Tena LukasvsNastasja Schunk
NSAI 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 |
Tena Lukas 5/5 models |
over 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%
Tena Lukas |
58%
Over 1.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
62%
Tena Lukas Both players compete on the ITF Women's circuit at comparable levels; Tena Lukas has marginally better recent form on hard courts based on t...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
58%
Over 1.5 Both players are ITF-level professionals with relatively balanced overall records; straight-set dominance is less common at this level than... |
|||
|
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%
Tena Lukas |
62%
over |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
58%
Tena Lukas Training data through 2025-09 contains no information on this 2026 fixture. Tena Lukas has shown stronger recent results on outdoor hard cou...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
62%
over Training data through 2025-09 contains no information on this 2026 fixture. Both players have histories of three-set matches on hard courts.... |
|||
|
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 |
60%
Tena Lukas |
55%
Over 2.5 sets |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
60%
Tena Lukas Based on historical performance patterns from my training data, Tena Lukas typically performs well on clay, which is the assumed surface for...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
55%
Over 2.5 sets Considering both players' historical performances from my training data, matches between players of similar ranking and clay-court specialis... |
|||
|
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
57%
Tena Lukas |
59%
Nastasja Schunk |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
57%
Tena Lukas Tena Lukas holds a slight edge in ranking and has demonstrated more consistent performance on the WTA tour recently. While both players are...
2 sources cited
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
59%
Nastasja Schunk Given the close ranking and the potential for a competitive match, it's likely to go the distance. Both players are capable of winning sets,...
2 sources cited
|
|||
|
DeepSeek V3 Deepseek |
55%
Tena Lukas |
70%
Over 1.5 |
|
|
Match winner
?
Match winner
Match winner. Pick the team that wins in regular time (or who advances in cup formats).
55%
Tena Lukas Based on training data through mid-2025, Tena Lukas is a consistent clay-court player with solid baseline game, while Nastasja Schunk has be...
Over / Under
?
Over / Under
Over / Under total points. Will the combined score be above or below the line.
70%
Over 1.5 In women's clay-court matches between players of similar calibre, straight-set wins are less common due to longer rallies and multiple break... |
|||
Match winner
ConsensusTena Lukas 5/5
Both players compete on the ITF Women's circuit at comparable levels; Tena Lukas has marginally better recent form on hard courts based on t...
Training data through 2025-09 contains no information on this 2026 fixture. Tena Lukas has shown stronger recent results on outdoor hard cou...
Based on historical performance patterns from my training data, Tena Lukas typically performs well on clay, which is the assumed surface for...
Tena Lukas holds a slight edge in ranking and has demonstrated more consistent performance on the WTA tour recently. While both players are...
Based on training data through mid-2025, Tena Lukas is a consistent clay-court player with solid baseline game, while Nastasja Schunk has be...
Over / Under
Consensusover 2/10
Both players are ITF-level professionals with relatively balanced overall records; straight-set dominance is less common at this level than...
Training data through 2025-09 contains no information on this 2026 fixture. Both players have histories of three-set matches on hard courts....
Considering both players' historical performances from my training data, matches between players of similar ranking and clay-court specialis...
Given the close ranking and the potential for a competitive match, it's likely to go the distance. Both players are capable of winning sets,...
In women's clay-court matches between players of similar calibre, straight-set wins are less common due to longer rallies and multiple break...
Model confidence
Conviction in pick · Match winnerClaude Haiku 4.5
Tena Lukas
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Tena Lukas
Grok 4 Fast
Tena Lukas
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Tena Lukas
DeepSeek V3
Tena Lukas
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:
9ffd038365f2564e…
- Kickoff
- Mon, Sep 7 · 07:35 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": 38976,
"sport": "tennis",
"venue": null,
"league": "ATIK Antalya Open",
"starts_at": "2026-09-07T07:30:00+00:00",
"starts_at_human": "Mon, 07 Sep 2026 07:30:00 GMT"
},
"teams": {
"away": "Nastasja Schunk",
"home": "Tena Lukas"
},
"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 · 2 sources
2 citations captured — unlock with Pro
-
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.
Get the AI consensus before kickoff
Free. Pre-match alert per AI + see your picks graded as results land.