Mees RottgeringvsJan Choinski
JCYour call
Who wins? One tap, no signup.
AI predictions
2 markets · 5 models
Ask the AIsWho picked what
16 models × 2 markets · click a row to see reasoning
| Model |
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
|
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus |
Mees Rottgering 3/5 models |
Over 2.5 2/10 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%
Mees Rottgering |
58%
Over 2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
62%
Mees Rottgering Both players are relatively lower-ranked ATP challengers competing at Winston-Salem (hard court, outdoor). Rottgering, a Dutch player born i...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
58%
Over 2.5 At ATP Challenger level on hard courts, baseline-heavy matches often extend to three sets unless there is a clear skill gap. Both Rottgering... |
|||
|
GPT-5 FlagshipOpenai |
Flagship picks across 2 markets — unlock with Pro
Get Pro
|
||
|
GPT-5 Mini Openai |
— | — | |
|
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.
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
No pick on this market. |
|||
|
GPT-4o Mini Openai |
— | — | |
|
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.
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
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 |
58%
Jan Choinski |
62%
under_2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Jan Choinski Training data through 2025-09 shows Choinski with more consistent ATP-level experience than the younger Rottgering. Both compete on hard cou...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
62%
under_2.5 Training data through 2025-09 indicates both players often close matches in straight sets on hard. Serve strength favors fewer breaks and qu... |
|||
|
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 |
65%
Jan Choinski |
60%
Under 2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
65%
Jan Choinski Based on my training data up to my last update, Jan Choinski is the more experienced player, having competed more regularly on the Challenge...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
Under 2.5 Given Jan Choinski's presumed experience and higher level of play compared to Mees Rottgering based on historical data, a straight-sets vict... |
|||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
58%
Mees Rottgering |
65%
2.0 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Mees Rottgering Mees Rottgering is the higher-ranked player and has shown better recent form on hard courts. Jan Choinski has struggled for consistency, par...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
65%
2.0 This is expected to be a closely contested match, but Rottgering's superior hard court form and serve should give him the edge in two sets.... |
|||
|
DeepSeek V3 Deepseek |
58%
Mees Rottgering |
60%
Over 2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Mees Rottgering Training data through 2025-09. Rottgering is a young prospect with strong recent hard-court results, while Choinski has been inconsistent an...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
60%
Over 2.5 Both players are prone to inconsistent play, and close matches are likely. Rottgering's aggressive game can lead to tiebreaks, while Choinsk... |
|||
Match winner
ConsensusMees Rottgering 3/5
Both players are relatively lower-ranked ATP challengers competing at Winston-Salem (hard court, outdoor). Rottgering, a Dutch player born i...
Training data through 2025-09 shows Choinski with more consistent ATP-level experience than the younger Rottgering. Both compete on hard cou...
Based on my training data up to my last update, Jan Choinski is the more experienced player, having competed more regularly on the Challenge...
Mees Rottgering is the higher-ranked player and has shown better recent form on hard courts. Jan Choinski has struggled for consistency, par...
Training data through 2025-09. Rottgering is a young prospect with strong recent hard-court results, while Choinski has been inconsistent an...
Over / Under
ConsensusOver 2.5 2/10
At ATP Challenger level on hard courts, baseline-heavy matches often extend to three sets unless there is a clear skill gap. Both Rottgering...
Training data through 2025-09 indicates both players often close matches in straight sets on hard. Serve strength favors fewer breaks and qu...
Given Jan Choinski's presumed experience and higher level of play compared to Mees Rottgering based on historical data, a straight-sets vict...
This is expected to be a closely contested match, but Rottgering's superior hard court form and serve should give him the edge in two sets....
Both players are prone to inconsistent play, and close matches are likely. Rottgering's aggressive game can lead to tiebreaks, while Choinsk...
Model confidence
Conviction in pick · Match winnerGemini 2.5 Flash
Jan Choinski
Claude Haiku 4.5
Mees Rottgering
Grok 4 Fast
Jan Choinski
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Mees Rottgering
DeepSeek V3
Mees Rottgering
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.
Refresh the read
Team newsRe-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.
Verifiable brief
Identical prompt sent to every AI · SHA-256 verified
hash:
ee9ec6cee008fc28…
- Kickoff
- Mon, Aug 24 · 19:30 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": 30850,
"sport": "tennis",
"venue": null,
"league": "Winston-Salem Open",
"starts_at": "2026-08-24T19:30:00+00:00",
"starts_at_human": "Mon, 24 Aug 2026 19:30:00 GMT"
},
"teams": {
"away": "Jan Choinski",
"home": "Mees Rottgering"
},
"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.
Results settle automatically once the final score lands. Picks are permanent — no hindsight edits.
Get the AI consensus before kickoff
Free. Pre-match alert per AI + see your picks graded as results land.