Botic Van De ZandschulpvsJan Choinski
JCAI 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 |
under_3.5 1/10 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 |
62%
Over 2.5 |
68%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
62%
Over 2.5 While Van De Zandschulp is favored, Choinski is unlikely to roll over—he reached the match through qualifying or lower brackets, suggesting...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
68%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Van De Zandschulp is a seasoned ATP player with hard-court experience and a higher ranking than Choinski (who is primarily a Challenger-leve... |
|||
|
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 |
61%
under_3.5 |
72%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
61%
under_3.5 Best-of-five format at the US Open favors the higher-ranked player finishing in straight or four sets. Van de Zandschulp's serve efficiency...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
72%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Botic van de Zandschulp holds a clear ranking and experience edge over Jan Choinski on hard courts. Training data through 2025 shows van de... |
|||
|
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 |
60%
Over 3.5 Sets |
75%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
Over 3.5 Sets While Botic Van De Zandschulp is favored, it is common for underdogs in Grand Slams to take at least one set, even in a loss. A 3-1 victory...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
75%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Botic Van De Zandschulp is historically the higher-ranked and more experienced player, especially on hard courts like the US Open. Jan Choin... |
|||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
60%
Jan Choinski |
70%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
Jan Choinski While Van De Zandschulp is favored, Jan Choinski is capable of taking a set, especially if he starts strong or if Van De Zandschulp has an o...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
70%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Botic Van De Zandschulp is the higher-ranked player and has a stronger recent track record on hard courts. Jan Choinski's performances have... |
|||
|
DeepSeek V3 Deepseek |
55%
Over 3.5 |
60%
Botic Van De Zandschulp |
|
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
Over 3.5 Both players are known for their resilience and ability to win long matches. Van de Zandschulp has been involved in several five-setters at...
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
60%
Botic Van De Zandschulp Training data through 2025-09. Van de Zandschulp has a higher career ceiling and more experience on hard courts, having reached the US Open... |
|||
Over / Under
Consensusunder_3.5 1/10
While Van De Zandschulp is favored, Choinski is unlikely to roll over—he reached the match through qualifying or lower brackets, suggesting...
Best-of-five format at the US Open favors the higher-ranked player finishing in straight or four sets. Van de Zandschulp's serve efficiency...
While Botic Van De Zandschulp is favored, it is common for underdogs in Grand Slams to take at least one set, even in a loss. A 3-1 victory...
While Van De Zandschulp is favored, Jan Choinski is capable of taking a set, especially if he starts strong or if Van De Zandschulp has an o...
Both players are known for their resilience and ability to win long matches. Van de Zandschulp has been involved in several five-setters at...
Match winner
ConsensusBotic Van De Zandschulp 5/5
Van De Zandschulp is a seasoned ATP player with hard-court experience and a higher ranking than Choinski (who is primarily a Challenger-leve...
Botic van de Zandschulp holds a clear ranking and experience edge over Jan Choinski on hard courts. Training data through 2025 shows van de...
Botic Van De Zandschulp is historically the higher-ranked and more experienced player, especially on hard courts like the US Open. Jan Choin...
Botic Van De Zandschulp is the higher-ranked player and has a stronger recent track record on hard courts. Jan Choinski's performances have...
Training data through 2025-09. Van de Zandschulp has a higher career ceiling and more experience on hard courts, having reached the US Open...
Model confidence
Conviction in pick · Match winnerGemini 2.5 Flash
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Grok 4 Fast
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Botic Van De Zandschulp
Claude Haiku 4.5
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:
4a9ff90d3f771adb…
- Kickoff
- Wed, Sep 2 · 16:40 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": 31735,
"sport": "tennis",
"venue": null,
"league": "US Open",
"starts_at": "2026-08-31T04:00:00+00:00",
"starts_at_human": "Mon, 31 Aug 2026 04:00:00 GMT"
},
"teams": {
"away": "Jan Choinski",
"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.