Estimated outcome probability. A likely winner can still be overpriced.
← Decision briefsCollege Football · Oct 17, 9:00 AM PDT YOUR RESEARCH TASK FORECASTSMU Mustangs RELIABILITY4/4 model reports MARKET VALUENot established
SMU Mustangs vs Virginia Cavaliers
77.3%SMU Mustangs
LOCKED Oct 17, 8:32 AM PDT4/4 independent models select SMU Mustangs; all four oriented probabilities average 77.25%.
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.
16 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.
- Claude: DraftKings line of SMU -10 implies roughly 78-82% win probability for the favorite
- Gemini: SMU is ranked #24
- GPT: SMU is 4-1 versus Virginia at 4-2.
- Grok: SMU 4-1 record and ranked 24
Read all four model reports
Claude · SMU Mustangs · 79.0%
SMU is a 10-point home favorite per the supplied DraftKings line, which is the strongest single signal available. Historically, a double-digit home favorite in college football wins roughly 78-82% of such games. Supporting facts align: SMU is ranked No. 24 with a 4-1 record, while Virginia is unranked at 4-2, and the game is at SMU's Gerald J. Ford Stadium. I anchor on the market-implied figure and apply no material adjustment since no injury or efficiency data is provided to justify deviation.
anthropic/claude-opus-5 · Oct 17, 7:23 AM PDTGemini · SMU Mustangs · 78.0%
SMU is ranked #24 with a 4-1 record and benefits from home-field advantage at Gerald J. Ford Stadium. The market line favors SMU by 10 points, which translates to an approximate 78% implied win probability.
google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview · Oct 17, 7:23 AM PDTGPT · SMU Mustangs · 76.0%
SMU has the stronger evidence package on every available comparative signal: better record (4-1 vs 4-2), a national ranking (#24 vs unranked), home field at Gerald J. Ford Stadium, and most importantly a substantial market signal of SMU -10. A double-digit point spread in college football generally indicates a clearly favored team, and that market view is consistent with the other supplied facts. Using only this immutable evidence, SMU should be favored to win comfortably more often than not, though not at near-certainty because no injury, roster, or efficiency data are provided.
openai/gpt-5.4 · Oct 17, 7:23 AM PDTGrok · SMU Mustangs · 76.0%
SMU holds a 4-1 record and #24 ranking versus Virginia's 4-2 mark and unranked status. The DraftKings line lists SMU as a 10-point home favorite at Gerald J. Ford Stadium, supplying the primary comparative signal that SMU is the stronger side on current evidence.
xai/grok-4.3 · Oct 17, 7:23 AM PDTWhat remains uncertain
- No injury reports, quarterback status, or depth-chart information supplied
- No advanced efficiency metrics (SP+, FEI, EPA) or strength-of-schedule context
- Record-to-team mapping inferred from side ordering; not explicitly labeled
- Single sportsbook line with no line-movement history or closing-line context
- No weather or travel detail provided
- No advanced efficiency metrics provided
- No injury information available
- Weather conditions are unknown
What to watch next
Wait for the official result. The locked forecast stays unchanged.
Open the event and source context →What changed before the lock
- 6.3 percentage points higher for SMU Mustangs
The pre-event probability state was locked atomically and is immutable.
Record hash
080279279ca85e1664d2cbff23e9dd5bdf44904e11a9f764712e76537851c7a6 - First recorded forecast
First prospective probability state captured for this source and competition.
Record hash
70d70a163c4defdf340b698fbe17783888272b7d0cc4ee951d06f530d0349190
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 →