Skip to content
Compare Horsham vs Dorking

Horsham vs Dorking Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Horsham vs Dorking: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Horsham Horsham Home Team
Dorking Dorking Away Team
Horsham
36.7
L W W L L D L W L L

Last 10 Matches

Dorking
36.1
W L W D L L L L W D

Performance Radar

Horsham
Dorking

Categories Won

6

Horsham

4

Draw

5

Dorking

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
30%

3W, 1D, 6L

30%

3W, 2D, 5L

Goals Scored / Match
1.0

10 / 10 matches

1.4

14 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.3

13 / 10 matches

1.9

19 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-3

-3

-5

-5

Clean Sheet
30%

3 / 10 matches

10%

1 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
40%

4 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
20%

2 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
L. Gravata (2 goals)
P. McCallum (2 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 2 / 2nd Half: 8
1st Half: 4 / 2nd Half: 10
Home Win Rate
75%

3W / 4 matches

50%

2W / 4 matches

Away Win Rate
0%

0W / 6 matches

17%

1W / 6 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
39.8

League Difficulty: 33.0, Opponent Quality: 44.3

39.2

League Difficulty: 31.5, Opponent Quality: 44.3

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
0.92

Actual: 1.0 | Diff: +0.08

1.26

Actual: 1.4 | Diff: +0.14

Adjusted Power Rating
36.7

Attack: 29.9, Defense: 50.9, Form: 26.9

36.1

Attack: 41.6, Defense: 32.7, Form: 26.8

Goal Timing Analysis

0-15'

1
1

16-30'

1
1

31-45'

2
1

46-60'

2
1

61-75'

2
3

76-90+'

4
Horsham
Dorking
Horsham

Power Rating Breakdown

36.7

Overall

Attack 29.9
Defense 50.9
Form 26.9
Consistency 46.0
Dorking

Power Rating Breakdown

36.1

Overall

Attack 41.6
Defense 32.7
Form 26.8
Consistency 49.3

Strength of Schedule

Measures the difficulty of opponents faced. Higher = tougher schedule.

League Difficulty

33.0 vs 31.5

Opponent Quality

44.3 vs 44.3

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Horsham logo Horsham
L
Sutton (41%)
W
Eastbourne T. (42%)
W
Chippenham (38%)
L
Salisbury (46%)
L
Weston-s-Mare (40%)
D
Maidstone (57%)
L
Farnborough (48%)
W
Dorking (34%)
Dorking logo Dorking
W
Lewes (46%)
L
Torquay (53%)
W
Maidenhead (43%)
D
Weston-s-Mare (40%)
L
Bath (33%)
L
Totton (43%)
L
Worthing (54%)
L
Horsham (38%)

Opponent Quality: Quality blends league strength, recent points form, goal difference, and home/away context. It is not only club size or reputation.

Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Sutton A
0 - 2 L
41%
Eastbourne T. H
3 - 0 W
42%
Chippenham H
3 - 2 W
38%
Salisbury A
1 - 2 L
46%
Weston-s-Mare A
0 - 1 L
40%
Maidstone H
0 - 0 D
57%
Farnborough A
0 - 2 L
48%
Dorking H
3 - 0 W
34%
Torquay A
0 - 2 L
53%
Hampton & RB A
0 - 2 L
44%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Lewes A
2 - 1 W
46%
Torquay A
2 - 4 L
53%
Maidenhead H
2 - 0 W
43%
Weston-s-Mare A
1 - 1 D
40%
Bath H
1 - 3 L
33%
Totton A
1 - 2 L
43%
Worthing H
1 - 2 L
54%
Horsham A
0 - 3 L
38%
Hemel H H
2 - 1 W
40%
Torquay A
2 - 2 D
53%

AI Analysis

On paper, these teams are closely aligned, and the data backs that up. Raw statistics can be misleading without context, but strength-of-opponent adjustments reinforce just how competitive this matchup is. Neither side has padded their numbers against weak opposition.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 39.8 vs 39.2), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Dorking holds the attacking edge with 1.4 goals per match versus Horsham's 1.0, though the gap isn't insurmountable.

Horsham has the defensive edge, conceding 1.3 per match compared to Dorking's 1.9.

Horsham has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Dorking has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Horsham has an exceptional home record with a 75% win rate at their home ground. When playing at home, they become significantly more dangerous.

Statistical modeling projects 2.8 goals in this fixture. The data points Over 2.5 as the value threshold, while BTTS stands at possible based on both sides' scoring records.

⚠️ Risk Factor: In matches this evenly balanced, the deciding factor often comes down to set pieces and individual errors. Both teams should be wary of complacency in a match where neither side has a clear edge.

💡 Why This Matters: Horsham's superior Strength of Schedule means their statistics were earned against tougher opponents. A team that performs well against strong opposition is more likely to maintain that level in any given match.

The data offers no clear edge here. These sides are separated by the finest of margins across every key metric, making the final result almost impossible to call in advance.

In their recent National League N / S match (2026-04-03), Horsham prevailed 3-0 against Dorking. This result provides valuable insight into how these teams match up against each other. Horsham secured this victory at home, where they tend to be strongest. However, the next encounter could present a different challenge if the venue changes. The 3-0 scoreline was emphatic — Horsham completely dominated Dorking in that encounter, raising serious questions about Dorking's ability to compete at this level. Dorking will be eager to avenge this defeat. The desire for revenge can be a powerful motivator, and they may come into the next meeting with extra determination. Horsham will carry a psychological advantage from this recent victory. Knowing you've beaten your opponent recently provides a significant confidence boost.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Horsham

Horsham

VS
Dorking

Dorking

In H2H (head-to-head) matchups, to eliminate momentary fluctuations and coincidences, we limit our analyses to an optimal depth of exactly 10 matches. Neither less, nor more. This focused approach is our undisputed gold standard, revealing the tactical and psychological supremacy teams hold over each other in its purest form. We do not dwell on the noise of the past; we concentrate on the millimetric precision of current form.

Compare Another Pair

Comparison Summary

This head-to-head comparison analyzes the last 10 matches of each team, evaluating attack power, defensive strength, form consistency, and overall performance metrics. The power ratings are calculated using a weighted algorithm that considers goals scored, goals conceded, win rate, and recent form trends.

Horsham

3W 1D 6L · 10 goals scored · 13 conceded

Dorking

3W 2D 5L · 14 goals scored · 19 conceded

Popular Teams

We use cookies & local storage to enhance your experience. Learn more

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or