Estimated outcome probability. A likely winner can still be overpriced.
← Decision briefsCollege Football · Oct 10, 4:00 PM PDT YOUR RESEARCH TASK FORECASTMemphis Tigers RELIABILITY4/4 model reports MARKET VALUENot established
Memphis Tigers vs UAB Blazers
84.8%Memphis Tigers
LOCKED Oct 10, 3:31 PM PDT4/4 independent models select Memphis Tigers; all four oriented probabilities average 84.75%.
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.
- GPT: Market line favors Memphis by 15.5 points, the strongest signal in the package
- Claude: DraftKings line MEM -15.5 implies roughly 87-90% win probability
- Gemini: Memphis is favored by 15.5 points
- Grok: Memphis 4-1 record vs UAB 3-2
Read all four model reports
GPT · Memphis Tigers · 82.0%
Memphis is the stronger side in the supplied evidence package. The comparative signals all lean Memphis: a better record (4-1 vs 3-2), home field at Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium, and most importantly a substantial market line of Memphis -15.5. In college football, a double-digit home favorite generally implies a clear win-probability edge, and -15.5 is strong enough to make Memphis a solid favorite even without rankings. Because no injury, roster-availability, or advanced-efficiency data are included, the estimate should stay evidence-bounded rather than extreme.
openai/gpt-5.4 · Oct 10, 2:08 PM PDTClaude · Memphis Tigers · 88.0%
Memphis is a 15.5-point favorite per DraftKings and is playing at Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium, its home venue. A spread of that size historically converts to roughly an 87-90% win probability for the favorite. The records reinforce the line modestly (4-1 vs 3-2). With a total of 54.5, the implied scoring environment is moderate, which does not materially shift the favorite's edge. I hold slightly below the pure line-implied figure to account for unknown injury/availability information and typical Group-of-Five variance.
anthropic/claude-opus-5 · Oct 10, 2:08 PM PDTGemini · Memphis Tigers · 87.0%
Memphis is a 15.5-point favorite at home with a 4-1 record compared to UAB's 3-2 record. The significant point spread indicates a high probability of a Memphis victory.
google/gemini-3.1-pro-preview · Oct 10, 2:08 PM PDTGrok · Memphis Tigers · 82.0%
Memphis holds a 4-1 record versus UAB's 3-2 and is installed as a 15.5-point home favorite at Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium. The double-digit spread and superior win-loss mark supply the primary comparative signal that Memphis is the stronger side on the date in question.
xai/grok-4.3 · Oct 10, 2:08 PM PDTWhat remains uncertain
- No injury or player-availability information in the evidence package
- No advanced statistics or efficiency metrics are provided
- No head-to-head, strength-of-schedule, or opponent-quality context is supplied
- No team-specific matchup details such as turnover rates, quarterback status, or coaching changes are included
- Rankings are absent, limiting broader quality calibration
- No injury or depth-chart information supplied
- No advanced efficiency or strength-of-schedule metrics
- No rankings provided for either team
What to watch next
Official result recorded. Review the original forecast and sources below.
Open the event and source context →What changed before the lock
- 19.8 percentage points higher for Memphis Tigers
The pre-event probability state was locked atomically and is immutable.
Record hash
f6fca5f9f8f6a39d180e6f6cdd9a0fea81097c53c94ae50a98121e421e9fe433 - First recorded forecast
First prospective probability state captured for this source and competition.
Record hash
9b3cf04b3d031140de34cb23b0615f2895fb06b24c5993700a2e24bfb1885a5f
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
These links provide event context. They do not verify every claim in a model report.
Recorded outcome: Final
Finish your review
Record whether this brief helped, how long the review took, and your next action.
Return to your review →