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 9–7
Texas Rangers logo

Texas RangersvsSan Diego Padres

San Diego Padres logo
Chat with the AIs Ask why they picked — live
Final9–7 Locked 26picks · 15 graded
Recap Consensus called it

Texas Rangers 9–7 San Diego Padres

4 of 6 AIs leaned Texas Rangers — and reality agreed.

AI lean
Texas Rangers 4/6
Correct calls
4/6
Final
9–7

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 × 4 markets · click a row to see reasoning

Match winner

Consensus
Texas Rangers 4/6
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 55% Texas Rangers W

Training data through 2025-09 limits live roster and form visibility for June 2026. The Rangers have historically been competitive in home m...

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

The Texas Rangers have a strong home record, while the San Diego Padres have struggled on the road. Recent form and head-to-head matchups fa...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 3 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 53% San Diego Padres L

Training data through 2025-09 shows Padres with superior pitching depth and consistent road performance against AL West clubs. Rangers home...

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% Texas Rangers W

Based on general team strengths observed in my training data through late 2023, the Texas Rangers, especially after their 2023 World Series...

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

Predicting based on training data through 2025-09. The San Diego Padres have historically shown strong offensive capabilities and pitching d...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 55% Texas Rangers W

The Rangers have home-field advantage at Globe Life Field, and their lineup is strong against left-handed pitching. The Padres have been inc...

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% Texas Rangers -1.5 W

A -1.5 line for Texas at home reflects modest favoritism, consistent with home-field advantage. Without access to starting pitchers, bullpen...

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

The Rangers' home advantage and the Padres' road struggles suggest a likely win by at least one run for Texas.

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 3 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 51% away_ -1.5

Training data through 2025-09 shows Padres covering run line at solid clip versus weaker AL pitching staffs. Rangers lineup struggles agains...

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% San Diego Padres +1.5 L

While the Rangers are favored for an outright win based on historical performance, the San Diego Padres are generally a competitive team wit...

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

While the head-to-head is expected to be close, the Padres' slightly stronger pitching staff and potentially more potent offense give them a...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 40% Texas Rangers -1.5 W

The Rangers are slight favorites, but winning by 2 runs is difficult. The Padres have a strong enough pitching staff to keep the game close....

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First 5 innings

Consensus
Texas Rangers 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 54% Texas Rangers

First-five-inning matchups are often shaped by starting pitcher quality and early bullpen availability. Without live pitcher data for 20 Jun...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 55% Texas Rangers

The Rangers have been strong early in games, and the Padres have had issues starting games on the road.

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 3 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 51% San Diego Padres

Training data through 2025-09 demonstrates Padres early-game scoring edge driven by strong top-of-order hitters. Rangers starters have shown...

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% Texas Rangers lead

Assuming strong starting pitching and a capable offense for the Rangers, a slight home advantage for the first five innings is anticipated....

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 54% San Diego Padres

Predicting based on training data through 2025-09. The Padres' tendency for strong starts offensively suggests they are likely to lead after...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 51% Texas Rangers

The first five innings often favor the starting pitcher. The Rangers' starter (projected) has been solid in early innings, while the Padres'...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Over / Under

Consensus
over 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 52% Over 8.5 W

MLB totals in 2026 reflect league-wide run environment trends. Without access to current pitching matchups or ballpark conditions, a mid-ran...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 55% over W

Both teams have potent offenses, and recent games have seen high-scoring outcomes. The over is slightly favored based on these trends.

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 3 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 52% over

Training data through 2025-09 indicates Rangers home games average above league run totals especially in summer months. Padres offense tends...

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% Over 8.5 W

My training data indicates that both the Rangers and Padres typically field competitive offenses, leading to moderately high-scoring games i...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 53% over

Predicting based on training data through 2025-09. Both teams have a history of high-scoring games, suggesting an 'over' is more likely. Thi...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 52% Over 8.5

Both bullpens are vulnerable, and the ballpark in Arlington tends to be hitter-friendly in June. Recent games for both teams have seen moder...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Model confidence

Conviction in pick · Match winner
GPT-4o Mini

GPT-4o Mini

Texas Rangers

60
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Texas Rangers

55
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Texas Rangers

55
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

San Diego Padres

55
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

Texas Rangers

55
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

San Diego Padres

53

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: 28d05a0fb32178c6…
Kickoff
Sat, Jun 20 · 00:05 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": 4343,
        "sport": "baseball",
        "venue": null,
        "league": "MLB",
        "starts_at": "2026-06-20T00:05:00+00:00",
        "starts_at_human": "Sat, 20 Jun 2026 00:05:00 GMT"
    },
    "teams": {
        "away": "San Diego Padres",
        "home": "Texas Rangers"
    },
    "version": "v1",
    "built_at": "2026-06-16T06:10:50+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.

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

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

  • GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini
    4 tool calls · 3 sources

    3 citations captured — unlock with Pro

  • Claude Haiku 4.5 Claude Haiku 4.5
    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.

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 →