First, looking at Côte d'Ivoire’s attack, their numbers in the final third are pretty impressive. Their high-pressing system keeps putting constant pressure on the opposition back line, they make excellent use of the half-spaces, and their combination of cutting inside from the wings and penetrating through the middle is very effective. Against a defense at Curacao’s level, their attacking conversion rate should stay at a relatively high level, and scoring 2 to 3 goals in a single match would really be a normal performance, right? Then there’s Curacao — they’re definitely not completely without a chance. Although they are weaker on paper overall, their counterattacking efficiency is actually not low, especially with a clear pace advantage on the flanks that can exploit space in behind the opponent’s defense. In previous matches against African teams of a similar level, their set-piece scoring rate has also shown some reliability, and with home support behind them, they still have a pretty good chance of converting one or two opportunities into goals. There are also issues at the back. Côte d'Ivoire have made a particularly large amount of rotation in defense this time, with almost none of their first-choice center-backs traveling with the squad. The substitute defenders lack cohesion in positioning and coverage, and their depth protection is not good enough, making them vulnerable to being breached. Curacao’s defense also tends to make more mistakes when facing high-intensity pressing, so both sides have weaknesses at the back. Once it turns into an open game, the goal count naturally goes up. And since this is a friendly, the tempo is usually faster, with more substitutions and tactical adjustments. Physical distribution is different from a competitive match, so goals often come more easily in the second half. Of course, there are uncertainties too. If Côte d'Ivoire build a big lead early and then lower the intensity, or if both teams have poor shot accuracy, it could still end up hovering around the line. But taking into account the xG data, tactical styles, and defensive weaknesses, I think the higher probability outcome is the over 3 direction. I personally lean toward the over 3 side.