MON 1-1 CAG · 38% PAR 1-1 TOR · 39% TOT 2-0 COV · 54% GET 1-1 RAY · 38% FEN 2-1 SLA · 45% SAB 0-3 BOR · 66% LIV 2-0 VIL · 51% MAN 3-0 AEK · 65% PAR 2-1 BAR · 44% VFB 0-1 ATL · 42% ASR 2-0 SLO · 58% FCP 2-1 PSV · 43% NAP 2-0 BOD · 54% COM 1-2 MAN · 46% MON 1-1 CAG · 38% PAR 1-1 TOR · 39% TOT 2-0 COV · 54% GET 1-1 RAY · 38% FEN 2-1 SLA · 45% SAB 0-3 BOR · 66% LIV 2-0 VIL · 51% MAN 3-0 AEK · 65% PAR 2-1 BAR · 44% VFB 0-1 ATL · 42% ASR 2-0 SLO · 58% FCP 2-1 PSV · 43% NAP 2-0 BOD · 54% COM 1-2 MAN · 46%
Major League Soccer · Regular Season - 34 Oct 17, 2026 · 23:30 · UTC Boston Stadium, Boston Match Finished · 90'

New England Revolution
vs
Chicago Fire.

Quick answer

Who will win New England Revolution vs Chicago Fire?

Final score: New England Revolution 1–0 Chicago Fire. Before kickoff, 9 of 10 AI models pick New England Revolution to win (90%); the consensus was right. The AI predicted score was 2–1.

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

Head-to-head history → New England Revolution form Chicago Fire form

10 AI models read this match. The plurality on 1X2 leans toward New England Revolution (9 of 10 models). The mean predicted score (rounded from all models) is 2–1 at 40% mean confidence (Low band) — see the strip and table below.

Who do you think will win?

Vote before kick-off and compare with AI

10 AI models · council in session Live match data · Pro

Still not sure? Ask 10 AIs at once:
“Will New England Revolution beat Chicago Fire in their upcoming match?”

Every model votes yes or no and defends it in a sentence or two. Attach this match's last-5 form, head-to-head and the picks above so they argue from real data — then keep asking the same council follow-ups.

Ask the Council Free today · sign in with Google to convene the council
— Consensus

Where the panel lands.

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

New England Revolution win 90%

9 / 10 models

Draw 10%

1 / 10 models

Chicago Fire win 0%

0 / 10 models

— Model breakdown

10 picks. Receipts attached.

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

#
Model
Pick
Score
Conf.
Reasoning
01
GPT-5.6 Luna
New England Revolution win
2–1
51%
With no form or head-to-head data supplied, New England’s home venue provides the clearest edge. MLS scoring variance makes a narrow, moderately open home win more plausible than a dominant result.
02
Claude Sonnet 5
New England Revolution win
2–1
46%
Late-season home fixture with modest edge for New England at Boston; Chicago's road form often inconsistent, but no strong form data available to justify higher confidence.
03
Gemini 3.8 Flash
New England Revolution win
2–1
48%
New England typically leverages home advantage against a Chicago side that consistently concedes on the road, leading to a competitive home victory.
04
Grok 4.6
New England Revolution win
1–0
42%
No H2H or form given; MLS regular-season home edge at Boston Stadium favors a narrow Revolution win in a likely tight, low-scoring game.
05
DeepSeek V4 Pro
New England Revolution win
1–0
52%
Home edge at Boston Stadium and typically tight MLS meetings between these sides; low-scoring game favors a narrow New England win.
06
Qwen 3.8 Max
New England Revolution win
1–0
42%
Thin context with no H2H or form data; home advantage at Boston Stadium gives slight edge in a likely tight, low-scoring affair.
07
Mistral Medium 3.5
New England Revolution win
2–1
58%
Home advantage at Boston Stadium; Revolution typically strong in late-season fixtures, Fire inconsistent away.
08
Kimi K3
Draw
1–1
48%
No H2H data and thin form context; MLS late-season game between mid-table sides profiles tight, with home edge modest and a low-scoring stalemate the most likely single line.
09
GLM 5.3
New England Revolution win
2–1
45%
No H2H or form data available; mid-table MLS sides at Boston Stadium typically play tight, so a low-scoring draw is the safest calibrated guess.
10
MiMo V2.5 Pro
New England Revolution win
1–0
42%
No H2H or form data available, so I lean on New England's Boston venue edge and MLS home base rate. A tight, low-scoring home win is the most defensible line.
— Scoreline frequency

How often each scoreline showed up.

5 of 10 models settled on 2–1. That convergence is a strong scoreline signal—many fixtures fan out wider across the panel.

  • 2–1
    5 models
  • 1–0
    4 models
  • 1–1
    1 model

Match overview

Looking for a today prediction on New England Revolution vs Chicago Fire in Major League Soccer? 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 (2 - 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 New England Revolution win, with vote shares roughly 90% / 10% / 0% home, draw, and away (rounded).

If you are asking who will win New England Revolution vs Chicago Fire, 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.

— Aggregated insights

What’s moving the panel.

01
Consensus favors New England Revolution

90% of models lean home — the clearest cluster on this fixture before kickoff.

02
Low confidence

Mean 40% across the panel with real dispersion — compare unanimous calls vs split tickets in the model table.

03
xG tilt 1.50 vs 0.60

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.

Confidence trend

Cumulative average confidence in table order.

First model Last model
Result check

Actual New England Revolution win · AI New England Revolution win

1X2: Miss Score: Off
— Match context

Form, history, team news.

New England Revolution
#3 · 52 PTS · GD +8
Last 5
W W L L W
6 GF · 9 GA
Recent fixtures
  • Chicago Fire 1-0 W
  • FC Cincinnati 2-3 W
  • Seattle Sounders 0-3 L
  • Real Salt Lake 3-0 L
  • Chicago Fire 1-2 W
Team news

No major injury updates in the current API snapshot.

Chicago Fire
#4 · 48 PTS · GD +8
Last 5
L L W W W
7 GF · 6 GA
Recent fixtures
  • New England Revolution 1-0 L
  • Philadelphia Union 1-3 L
  • New York City FC 2-1 W
  • Vancouver Whitecaps 3-1 W
  • Charlotte 0-1 W
Team news

No major injury updates in the current API snapshot.

— Head to head

Last five meetings.

NEW 2 · D 0 · CHI 0

NEW VS CHI
1-0
HOME WIN
Oct 17, 2026
CHI VS NEW
1-2
AWAY WIN
Sep 13, 2026

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 90% of models side with New England Revolution, treat that as the default script unless late team news breaks the assumptions.
  • Watch the draw lane at 10% — tight Major League Soccer 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.

New England Revolution
~90%
implied lean
Draw
~10%
implied lean
Chicago Fire
~0%
implied lean

Over / under prediction (totals)

Model-derived xG sums to 2.10 goals in expectation. A notional totals line near 2.4 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 New England Revolution 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 2.10 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: New England Revolution 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.

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.