions, 7.5% finished 0-0, which works out to fair odds of 13.29.
Do low-corner teams draw 0-0 more often?
Yes, modestly. When both sides won under 3.8 corners per game over their last five league games, 0-0 came in 9.2% of 8,616 matches, against 8.4% for matches with the same prices.
Is backing 0-0 in low-corner matches profitable?
At margin-free model prices the under-3.8 band returned +9.6%, but real exact-score odds carry a margin and no such prices were tested. The recent-era gap has also shrunk to +0.4 points, so I would not treat it as a system.
I'm Lucía Pereyra, based in Buenos Aires, and I handle the correct score predictions at fixedmatchesvip.com — I map out every plausible final number rather than romance a single tidy scoreline into existence.
View profile →
