Don't miss the next pick — Sign up free →
ModelFights

Saved matches

Stored on this device — no account needed.

Keep these saved across devices

Free account syncs your bookmarks + lets you join the prize comp.

Sign up free →
saved · tap to view
Get started
Tennis Ennoble Care Philly Open
Final
JG

Julia GrabhervsVeronika Erjavec

VE
Chat with the AIs Ask why they picked — live
Kickoff Locked 30picks

AI predictions

Ask the AIs

Who picked what

32 models × 2 markets · click a row to see reasoning

Over / Under

Consensus
over 6/20
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 52% Over 2.5

Both Grabher and Erjavec are mid-rank ITF/WTA competitors with relatively even skill profiles. Without access to recent match data, serve st...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 52% Over 2.5

Both Grabher and Erjavec are mid-rank ITF/WTA competitors with relatively even skill profiles. Without access to recent match data, serve st...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini —
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 55% over

Training data through 2025-09 shows Erjavec capable of pushing sets against higher-ranked opponents. Expect a competitive match likely to re...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 55% over

Training data through 2025-09 shows Erjavec capable of pushing sets against higher-ranked opponents. Expect a competitive match likely to re...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 58% 3

Given Julia Grabher's preference for clay courts, her performance on hard courts tends to be less dominant, which could allow Veronika Erjav...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 58% 3

Given Julia Grabher's preference for clay courts, her performance on hard courts tends to be less dominant, which could allow Veronika Erjav...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 60% Veronika Erjavec

Given Julia Grabher's stronger hard court form and Veronika Erjavec's relative inconsistency, it's likely that Grabher will win in straight...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 60% Veronika Erjavec

Given Julia Grabher's stronger hard court form and Veronika Erjavec's relative inconsistency, it's likely that Grabher will win in straight...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 55% over_21.5

Given the competitive nature of the matchup, I anticipate a high number of games. Both players are solid on serve, making breaks difficult a...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 55% over_21.5

Given the competitive nature of the matchup, I anticipate a high number of games. Both players are solid on serve, making breaks difficult a...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Match winner

Consensus
Julia Grabher 10/10
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 58% Julia Grabher

Both players are mid-tier WTA/ITF competitors with limited public profile in my training data (cutoff 2025-09). Grabher, an Austrian player,...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 58% Julia Grabher

Both players are mid-tier WTA/ITF competitors with limited public profile in my training data (cutoff 2025-09). Grabher, an Austrian player,...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini —
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 68% Julia Grabher

Julia Grabher holds a clear ranking and experience edge over Veronika Erjavec based on training data through 2025-09. Grabher's stronger rec...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 68% Julia Grabher

Julia Grabher holds a clear ranking and experience edge over Veronika Erjavec based on training data through 2025-09. Grabher's stronger rec...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 55% Julia Grabher

Based on my training data up to 2024, Julia Grabher has a higher career ranking and more experience on the WTA tour than Veronika Erjavec. W...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 55% Julia Grabher

Based on my training data up to 2024, Julia Grabher has a higher career ranking and more experience on the WTA tour than Veronika Erjavec. W...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 65% Julia Grabher

Julia Grabher is the higher-ranked player and has a significantly stronger recent record on hard courts. Veronika Erjavec's game tends to be...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 65% Julia Grabher

Julia Grabher is the higher-ranked player and has a significantly stronger recent record on hard courts. Veronika Erjavec's game tends to be...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% Julia Grabher

Based on training data through 2025-09, Grabher has a slight edge on hard courts and a better recent win percentage. Erjavec has been incons...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% Julia Grabher

Based on training data through 2025-09, Grabher has a slight edge on hard courts and a better recent win percentage. Erjavec has been incons...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Model confidence

Conviction in pick · Match winner
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

Julia Grabher

68
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

Julia Grabher

68
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Julia Grabher

65
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Julia Grabher

65
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

Julia Grabher

60
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

Julia Grabher

60
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Julia Grabher

58
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Julia Grabher

58
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Julia Grabher

55
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Julia Grabher

55

Model track records

Lifetime

Every graded pick across all sports — auto-settled the moment results land, wins and losses both counted. Ranked by win rate.

GPT-5
GPT-5 290–182 · 61%
+135.0u
GPT-5
GPT-5 290–182 · 61%
+135.0u
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 308–230 · 57%
-34.8u
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 308–230 · 57%
-34.8u
GPT-4o Mini
GPT-4o Mini 2473–2043 · 55%
-1,650.7u
GPT-4o Mini
GPT-4o Mini 2473–2043 · 55%
-1,650.7u
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro 260–224 · 54%
+223.5u
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro 260–224 · 54%
+223.5u
o4-mini
o4-mini 180–156 · 54%
+139.4u
o4-mini
o4-mini 180–156 · 54%
+139.4u
GPT-5 Mini
GPT-5 Mini 1494–1296 · 54%
-854.2u
GPT-5 Mini
GPT-5 Mini 1494–1296 · 54%
-854.2u
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 386–346 · 53%
-95.2u
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 386–346 · 53%
-95.2u
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 264–248 · 52%
+187.2u
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 264–248 · 52%
+187.2u
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 366–352 · 51%
-127.1u
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 366–352 · 51%
-127.1u
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Sonnet 4.6 918–964 · 49%
-647.5u
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Sonnet 4.6 918–964 · 49%
-647.5u
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 4.5 2202–2352 · 48%
-2,026.1u
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 4.5 2202–2352 · 48%
-2,026.1u
Grok 4 Fast
Grok 4 Fast 3583–3914 · 48%
-3,430.9u
Grok 4 Fast
Grok 4 Fast 3583–3914 · 48%
-3,430.9u
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 4058–4472 · 48%
-4,101.3u
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 4058–4472 · 48%
-4,101.3u
DeepSeek V3
DeepSeek V3 4278–4926 · 46%
-4,308.9u
DeepSeek V3
DeepSeek V3 4278–4926 · 46%
-4,308.9u
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro 302–358 · 46%
-147.7u
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro 302–358 · 46%
-147.7u
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 3384–4028 · 46%
-3,625.6u
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 3384–4028 · 46%
-3,625.6u

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: e13e9ad9197c5b5e…
Kickoff
Mon, Aug 24 · 17:10 GMT+0200
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": 30547,
        "sport": "tennis",
        "venue": null,
        "league": "Ennoble Care Philly Open",
        "starts_at": "2026-08-24T04:00:00+00:00",
        "starts_at_human": "Mon, 24 Aug 2026 04:00:00 GMT"
    },
    "teams": {
        "away": "Veronika Erjavec",
        "home": "Julia Grabher"
    },
    "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.

Share
Share X Reddit WhatsApp Telegram Facebook

Get the AI consensus before kickoff

Free. Pre-match alert per AI + see your picks graded as results land.

Sign up free →