Estimated outcome probability. A likely winner can still be overpriced.
← Decision briefsNFL · Oct 22, 5:15 PM PDT YOUR RESEARCH TASK FORECASTPending RELIABILITY4/4 model reports MARKET VALUENot established
New England Patriots vs Chicago Bears
—No winner forecast available
NOT LOCKED4/4 models favor Chicago Bears, but the mean probability (53.75%) is below the house threshold.
Check the evidence
The most important gap and your next source check.
- Read the model reasons and reported limits.
- Inspect available source context; record missing sources.
- Identify what remains unverified and your next action.
18 reported evidence limits. Agreement alone does not establish accuracy.
A probability difference alone does not account for forecast error, fees, spread, or available liquidity.
Why the models lean this way
These are reasons recorded by the models. They are not independently verified facts or measured causes of a probability change.
- Gemini: Chicago Bears are -1.5 point favorites
- Claude: Market line CHI -1.5 implies a narrow Chicago edge (~54-56% win probability)
- Grok: Identical 3-2 records for NE and CHI
- GPT: Both teams are 3-2, so record-based team strength appears roughly even from the package.
Read all four model reports
Gemini · Chicago Bears · 54.0%
The Chicago Bears are slight 1.5-point home favorites against the New England Patriots. Both teams hold identical 3-2 records. A -1.5 spread typically translates to roughly a 53-55% implied win probability for the home favorite.
google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview · Oct 13, 12:30 PM PDTClaude · Chicago Bears · 55.0%
Both teams enter 3-2, so records provide no differentiation. The only discriminating evidence is the DraftKings line of CHI -1.5 at Soldier Field, which is essentially a home-field-sized edge. A 1.5-point favorite historically converts to roughly a 54-56% win probability. With no injury, quarterback, or weather information supplied, there is no basis to deviate meaningfully from the market-implied figure, so I anchor at 55% for Chicago.
anthropic/claude-opus-5 · Oct 13, 12:30 PM PDTGrok · Chicago Bears · 53.0%
Both teams enter at identical 3-2 records. The only comparative signal is the DraftKings market line listing Chicago as a 1.5-point home favorite at Soldier Field, implying a modest home-edge probability slightly above 50 percent. No other team statistics, quarterback information, or advanced metrics are supplied.
xai/grok-4.3 · Oct 13, 12:30 PM PDTGPT · Chicago Bears · 53.0%
The immutable evidence shows an otherwise very even matchup: both teams are 3-2, with no weather signal and no usable injury edge in the package. The main comparative separator is venue plus the market signal. Chicago is at home and listed by DraftKings as a 1.5-point favorite, which implies the Bears are more likely than not to win, but only narrowly. With equal records and no quarterback/injury detail, the line supports only a small edge rather than a strong favorite status.
openai/gpt-5.4 · Oct 13, 12:30 PM PDTWhat remains uncertain
- No moneyline odds provided
- No injury reports available
- Weather details are missing
- Game is 10 days away, so conditions and lines may change
- No moneyline prices provided; probability derived from spread conversion only
- Injury lists are empty for both teams and may simply be unpublished at data-capture time (10 days pre-game)
- No weather data for an outdoor late-October Chicago game
- No quarterback, personnel, or recent-form detail (point differential, strength of schedule) supplied
What to watch next
Wait for all required evidence and the pre-event lock. This view is not final.
Open the event and source context →What changed before the lock
- First recorded forecast
First prospective probability state captured for this source and competition.
Record hash
617525363b33bce906d2c23603b6a30391f5fd20958b136f209145d1db3ddcc5
Reasons are shown as they were recorded. The ledger does not establish that a specific fact caused a probability change.
The saved method comparison
This event has no eligible record in the new comparison cohort. Historical or late forecasts are not filled in after the event.
Inspect the methods and progress →Available source context
No direct source links are attached to this brief. The event page shows the available context.
These links provide event context. They do not verify every claim in a model report.
Finish your review
Record whether this brief helped, how long the review took, and your next action.
Return to your review →