Both Teams to Score
| # | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |  Xinjiang Tianshan | 34 | 21 | 62% |
| 2 |  Beijing BG | 34 | 12 | 35% |
| 3 |  Qingdao Jonoon | 34 | 18 | 53% |
| 4 |  BIT | 34 | 12 | 35% |
| 5 |  Jiangxi Liansheng | 34 | 22 | 65% |
| 6 |  Heilongjiang Lava Spring | 34 | 20 | 59% |
| 7 |  Shaanxi Chang'an | 34 | 17 | 50% |
| 8 |  Nantong Zhiyun | 34 | 13 | 38% |
| 9 |  Zibo Cuju | 34 | 18 | 53% |
| 10 |  Guangxi Baoyun | 34 | 15 | 44% |
| 11 |  Shenyang Urban | 34 | 17 | 50% |
| 12 |  Shanghai Jiading | 34 | 17 | 50% |
| 13 |  Suzhou Dongwu | 34 | 13 | 38% |
| 14 |  Sichuan Jiuniu | 34 | 8 | 24% |
| 15 |  Kunshan | 34 | 16 | 47% |
| 16 |  Nanjing City | 34 | 18 | 53% |
| 17 |  Qingdao Youth Island | 34 | 20 | 59% |
| 18 |  Hebei Kungfu | 34 | 13 | 38% |
| # | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Xinjiang Tianshan | 17 | 11 | 65% |
| 2 | Beijing BG | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 3 | Qingdao Jonoon | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 4 | BIT | 17 | 5 | 29% |
| 5 | Jiangxi Liansheng | 17 | 11 | 65% |
| 6 | Heilongjiang Lava Spring | 17 | 9 | 53% |
| 7 | Shaanxi Chang'an | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 8 | Nantong Zhiyun | 17 | 5 | 29% |
| 9 | Zibo Cuju | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 10 | Guangxi Baoyun | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 11 | Shenyang Urban | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 12 | Shanghai Jiading | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 13 | Suzhou Dongwu | 17 | 5 | 29% |
| 14 | Sichuan Jiuniu | 17 | 2 | 12% |
| 15 | Kunshan | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 16 | Nanjing City | 17 | 11 | 65% |
| 17 | Qingdao Youth Island | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 18 | Hebei Kungfu | 17 | 6 | 35% |
| # | Team | MP | BTTS | BTTS% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Xinjiang Tianshan | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 2 | Beijing BG | 17 | 5 | 29% |
| 3 | Qingdao Jonoon | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 4 | BIT | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 5 | Jiangxi Liansheng | 17 | 11 | 65% |
| 6 | Heilongjiang Lava Spring | 17 | 11 | 65% |
| 7 | Shaanxi Chang'an | 17 | 9 | 53% |
| 8 | Nantong Zhiyun | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 9 | Zibo Cuju | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 10 | Guangxi Baoyun | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 11 | Shenyang Urban | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 12 | Shanghai Jiading | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 13 | Suzhou Dongwu | 17 | 8 | 47% |
| 14 | Sichuan Jiuniu | 17 | 6 | 35% |
| 15 | Kunshan | 17 | 9 | 53% |
| 16 | Nanjing City | 17 | 7 | 41% |
| 17 | Qingdao Youth Island | 17 | 10 | 59% |
| 18 | Hebei Kungfu | 17 | 7 | 41% |
Zibo Cuju BTTS matches in the season
The both teams scoring stat is the number of times a team has both scored and conceded a goal in a match. This stat is helpful in determining whether a match has the potential to be a high-scoring affair.
And in Zibo Cuju’s case, their BTTS statistics in the China League One 2022 provide some interesting insights about their offence and defence. Here are the relevant BTTS stats on Zibo Cuju in the competition:
- In 34 matches to date, Zibo Cuju has scored and conceded in the same game 18 times
- In terms of percentage, Zibo Cuju has had both teams score in 53% of their matches in China League One.
You can also see Zibo Cuju’s BTTS stats filtered in terms of where they play, whether it’s at home or away, as well as overall, for a more comprehensive view of the stat all season long.