Rebeka MasarovavsSimona Waltert
SWAI 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 |
Rebeka Masarova 4/5 models |
Over 2.5 3/10 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%
Rebeka Masarova |
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%
Rebeka Masarova Masarova is a established WTA player with multiple career titles and consistent performances on hard courts, while Waltert is a lower-ranked...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
58%
Over 2.5 Women's singles matches at WTA-level tournaments typically follow a best-of-three-set format, and competitive hard-court contests—especially... |
|||
|
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 |
62%
Rebeka Masarova |
58%
Over 21.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
62%
Rebeka Masarova Training data through 2025-09. Masarova holds the higher ranking and stronger recent results on clay surfaces typical of the Montreux event....
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
58%
Over 21.5 Training data through 2025-09. Clay matches at this level average above 21 games when going the distance. Serve and return stats suggest mul... |
|||
|
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 |
58%
Rebeka Masarova |
55%
Over 2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Rebeka Masarova Based on my training data up to my last update, Rebeka Masarova generally has a slight edge in ranking and overall performance against Simon...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
Over 2.5 Given the potential for a competitive match between these two players, a three-set encounter is quite plausible. While Masarova is favored,... |
|||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
60%
Masarova |
58%
Simona Waltert |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
60%
Masarova Rebeka Masarova is slightly favored due to a higher career ranking and potentially more consistent performance on hard courts, although spec...
2 sources cited
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
58%
Simona Waltert Given that Masarova is the slight favorite and this is likely to be a competitive match between players of similar calibre on hard courts, a...
2 sources cited
|
|||
|
DeepSeek V3 Deepseek |
65%
Rebeka Masarova |
55%
under_2.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
65%
Rebeka Masarova Based on training data through early 2025, Masarova has generally performed at a higher level with a stronger serve, which plays well on har...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
under_2.5 Both players are solid but not elite on hard courts, and matches between them tend to be decided in straight sets due to the importance of s... |
|||
Match winner
ConsensusRebeka Masarova 4/5
Masarova is a established WTA player with multiple career titles and consistent performances on hard courts, while Waltert is a lower-ranked...
Training data through 2025-09. Masarova holds the higher ranking and stronger recent results on clay surfaces typical of the Montreux event....
Based on my training data up to my last update, Rebeka Masarova generally has a slight edge in ranking and overall performance against Simon...
Rebeka Masarova is slightly favored due to a higher career ranking and potentially more consistent performance on hard courts, although spec...
Based on training data through early 2025, Masarova has generally performed at a higher level with a stronger serve, which plays well on har...
Over / Under
ConsensusOver 2.5 3/10
Women's singles matches at WTA-level tournaments typically follow a best-of-three-set format, and competitive hard-court contests—especially...
Training data through 2025-09. Clay matches at this level average above 21 games when going the distance. Serve and return stats suggest mul...
Given the potential for a competitive match between these two players, a three-set encounter is quite plausible. While Masarova is favored,...
Given that Masarova is the slight favorite and this is likely to be a competitive match between players of similar calibre on hard courts, a...
Both players are solid but not elite on hard courts, and matches between them tend to be decided in straight sets due to the importance of s...
Model confidence
Conviction in pick · Match winnerDeepSeek V3
Rebeka Masarova
Claude Haiku 4.5
Rebeka Masarova
Grok 4 Fast
Rebeka Masarova
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Masarova
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Rebeka Masarova
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:
3344a842b7dc0558…
- Kickoff
- Tue, Sep 8 · 15:00 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": 38932,
"sport": "tennis",
"venue": null,
"league": "Montreux Nestlé Open",
"starts_at": "2026-09-07T04:00:00+00:00",
"starts_at_human": "Mon, 07 Sep 2026 04:00:00 GMT"
},
"teams": {
"away": "Simona Waltert",
"home": "Rebeka Masarova"
},
"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.
Research trail
What each AI looked up before picking
-
0 tool calls · 0 sources
No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.
-
0 tool calls · 0 sources
No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.
-
0 tool calls · 0 sources
No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.
-
0 tool calls · 0 sources
No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.
-
0 tool calls · 2 sources
2 citations captured — unlock with Pro
Get the AI consensus before kickoff
Free. Pre-match alert per AI + see your picks graded as results land.