Chicago White Sox at Cleveland Guardians, MLB forecast
Win probability
Starts from the pregame forecast, then moves with the score and the time left after each inning. Above the line favors CLE.
Game center
From the ESPN box score.
Top performers
White Sox- Munetaka MurakamiBatting2-4, 1 HR, 2 RBI
- Grant TaylorPitching4.0 IP, 0 ER, 6 K
Guardians- Nathaniel LoweBatting1-2
- Parker MessickPitching4.1 IP, 2 ER, 6 K
Scoring summary
- 7C. Montgomery doubled to left, Teel scored.3–0
- 4Murakami homered to right (440 feet), Vargas scored.2–0
The pick
Reconstructed from what was known before the game: the ratings at that point and the closing line.
Guardians 57%
Forecast Elo ratings alone
How often that comes true: MLB favorites the forecast gave 55–60% have won 55.5% of 2,596 graded games.
- Market
- CLE 57%
- ML CHW +124 / CLE -149
- Pre-line forecast
- CLE 56%
- Elo + market-implied
- Elo ratings
- CLE 54%
- Ratings vs. market
- −2.9 pts
- CLE: Elo 54.4%, market 57.3%
- Fair odds
- CLE -134
- CHW +134 · the forecast as odds, no margin
- Pregame projection
- CHW 2.9 – 3.6 CLE
- Margin from the forecast, posted total 6.5
How the number is built
Elo inputs in rating points (higher favors that team; 25–28 Elo is about a point of spread in football and basketball), then how the pieces combine.
| Factor | CHW | CLE | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Team rating | 1502 | 1510 | Elo entering the game; 1500 is league average |
| Home field | — | +18 | Worth 18 Elo in MLB |
| Starting pitchers | +6 | +11 | CHW: Hagen Smith: team allows 0.32 fewer runs than with its usual starter (≈2 weighted starts) · CLE: Parker Messick: team allows 0.55 fewer runs than with its usual starter (≈10 weighted starts) |
| Elo ratings | CLE +31 Elo | CLE 54.4% | |
| Market-implied ratings | CLE 56.3% | Team strength as past closing lines priced it, same game context | |
| Pre-line forecast | CLE 56.0% | 15% Elo, 85% market-implied (log-odds blend) | |
| Forecast | CLE 57.3% | Follows the market (vig removed): in testing, adding the ratings made it less accurate | |
Tale of the tape
This season coming into the game, regular season, each number with its league rank (the longer the bar, the higher). Home and road: the host's record at home against the visitor's on the road. Opponent Elo: how strong the teams each has played are, 1st the toughest.
| CHW | Stat | CLE |
|---|---|---|
| 5th of 304.8 | Runs scored | 4.224th of 30 |
| 15th of 304.4 | Runs allowed | 4.18th of 30 |
| 9th of 30+0.3 | Margin | +0.113th of 30 |
| 5th of 307–3 | Last 10 | 8–21st of 30 |
| 20th of 3036–45 | Road vs home | 41–4019th of 30 |
| 23rd of 301497 | Opponent Elo | 149526th of 30 |
| 15th of 301502 | Elo rating | 151011th of 30 |
Rating history
Each team's Elo over the last two seasons. Hover or drag to compare on any date.
Recent form
Last five results, and whether the forecast hit.
Against the line
How each team has done against the closing spread and total, coming into this game.
| This season |  CHW |  CLE |
|---|---|---|
| Run line | 89–75 | 81–81 |
| Last 10 | 8–2 | 9–1 |
| Favorite | 22–34 | 32–59 |
| Underdog | 67–41 | 49–22 |
| Overs–unders | 94–68–2 | 77–83–2 |
| Overs–unders, last 10 | 7–3 | 4–5–1 |
Against each game's closing line. Books set every line knowing these records: across 3,901 past games, the team with the better record against the spread so far that season covered 51.2%, short of the 52.4% a standard −110 bet needs, and over/under streaks held 48.0% of the time. They describe the past.
Head to head
CHW 22–30 CLE in their last 52 meetings; the forecast called 33 of 52.