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
Basketball World Cup
Upcoming · in 74h 27m
Tunisia logo

TunisiavsGuinea

Guinea logo
Chat with the AIs Ask why they picked — live
Kickoff Locked 24picks

Your call

Who wins? One tap, no signup.

AI predictions

Ask the AIs

Who picked what

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

Match winner

Consensus
Tunisia 5/6
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 68% Tunisia

Tunisia has a stronger basketball infrastructure and FIBA World Cup history than Guinea, with more competitive international fixtures and hi...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 70% Tunisia

Tunisia has a strong home-court advantage and a superior head-to-head record against Guinea, winning 6 out of 8 encounters since 2017. Their...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 72% Tunisia

Tunisia has historically been the stronger African basketball side with better organization and experience against Guinea. Training data thr...

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 90% Tunisia

Based on historical performance captured in my training data (through early 2024), Tunisia has a significantly stronger and more experienced...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 60% Guinea

Tunisia has a stronger historical presence and performance in international basketball tournaments compared to Guinea. Based on general know...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 68% Tunisia

Tunisia has historically been the stronger basketball nation in Africa, with better FIBA rankings and deeper tournament experience. Guinea i...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Over / Under

Consensus
over 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 59% Under

World Cup basketball games, especially early rounds or lower-seeded matchups, tend toward slower pace and defensive intensity as teams prior...

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

Both teams have demonstrated strong defensive capabilities in recent matches, with Tunisia allowing an average of 70 points per game and Gui...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 55% over

Pace tends to be moderate in these qualifiers but Tunisia's offense creates enough possessions for totals to trend slightly over. Training d...

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 60% Over 145.5

Tunisia's offensive capabilities against a likely weaker defensive team from Guinea should lead to them scoring a good number of points. Whi...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 55% over

International basketball games can vary in pace, but a total set around 150 suggests a moderate-scoring game. Without specific team pace dat...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 55% over 155.5

African basketball games often feature moderate scoring, but Tunisia's style is deliberate while Guinea can push pace. Expected total around...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

Spread

Consensus
Tunisia 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 64% Tunisia -8

Tunisia's talent gap and experience should produce a comfortable margin in a World Cup knockout/group setting. An 8-point spread reflects Tu...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 65% Tunisia

Tunisia's home advantage and superior head-to-head record suggest they are likely to cover a -1 point spread against Guinea. ([aiscore.com](...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 68% Tunisia

Home edge and superior team structure give Tunisia a consistent spread advantage in regional games. Training knowledge through 2023 indicate...

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 70% Tunisia -10.5

The substantial quality gap between Tunisia and Guinea suggests that Tunisia should comfortably cover a double-digit spread. Tunisia's disci...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 52% Guinea

Given Tunisia's slightly favored status in head-to-head, a small spread of -5.5 implies they are expected to win but not by a landslide. Gui...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 60% Tunisia -5.5

Tunisia's historical superiority suggests they can win by a margin of 6-10 points. Guinea's competitiveness may keep it closer, but Tunisia'...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First half winner

Consensus
Tunisia 4/5
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 66% Tunisia

Tunisia's talent edge should translate into first-half dominance; international defenses rarely adjust quickly enough to erase early gaps in...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
GPT-5 GPT-5 Pro
GPT-5 Mini GPT-5 Mini —
GPT-4o Mini GPT-4o Mini 70% Tunisia

Tunisia's strong start in recent games, including a 79-66 victory over Rwanda, indicates they are likely to lead at halftime. ([aiscore.com]...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
🔍 researched 4 sources cited
o4-mini o4-mini Pro
Grok 4.3 Grok 4.3 Pro
Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast 65% Tunisia

Tunisia typically establishes early leads through better preparation and execution. Training data through 2023 shows first-half dominance in...

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 —
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 55% Guinea

Teams often establish their rhythm and dominance early in the game. If Tunisia is the slightly better team overall, they are likely to start...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 62% Tunisia

Tunisia typically starts games strong with disciplined play, while Guinea may need time to settle. The first half should favor Tunisia, but...

Unlock reasoning · Pro

First half winner

Consensus
Tunisia 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 95% Tunisia

Stronger teams typically establish their dominance early in basketball games, especially against significantly weaker opponents. Tunisia's s...

Unlock reasoning · Pro
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite —
DeepSeek V3 DeepSeek V3 —

Model confidence

Conviction in pick · Match winner
Gemini 2.5 Flash

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Tunisia

90
Grok 4 Fast

Grok 4 Fast

Tunisia

72
GPT-4o Mini

GPT-4o Mini

Tunisia

70
Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5

Tunisia

68
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek V3

Tunisia

68
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite

Guinea

60

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-5 114–73 · 61%
-2.1u
Claude Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8 121–97 · 56%
-30.1u
o4-mini
o4-mini 66–58 · 53%
-1.6u
GPT-4o Mini
GPT-4o Mini 632–581 · 52%
-385.7u
GPT-5 Mini
GPT-5 Mini 479–444 · 52%
-224.7u
Claude Opus 4.6
Claude Opus 4.6 162–153 · 51%
-35.3u
Claude Opus 4.7
Claude Opus 4.7 157–150 · 51%
-42.8u
Gemini 3.1 Pro
Gemini 3.1 Pro 100–96 · 51%
+118.5u
Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 102–104 · 50%
+106.6u
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 768–810 · 49%
-626.7u
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Claude Sonnet 4.6 427–462 · 48%
-311.3u
DeepSeek V3
DeepSeek V3 740–806 · 48%
-497.4u
Grok 4 Fast
Grok 4 Fast 566–622 · 48%
-380.5u
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite 596–686 · 46%
-486.6u
Claude Haiku 4.5
Claude Haiku 4.5 718–869 · 45%
-706.9u
Gemini 2.5 Pro
Gemini 2.5 Pro 125–159 · 44%
-68.0u

Units = net profit at flat 1-unit stakes. The full sortable board lives on the leaderboard.

Refresh the read

Early read

Re-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.

Unlock with Pro Create a free account

Pro on-demand

Request an AI audit

Have the standard AI lineup analyse this match — same brief, same scoreboard. Predictions appear publicly once the run finishes.

Sign in and upgrade to Pro to request audits on any future match.

Sign in See Pro

Verifiable brief

Identical prompt sent to every AI · SHA-256 verified

hash: 37822aae15e6441c…
Kickoff
Sun, Jul 5 · 12:00 GMT+0000
Markets
Match winner · Over / Under · Spread · First half winner
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_half

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": 9770,
        "sport": "basketball",
        "venue": null,
        "league": "World Cup",
        "starts_at": "2026-07-05T12:00:00+00:00",
        "starts_at_human": "Sun, 05 Jul 2026 12:00:00 GMT"
    },
    "teams": {
        "away": "Guinea",
        "home": "Tunisia"
    },
    "version": "v2",
    "sport_focus": [
        "Pace is the master variable for totals — multiply both teams' possessions-per-game tendencies, not just their points.",
        "Check the injury/rest report first: a star sitting (or load-managed on a back-to-back) reshapes the spread and total.",
        "Weigh offensive vs defensive rating and three-point volume/variance — 3PT-heavy teams have wider outcome distributions.",
        "Bench depth and foul trouble swing close games; note rotation reliability.",
        "Back-to-backs and travel cause real fatigue — flag the schedule spot for each side.",
        "Home-court edge is meaningful but smaller than star availability."
    ],
    "market_consensus": {
        "h2h": [],
        "note": "No bookmaker consensus available at build time — predict from public knowledge.",
        "extra_markets": []
    },
    "markets_requested": [
        "h2h",
        "totals",
        "spreads",
        "first_half"
    ],
    "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
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash Gemini 2.5 Flash
    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 · 4 sources

    4 citations captured — unlock with Pro

  • Grok 4 Fast Grok 4 Fast
    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.

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

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

Results settle automatically once the final score lands. Picks are permanent — no hindsight edits.

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 →