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
MLB
Final 3–2
St.Louis Cardinals logo

St.Louis CardinalsvsSan Diego Padres

San Diego Padres logo
Chat with the AIs Ask why they picked — live
Final3–2 Locked 28picks · 15 graded AIs split
Recap Consensus missed

St.Louis Cardinals 3–2 San Diego Padres

4 of 7 AIs leaned San Diego Padres — reality had other ideas.

AI lean
San Diego Padres 4/7
Correct calls
2/7
Final
3–2

Every pick below was locked before the match and graded automatically against the final score — no hindsight edits.

AI predictions

Ask the AIs

Who picked what

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

Match winner

Consensus
San Diego Padres 4/7
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 55% St. Louis Cardinals L

St. Louis has historically been a strong home performer in interleague play and benefits from their established bullpen depth. San Diego's r...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 55% St.Louis Cardinals W

The St. Louis Cardinals have a strong home record, and the San Diego Padres have struggled on the road this season. Additionally, the Cardin...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 1 source cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 51% San Diego Padres L

Training data through 2024 shows Padres with slightly better overall roster depth than Cardinals. Home-field advantage is modest in MLB but...

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 52% St.Louis Cardinals W

Based on general knowledge from training data through 2026-06, the St. Louis Cardinals typically perform well at home, often benefiting from...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 55% San Diego Padres L

Based on training data, the San Diego Padres generally have a slight edge over the St. Louis Cardinals. This historical performance trend su...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 54% San Diego Padres L

Padres have a strong lineup and better recent form (training data through 2025). Cardinals are competitive but lack the same upside. Slight...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Spread

Consensus
San Diego Padres 2/7
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 53% St. Louis Cardinals -1.5

Cardinals' home-field advantage in early-season interleague play, combined with typical franchise strength in run differential, supports a m...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 55% St.Louis Cardinals L

The Cardinals have been dominant at home, often winning by multiple runs. The Padres have had difficulty covering the spread on the road thi...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 1 source cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 50% San Diego Padres

Run-line markets in MLB split close to even when teams are evenly matched. Padres hold slight talent edge that offsets Cardinals home status...

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 51% San Diego Padres +1.5 W

While I lean towards the Cardinals for the H2H win, many MLB games are decided by a single run, especially between competitive teams. The Pa...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 53% San Diego Padres L

The Padres, showing a slight historical advantage, are predicted to cover a -1.5 spread with a slim margin. This suggests they are expected...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% San Diego Padres +1.5 W

Padres are competitive and likely to keep the game close. Spread of +1.5 gives a cushion. Historical edge to Padres covering the spread.

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Over / Under

Consensus
over 3/7
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 52% Over 8.5

MLB totals in mid-June typically reflect summer weather warming and both teams settling into seasonal form. Cardinals and Padres both field...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 60% under W

Both teams have strong pitching rotations, and recent games between them have tended to be low-scoring. The weather forecast suggests mild c...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 1 source cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 52% over

Training data through 2024 indicates average MLB run scoring near 8.8 per game. Both lineups feature power hitters who elevate totals in neu...

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 53% Under 8.5 W

Assuming typical starting pitching quality for both teams, and considering that both clubs can have stretches of lower-scoring games, the Un...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 52% over L

Given the offensive capabilities of both teams as reflected in training data, an average total of 8.5 runs seems like a reasonable baseline,...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 50% Over 4.5

Both offenses can score, but pitching staffs make totals uncertain. Even without live data, a 4.5 line is near league average, so slight lea...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First 5 innings

Consensus
St.Louis Cardinals 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 54% Under 4.5

First five innings typically see more defensive efficiency and fewer home runs than full-game play. Starting pitchers for both teams likely...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 60% St.Louis Cardinals

The Cardinals have been strong in the first five innings at home, with early leads in recent games. The Padres have struggled to score early...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 1 source cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 49% St.Louis Cardinals

Cardinals home starters have historically kept games close through five innings per past seasons. Limited 2026 data forces reliance on 2024...

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 45% St.Louis Cardinals F5

The Cardinals' home advantage often translates to early leads, as they tend to start strong with the support of their home crowd. Assuming t...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite —
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 52% San Diego Padres

Padres' starting pitching tends to be solid early. Cardinals' early offense can be inconsistent. Slight lean to Padres in the first five.

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First five innings over 4.5

Consensus
over 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 51% over

The early game dynamics, based on general offensive trends from training data, suggest a moderate likelihood of exceeding 4.5 runs within th...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 —

Model confidence

Conviction in pick · Match winner
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

St. Louis Cardinals

55
GPT-4o Mini

GPT-4o Mini

St.Louis Cardinals

55
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

San Diego Padres

55
Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Sonnet 4.6

San Diego Padres

54
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

San Diego Padres

54
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

St.Louis Cardinals

52
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

San Diego Padres

51

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-5 145–91 · 61%
+67.5u
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 154–115 · 57%
-17.4u
GPT-4o Mini
GPT-4o Mini 1056–799 · 57%
-602.9u
GPT-5 Mini
GPT-5 Mini 690–586 · 54%
-365.1u
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro 130–112 · 54%
+111.8u
o4-mini
o4-mini 90–78 · 54%
+69.7u
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 193–173 · 53%
-47.6u
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 132–124 · 52%
+93.6u
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 183–176 · 51%
-63.5u
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 1128–1109 · 50%
-923.7u
Grok 4 Fast
Grok 4 Fast 740–743 · 50%
-501.5u
DeepSeek V3
DeepSeek V3 1031–1055 · 49%
-746.4u
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Sonnet 4.6 459–482 · 49%
-323.7u
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 876–927 · 49%
-725.8u
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 4.5 1017–1091 · 48%
-928.0u
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro 151–179 · 46%
-73.8u

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: febb8d710539033f…
Kickoff
Tue, Jun 16 · 23:45 GMT+0000
Markets
Match winner · Over / Under · Spread · First 5 innings
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_five_innings

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": 2833,
        "sport": "baseball",
        "venue": null,
        "league": "MLB",
        "starts_at": "2026-06-16T23:45:00+00:00",
        "starts_at_human": "Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:45:00 GMT"
    },
    "teams": {
        "away": "San Diego Padres",
        "home": "St.Louis Cardinals"
    },
    "version": "v1",
    "built_at": "2026-06-14T08:58:22+00:00",
    "market_consensus": {
        "h2h": [],
        "note": "No bookmaker consensus available at build time — predict from public knowledge.",
        "extra_markets": []
    },
    "markets_requested": [
        "h2h",
        "totals",
        "spreads",
        "first_five_innings"
    ],
    "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
  • Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

  • DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

  • Claude Sonnet 4.6 Claude Sonnet 4.6
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

  • Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

  • GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini
    4 tool calls · 1 source

    1 citation captured — unlock with Pro

  • Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash
    0 tool calls · 0 sources

    No live web access — picked from training-data knowledge.

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 →