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
Basketball World Cup
Upcoming · in 78h 51m
Mali logo

MalivsUganda

Uganda logo
Chat with the AIs Ask why they picked — live
Kickoff Locked 24picks

Your call

Who wins? One tap, no signup.

AI predictions

Ask the AIs

Who picked what

16 models × 5 markets · click a row to see reasoning

Match winner

Consensus
Mali 5/6
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 62% Mali

Mali has historically been the stronger basketball program in West Africa with more consistent international competition and deeper player d...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 85% Mali

Mali has a perfect 4-0 record against Uganda in recent matchups, including a decisive 84-73 victory on March 1, 2026. Their consistent perfo...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 78% Mali

Mali holds a clear talent and experience edge over Uganda in FIBA competitions based on historical results. Uganda rarely competes at this l...

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

Based on general historical performance data available in my training set, Mali has consistently shown a slight competitive edge over Uganda...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 60% Uganda

Uganda has never qualified for the FIBA Basketball World Cup, indicating a significant gap in international pedigree compared to Mali, who h...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
3 sources cited
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 65% Mali

Mali has a stronger basketball tradition and more experienced players in international competition. Training data through 2025 suggests Mali...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Over / Under

Consensus
over 3/6
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 58% Under 160.5

African national teams at World Cup level typically play at slower paces and lower-efficiency offenses than European or American squads, wit...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 75% over

Recent games between Mali and Uganda have seen high-scoring outcomes, with an average of 152 total points. This trend suggests a high likeli...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 55% over

Mali typically plays at a faster pace than Uganda and generates higher offensive ratings. Limited rest or travel details for this 2026 fixtu...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 55% Under

International basketball games, particularly between African nations, often feature a slower pace and strong defensive focus, leading to low...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 55% over

Without specific team pace and offensive/defensive ratings, predicting a total is challenging. However, FIBA World Cup games often feature c...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
3 sources cited
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 55% Over 152.5

Typical totals in African World Cup qualifiers often exceed 150 points due to uptempo play and less disciplined defenses. Both teams have pl...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Spread

Consensus
Mali 2/6
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 59% Mali -5.5

Mali's historical program strength and international experience justify a modest home spread of 5–6 points. Uganda is competitive but has no...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 80% Mali

Mali's consistent victories over Uganda, including a 84-73 win on March 1, 2026, indicate a strong performance margin, making them likely to...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 72% Mali

Mali is the stronger side on paper and should cover a standard spread at home. Uganda has shown little ability to stay competitive against h...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 54% Mali -4.5

Given Mali's historical status as the slightly stronger team, a -4.5 spread is a reasonable handicap. They are expected to control the game...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 58% Uganda

Given Mali's historical participation in the World Cup compared to Uganda's absence, Mali is expected to have a stronger squad and better to...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
3 sources cited
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% Mali -5.5

Mali's superior depth and experience should allow them to cover a modest spread at home. Uganda might keep it close early, but Mali's bench...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First half winner

Consensus
Mali 5/5
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 60% Mali

First-half spreads typically track full-game spreads in African basketball, as tournament rhythm is set early and both teams play conservati...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 70% Mali

Mali's strong start in previous games, including a 23-17 first-quarter lead against Uganda on March 1, 2026, suggests they will lead at half...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 74% Mali

Mali generally establishes early leads through superior size and execution in the opening 20 minutes. Uganda struggles with turnovers and ef...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash 56% Mali

Teams favored to win the full game are typically also favored to establish a lead by halftime. Mali's slight overall advantage, based on his...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite —
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% Mali

Mali tends to start strong due to experienced starting lineup and early game execution. Uganda may need time to adjust to the level of compe...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First half h2h

Consensus
Uganda 1/1
Claude Opus 4.7 Claude Opus 4.7 Pro
Claude Opus 4.6 Claude Opus 4.6 Pro
Claude Opus 4.8 Claude Opus 4.8 Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6 Pro
Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5 —
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini —
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast —
Gemini 3.1 Pro Gemini 3.1 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash —
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 57% Uganda

The historical advantage of Mali in World Cup participation suggests they are likely to start stronger and establish a lead. Even if Uganda...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
3 sources cited
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 —

Model confidence

Conviction in pick · Match winner
GPT-4o Mini

GPT-4o Mini

Mali

85
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

Mali

78
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

Mali

65
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Mali

62
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Uganda

60
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Mali

58

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-5 109–72 · 60%
-6.4u
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 111–93 · 54%
-30.7u
GPT-5 Mini
GPT-5 Mini 451–420 · 52%
-212.6u
GPT-4o Mini
GPT-4o Mini 595–556 · 52%
-390.8u
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 153–149 · 51%
-36.2u
o4-mini
o4-mini 56–55 · 50%
-17.1u
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 147–146 · 50%
-44.9u
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro 89–94 · 49%
+54.1u
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 734–784 · 48%
-605.3u
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 93–100 · 48%
+49.1u
DeepSeek V3
DeepSeek V3 717–782 · 48%
-476.9u
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Sonnet 4.6 417–459 · 48%
-313.4u
Grok 4 Fast
Grok 4 Fast 547–607 · 47%
-371.1u
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 571–661 · 46%
-469.2u
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 4.5 701–850 · 45%
-687.9u
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro 119–152 · 44%
-64.7u

Units = net profit at flat 1-unit stakes. The full sortable board lives on the leaderboard.

Refresh the read

Early read

Re-run the AIs closer to kickoff and watch the read evolve. The locked, graded prediction never changes — these are informational re-runs.

Lineups change everything — Pro re-runs the AIs after they drop.

Confirmed XIs, late injuries and line moves land in the final hour. Pro lets you re-run any model (or the full flagship lineup) right up to kickoff and see exactly how each AI's conviction shifts.

Unlock with Pro Create a free account

Pro on-demand

Request an AI audit

Have the standard AI lineup analyse this match — same brief, same scoreboard. Predictions appear publicly once the run finishes.

Sign in and upgrade to Pro to request audits on any future match.

Sign in See Pro

Verifiable brief

Identical prompt sent to every AI · SHA-256 verified

hash: ddf9310cc757af6f…
Kickoff
Sat, Jul 4 · 15:00 GMT+0000
Markets
Match winner · Over / Under · Spread · First half winner
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 4. 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 4, in this order): h2h | totals | spreads | first_half

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": 9577,
        "sport": "basketball",
        "venue": null,
        "league": "World Cup",
        "starts_at": "2026-07-04T15:00:00+00:00",
        "starts_at_human": "Sat, 04 Jul 2026 15:00:00 GMT"
    },
    "teams": {
        "away": "Uganda",
        "home": "Mali"
    },
    "version": "v2",
    "sport_focus": [
        "Pace is the master variable for totals — multiply both teams' possessions-per-game tendencies, not just their points.",
        "Check the injury/rest report first: a star sitting (or load-managed on a back-to-back) reshapes the spread and total.",
        "Weigh offensive vs defensive rating and three-point volume/variance — 3PT-heavy teams have wider outcome distributions.",
        "Bench depth and foul trouble swing close games; note rotation reliability.",
        "Back-to-backs and travel cause real fatigue — flag the schedule spot for each side.",
        "Home-court edge is meaningful but smaller than star availability."
    ],
    "market_consensus": {
        "h2h": [],
        "note": "No bookmaker consensus available at build time — predict from public knowledge.",
        "extra_markets": []
    },
    "markets_requested": [
        "h2h",
        "totals",
        "spreads",
        "first_half"
    ],
    "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.

Research trail

What each AI looked up before picking

Unlock sources · Pro

Results settle automatically once the final score lands. Picks are permanent — no hindsight edits.

Recent recaps

How the AI lineup did on other recent matches.

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 →