ALD 0-1 NEO · 48% KON 1-2 GAL · 53% LEH 0-2 PAR · 63% NIC 1-2 REN · 48% BOD 1-2 VIK · 44% LYN 1-1 RAN · 40% ALS 1-2 AL- · 55% SVE 1-2 FSV · 45% ZUL 0-2 CLU · 61% VIL 2-1 ESP · 55% SHE 2-1 WRE · 47% LIL 2-1 LEN · 49% CAS 0-2 SPO · 66% EST 0-1 GIM · 59% ALD 0-1 NEO · 48% KON 1-2 GAL · 53% LEH 0-2 PAR · 63% NIC 1-2 REN · 48% BOD 1-2 VIK · 44% LYN 1-1 RAN · 40% ALS 1-2 AL- · 55% SVE 1-2 FSV · 45% ZUL 0-2 CLU · 61% VIL 2-1 ESP · 55% SHE 2-1 WRE · 47% LIL 2-1 LEN · 49% CAS 0-2 SPO · 66% EST 0-1 GIM · 59%
J1 League · Regular Season - 13 Oct 31, 2026 · 05:00 · UTC Sanga Stadium by Kyocera, Kyoto Not Started

Kyoto Sanga
vs
Shimizu S-pulse.

Quick answer

Who will win Kyoto Sanga vs Shimizu S-pulse?

2 of 10 AI models pick Shimizu S-pulse to win (20%). A draw is in play: 7 of 10 models picked it. The mean predicted score is 1–1 at 43% average confidence (low).

Consensus of independent AI models on TuringStats, updated before kickoff. Not betting advice.

Head-to-head history → Kyoto Sanga form Shimizu S-pulse form

10 AI models read this match. The plurality on 1X2 leans toward the draw (7 of 10 models). The mean predicted score (rounded from all models) is 1–1 at 43% mean confidence (Low band) — see the strip and table below.

Who do you think will win?

Vote before kick-off and compare with AI

J1 League table Where Kyoto Sanga and Shimizu S-pulse stand right now
— Consensus

Where the panel lands.

Vote share across models. Read this strip first, then the line-by-line table.

Kyoto Sanga win 10%

1 / 10 models

Draw 70%

7 / 10 models

Shimizu S-pulse win 20%

2 / 10 models

— Model breakdown

10 picks. Receipts attached.

Line-by-line comparison of each system’s call.

#
Model
Pick
Score
Conf.
Reasoning
01
GPT-6 Luna
Draw
1–1
30%
Kyoto score more freely but have conceded in all 12 league matches, while Shimizu’s five-goal droughts point to limited attacking output. Recent meetings are tight, making a 1-1 draw the best estimate.
02
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Kyoto Sanga win
2–1
42%
Both sides inconsistent and defensively leaky; Sanga's attack (Elias, Arai) and home venue edge it, but low-mid confidence given weak form overall.
03
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Draw
1–1
52%
Kyoto has conceded in every game this season, while Shimizu has struggled to score consistently. A tight, balanced clash points towards a low-scoring stalemate.
04
Grok 4.7
Draw
1–1
36%
Both leaky and low on clean sheets; Kyoto finish better at home but Shimizu often nicks a goal. Mixed form and H2H point to a tight 1-1.
05
DeepSeek V4 Pro
Shimizu S-pulse win
0–1
48%
Kyoto have no clean sheets and concede heavily at home, while Shimizu's tight away style suits a low-scoring win. H2H also favors Shimizu in Kameoka.
06
Qwen 3.8 Max
Shimizu S-pulse win
0–1
32%
Shimizu won 2 of last 3 H2H including 1-0 at this venue; Kyoto's zero clean sheets guarantee concession, but Shimizu's scoring struggles cap their output.
07
Meta Muse Spark 1.3
Draw
1–1
47%
Kyoto leak every game with 0 clean sheets but have Elias scoring; Shimizu score little yet won recent H2H. 1-1 fits both.
08
Kimi K3
Draw
1–1
52%
Both sides defensively fragile (0 and 2 clean sheets) but Kyoto score freely at home while Shimizu struggle away; H2H shows tight, low-scoring recent meetings.
09
GLM 5.3
Draw
1–1
52%
Both sides are struggling (Kyoto WLLDD, Shimizu WWDLL) with leaky defenses but modest attacks; Shimizu's recent H2H edge at Kyoto offsets home advantage, so a tight 1-1 fits best.
10
MiMo V2.6 Pro
Draw
1–1
34%
Both sides struggle for wins and consistency; Kyoto leak late goals but lack clean sheets, Shimizu score rarely. H2H shows tight, low-scoring meetings, so a draw fits better than either side dominating.
— Scoreline frequency

How often each scoreline showed up.

7 of 10 models settled on 1–1. That convergence is a strong scoreline signal—many fixtures fan out wider across the panel.

  • 1–1
    7 models
  • 0–1
    2 models
  • 2–1
    1 model

Bookmakers vs the AI panel

Bet365 · 2.45 / 3.30 / 2.80
Kyoto Sanga Market 38% · AI 9%
Draw Market 29% · AI 64%
Shimizu S-pulse Market 33% · AI 27%

Grey: bookmaker prices as probabilities, margin removed. Lime: share of the 11 AI models picking each result.

Team news

Predicted lineups: Kyoto Sanga vs Shimizu S-pulse

Each side's last starting XI, with players ruled out of this match marked. The confirmed lineups replace this about an hour before kickoff.

Kyoto Sanga

3-4-2-1 · XI v Newcastle Jets, 27 Oct
R. Popović
9 Rafael Elias
9 Elias
11 Marco Túlio
11 Túlio
38 Everton
38 Everton
44 K. Sato
44 Sato
6 João Pedro
6 Pedro
10 S. Fukuoka
10 Fukuoka
25 Yoon Sung-Jun
25 Sung-Jun
62 T. Shichi
62 Shichi
43 Weverton
43 Weverton
5 H. Tawiah
5 Tawiah
90 Halls
90 Halls

Shimizu S-pulse

4-3-3 · XI v Sanfrecce Hiroshima, 24 Oct
T. Yoshida
7 Capixaba
7 Capixaba
19 K. Kinoshita
19 Kinoshita
13 R. Germain
13 Germain
18 T. Hirato
18 Hirato
17 M. Yumiba
17 Yumiba
47 Y. Shimamoto
47 Shimamoto
25 Mateus Brunetti
25 Brunetti
4 S. Hasukawa
4 Hasukawa
14 Park Seung-Wook
14 Seung-Wook
24 H. Sugai
24 Sugai
16 T. Umeda
16 Umeda

Season data

J1 League numbers for both sides, when they score and the players who carry them.

Kyoto Sanga

4-2-3-1
W-D-L
2-4-6
Goals
15-23
Clean sheets
0
Failed to score
3
Best win run
1
Penalties
0/0
When they score
15'30'45'60'75'90'
When they concede
15'30'45'60'75'90'

Shimizu S-pulse

4-3-3
W-D-L
4-2-6
Goals
10-20
Clean sheets
2
Failed to score
5
Best win run
3
Penalties
1/1
When they score
15'30'45'60'75'90'
When they concede
15'30'45'60'75'90'

Key players · Kyoto Sanga

  • Rafael Elias 5 G · 3 A · 10 apps
  • H. Arai 4 G · 0 A · 12 apps

Key players · Shimizu S-pulse

  • T. Fujii 1 G · 3 A · 12 apps

Top scorers · J1 League

  1. 1 Léo Ceará Kashima 12
  2. 2 Marcinho Kawasaki Frontale 8
  3. 3 A. Suzuki Sanfrecce Hiroshima 8
  4. 4 M. Nagakura FC Tokyo 7
  5. 5 Y. Segawa Kashiwa Reysol 7
Venue Sanga Stadium by Kyocera, Kyoto
New at Kyoto Sanga T. Shichi (Sanfrecce Hiroshima), R. Kato (Yokohama F. Marinos), T. Kato (Matsumoto Yamaga)
New at Shimizu S-pulse T. Hirato (Kyoto Sanga), Won Du-Jae (Khorfakkan), Vini Peixoto (Zeljeznicar Sarajevo)
— Aggregated insights

What’s moving the panel.

01
Models lean the draw

70% of models take a stalemate — cross-check score frequency and 1X2 strip before sizing.

02
Low confidence

Mean 43% across the panel with real dispersion — compare unanimous calls vs split tickets in the model table.

03
xG tilt 0.90 vs 1.00

Derived from predicted scorelines (model means), not live match data — useful for pace vs vote-share sanity checks.

04
Match context

Expected-goals tilt and home-field rhythm (see xG on this page) usually explain whether the game stays open or compresses late.

Ask the Council about this match

Pro

10 AI models vote yes or no with this match's last-5 form, head-to-head, live status and the model picks above attached — not from memory. Then keep asking the same council follow-ups.

— Match context

Form, history, team news.

Kyoto Sanga
#16 · 10 PTS · GD -8
Last 5
W D D L W
10 GF · 9 GA
Recent fixtures
  • Newcastle Jets 5-2 W
  • Gamba Osaka 2-2 D
  • Kashima 2-2 D
  • Sanfrecce Hiroshima 3-0 L
  • Ratchaburi 1-0 W
Team news

No major injury updates in the current API snapshot.

Shimizu S-pulse
#13 · 14 PTS · GD -10
Last 5
L L D L W
5 GF · 14 GA
Recent fixtures
  • Sanfrecce Hiroshima 4-0 L
  • Machida Zelvia 0-5 L
  • Gamba Osaka 2-2 D
  • Yokohama F. Marinos 2-1 L
  • Mito Hollyhock 1-2 W
Team news

No major injury updates in the current API snapshot.

— Head to head

Last five meetings.

KYO 2 · D 1 · SHI 2

KYO VS SHI
1-2
AWAY WIN
May 2, 2026
SHI VS KYO
1-1
DRAW
Feb 14, 2026
KYO VS SHI
0-1
AWAY WIN
Sep 20, 2025
SHI VS KYO
1-2
AWAY WIN
Mar 16, 2025
KYO VS SHI
3-1
HOME WIN
Jul 10, 2024

Confidence trend

Cumulative average confidence in table order.

First model Last model

Betting tips (AI-signal view)

Educational only — not financial advice. We summarize how the AI picks cluster so you can cross-check with your own staking plan.

  • Lean with the plurality: when 10% of models side with Kyoto Sanga, treat that as the default script unless late team news breaks the assumptions.
  • Watch the draw lane at 70% — tight J1 League games often compress toward stalemates when both midfields win the second-ball.
  • If you chase “best bets today” narratives, require alignment between the headline pick and the score-frequency table; conflicting signals usually mean thinner edge.

Odds & analysis (implied probabilities)

Implied fair percentages from the model vote share (normalized to 100%) approximate how a balanced market might price the 1X2 if it mirrored this panel — useful for odds analysis homework even though we do not quote sportsbook ticks here.

Kyoto Sanga
~10%
implied lean
Draw
~70%
implied lean
Shimizu S-pulse
~20%
implied lean

Over / under prediction (totals)

Model-derived xG sums to 1.90 goals in expectation. A notional totals line near 2.2 is consistent with that pace (rounded for readability). If your sportsbook posts a similar number, compare juice and live team news before deciding either side of the total.

Handicap prediction (spread-style read)

When Kyoto Sanga is priced as the stronger side in the model vote, a −1 handicap narrative only clears if the most common scorelines include multi-goal wins. Cross-check the score-frequency list: if tight one-goal wins dominate, Asian handicaps near pick’em or −0.5 / −0.75 splits often fit the story better than a full −1.5 sell.

BTTS prediction (both teams to score)

With combined offensive weight near 1.90 xG, a heuristic “both teams score” prior lands around 55% yes before defensive adjustments. If several top models forecast clean-sheet pathways, downgrade BTTS enthusiasm even when the raw xG sum looks juicy.

Best bet framing (consensus-led)

Our headline best bet label follows the consensus recommendation: Shimizu S-pulse win. Pair that with the confidence band (Low) — high dispersion across models usually argues for smaller stake or pass, even when the headline pick looks tempting for a today prediction card on social.

Match overview

Looking for a today prediction on Kyoto Sanga vs Shimizu S-pulse in J1 League? TuringStats aggregates multiple AI scorelines into one readable page so you can see who the models favor, the mean predicted score shown in the hero (1 - 1; the frequency chart below lists the most common exact scorelines), and implied splits before kickoff.

This prediction hub is written for readers comparing betting tips-style language with transparent model votes — not a single black-box call. The headline read is Shimizu S-pulse win, with vote shares roughly 10% / 70% / 20% home, draw, and away (rounded).

If you are asking who will win Kyoto Sanga vs Shimizu S-pulse, start with the consensus strip and model table, then cross-check form and injuries in Match context further down — that order keeps the strongest signals first.

Explore more

Keep browsing today prediction coverage and league hubs.

Related matches

— Journal

Articles linked to these clubs or AI forecasting.

Ask multiple AIs about this match.

10 models vote yes or no with this match's last-5 form, head-to-head, live status and our model picks attached — not from memory. Then ask follow-ups to the same council.