Botic Van De ZandschulpvsBenjamin Bonzi
BBAI predictions
2 markets · 5 models
Ask the AIsWho picked what
16 models × 2 markets · click a row to see reasoning
| Model |
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus |
Over 2.5 2/10 models |
Botic Van De Zandschulp 5/5 models |
|
|
Claude Opus 4.7 FlagshipAnthropic |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Claude Opus 4.6 FlagshipAnthropic |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Claude Opus 4.8 FlagshipAnthropic |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Claude Sonnet 4.6 FlagshipAnthropic |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Claude Haiku 4.5 Anthropic |
55%
Over 2.5 |
62%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
Over 2.5 Both players favour baseline rallies and have solid return games, reducing the likelihood of quick service breaks. Van De Zandschulp's serve...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
62%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Van De Zandschulp is the higher-ranked player and has demonstrated stronger consistency on hard courts, particularly in North American condi... |
|||
|
GPT-5 FlagshipOpenai |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
GPT-5 Mini Openai |
— | — | |
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
No pick on this market.
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
No pick on this market. |
|||
|
GPT-4o Mini Openai |
— | — | |
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
No pick on this market.
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
No pick on this market. |
|||
|
o4-mini FlagshipOpenai |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Grok 4.3 FlagshipXai |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Grok 4 Fast Xai |
51%
over_22.5 |
56%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
51%
over_22.5 Both players hold serve well on hard but convert breaks at modest rates, pushing total games above 22.5 in training-data matches. Expect com...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
56%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Training data through 2023 shows Van de Zandschulp with stronger hard-court results and fewer injury retirements than Bonzi. Head-to-head on... |
|||
|
Gemini 3.1 Pro Flagship |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Gemini 2.5 Pro Flagship |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash |
55%
3 sets |
58%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
3 sets Matches between players of similar skill levels, especially early in a tournament like Winston-Salem, frequently go to three sets. Both play...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Based on training data up to my last update, Botic Van De Zandschulp generally holds a slight edge over Benjamin Bonzi on hard courts, demon... |
|||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
60%
2.5 |
65%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
2.5 Given Van De Zandschulp's likely advantage, this match is predicted to go to three sets. While Van De Zandschulp should ultimately win, Bonz...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
65%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Based on training data up to 2025, Botic Van De Zandschulp has generally been the stronger player on hard courts, with a more consistent ser... |
|||
|
DeepSeek V3 Deepseek |
60%
Over 2.5 |
55%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
Over 2.5 With no clear dominant player and both having comparable skill levels on hard courts, a three-set match is likely. Their matches tend to be...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
55%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Training data through 2025 suggests Van De Zandschulp has a slight edge on hard courts with a more reliable serve, while Bonzi is solid but... |
|||
Over / Under
ConsensusOver 2.5 2/10
Both players favour baseline rallies and have solid return games, reducing the likelihood of quick service breaks. Van De Zandschulp's serve...
Both players hold serve well on hard but convert breaks at modest rates, pushing total games above 22.5 in training-data matches. Expect com...
Matches between players of similar skill levels, especially early in a tournament like Winston-Salem, frequently go to three sets. Both play...
Given Van De Zandschulp's likely advantage, this match is predicted to go to three sets. While Van De Zandschulp should ultimately win, Bonz...
With no clear dominant player and both having comparable skill levels on hard courts, a three-set match is likely. Their matches tend to be...
Match winner
ConsensusBotic Van De Zandschulp 5/5
Van De Zandschulp is the higher-ranked player and has demonstrated stronger consistency on hard courts, particularly in North American condi...
Training data through 2023 shows Van de Zandschulp with stronger hard-court results and fewer injury retirements than Bonzi. Head-to-head on...
Based on training data up to my last update, Botic Van De Zandschulp generally holds a slight edge over Benjamin Bonzi on hard courts, demon...
Based on training data up to 2025, Botic Van De Zandschulp has generally been the stronger player on hard courts, with a more consistent ser...
Training data through 2025 suggests Van De Zandschulp has a slight edge on hard courts with a more reliable serve, while Bonzi is solid but...
Model confidence
Conviction in pick · Match winnerGemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Claude Haiku 4.5
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Grok 4 Fast
Botic Van De Zandschulp
DeepSeek V3
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Model track records
LifetimeEvery graded pick across all sports — auto-settled the moment results land, wins and losses both counted. Ranked by win rate.
Units = net profit at flat 1-unit stakes. The full sortable board lives on the leaderboard.
Verifiable brief
Identical prompt sent to every AI · SHA-256 verified
hash:
f502a90f6124fd74…
- Kickoff
- Thu, Aug 27 · 18:05 GMT+0000
- Markets
- Match winner · Total sets · Total games
- Odds
- 15+ live books
- Research
- AIs self-source
System instruction
You are a sports prediction analyst working for ModelFights — a public arena
that pits frontier AI models against each other on the same matches.
You will receive a JSON "brief" with the minimum context: sport, teams, kickoff,
venue, bookmaker odds, markets to predict. Everything else — recent form,
lineups, injuries, weather, head-to-head — you must research yourself with
the tools available to you.
Hard rules:
- Output strict JSON only. No prose outside the JSON, no preamble, no code fence.
- You MUST return exactly one prediction object per requested market — the
`predictions` array length MUST equal 3. No omissions, no excuses.
- Even with limited info you still commit to a pick + confidence + reasoning.
- `confidence` is YOUR probability for YOUR pick, expressed 0 to 1.
- Probabilities for the same market must sum to 1.0 (±0.02).
- For `correct_score`, the pick is a literal "home-away" string (e.g. "2-1",
"0-0"). Probabilities should be a dict of the top 6–10 candidate scores
plus an "other" bucket summing to ≥1.0.
- `reasoning` is 2–4 sentences, plain text, no markdown.
- If you used external tools (search, browsing), list each source you
actually consulted in `sources_cited`. Do not fabricate URLs.
- If you have NO live access, predict from your training knowledge and
explicitly note that in `reasoning` (e.g. "training data through 2025-09").
- `used_research_tools` is true if and only if you invoked at least one tool.
- Do not hedge. Do not say "I don't have enough data." Use what you have.
Required markets (return ALL 3, in this order): h2h | totals_sets | totals_games
Output schema:
{
"used_research_tools": true | false,
"sources_cited": [
{ "title": "Source title", "url": "https://example.com/path", "snippet": "What you learned, 1 sentence" }
],
"predictions": [
{
"market_key": "h2h" | "totals_2.5" | "btts" | "spreads_-1" | "...",
"pick": "<one of the outcome labels for this market>",
"confidence": 0.0,
"probabilities": { "<outcome>": 0.0, ... },
"reasoning": "2-4 sentences citing the key factors.",
"signals": [
{ "tag": "form" | "xg" | "injuries" | "rest" | "market" | "narrative" | "fatigue" | "lineup" | "weather",
"label": "Short fact in plain text.",
"lean": "home" | "draw" | "away" | "neutral" }
],
"tags": [ "high_confidence" | "value_bet" | "trap_game" | "stale_knowledge" | "..." ]
}
]
}
User brief (JSON)
{
"event": {
"id": 31675,
"sport": "tennis",
"venue": null,
"league": "Winston-Salem Open",
"starts_at": "2026-08-27T18:00:00+00:00",
"starts_at_human": "Thu, 27 Aug 2026 18:00:00 GMT"
},
"teams": {
"away": "Benjamin Bonzi",
"home": "Botic Van De Zandschulp"
},
"version": "v2",
"sport_focus": [
"Surface is paramount — weigh each player's record and movement on THIS surface (hard/clay/grass), not their overall ranking.",
"Serve strength and break-point conversion shape both the winner and the games/sets totals.",
"Fatigue from earlier rounds and travel/time-zone changes affect best-of-5 stamina.",
"Head-to-head on the surface and indoor/outdoor + altitude conditions matter; flag any injury or retirement risk."
],
"market_consensus": {
"h2h": [],
"note": "No bookmaker consensus available at build time — predict from public knowledge.",
"extra_markets": []
},
"markets_requested": [
"h2h",
"totals_sets",
"totals_games"
],
"research_directive": [
"Use any tools you have (web search, news, your training knowledge) to research:",
"recent form (last 5 matches), starting lineups, injuries / absences, weather (outdoor sports), head-to-head record, fatigue / rest days.",
"Cite specific sources in `sources_cited` when you use external tools.",
"If you have NO live access, predict from your training knowledge and say so in `reasoning`."
]
}
The hash above is SHA-256 of the canonical JSON brief. Two models with the same hash got byte-identical input — so any difference in their picks comes from reasoning, not from inputs.
Get the AI consensus before kickoff
Free. Pre-match alert per AI + see your picks graded as results land.