
CHC
88-65

CIN
77-76
Postgame · final
Line score, top performers, model verdict against Vegas, and how the closing line shaped up vs the actual outcome.
Final
CIN wins
CHC 0 · CIN 1 (by 1)
Model verdict
✗ Missed
Picked CHC +4pp
Against the spread
No spread
Line score
| Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | R |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHC | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| CIN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
What's next
See every model edge for tonight's remaining games and tomorrow's slate side-by-side, or jump straight to DraftKings & FanDuel for the full board.
21+ · we may earn a referral fee · your odds unchanged.
Data via ESPN · MLB Stats API · Baseball Savant
Historical comparables
basis · elo_diff + win_prob + day_of_year + total_runs
Recap · MLB
incinnati Reds held off Chicago Cubs, 1–0. It came down to the final possession.
ESPN didn't ship a closing line for this game; book settlement summary unavailable.
ByTheOnemodel/auto-generated · live odds + scouting data/refreshes with the page
CHC · top performer

Seiya Suzuki
RF
3-1
AB-H
0
R
0
RBI
CIN · top performer

Austin Hays
LF
3-2
AB-H
1
R
0
RBI
MLB · Box scoreSTATCAST


CHC
88-65
| Batting | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player | H-AB | AB | R | H | RBI | HR | BB | K |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
SPRINT25.716 | ||||||||
| 0-4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
SPRINT28.278 | ||||||||
| 0-4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
SPRINT27.662 | ||||||||
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
SPRINT24.53 | ||||||||
| 1-3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
SPRINT27.457 | ||||||||
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
| Team | 1-29 | 29 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 |
| Pitching | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player | IP | H | R | ER | BB | K | HR |
| 7.0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 11 | 0 | |
| 1.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| Team | 8.0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 12 | 0 |
CIN
77-76
| Batting | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player | H-AB | AB | R | H | RBI | HR | BB | K |
| 0-4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
SPRINT26.838 | ||||||||
| 1-4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
| 2-3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
SPRINT27.354 | ||||||||
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | |
SPRINT26.530 | ||||||||
| 1-3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
SPRINT2872 | ||||||||
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| 0-3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| 0-2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | |
| Team | 4-28 | 28 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 12 |
| Pitching | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player | IP | H | R | ER | BB | K | HR |
| 9.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 | |
| Team | 9.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 |
Pitcher arsenals · per-pitch detail
Statcast · via Baseball SavantCHC
CIN
Stat compare
Headline stats · full table below
1
Hits
4
0
Runs
1
0
Errors
1
Current series
CIN wins series 5-2
Season series
Series tied 5-5
Headlines · top performers
Biggest swing: 12pp · Bottom 4th Inning
S. Suzuki
RFBatter of the game
1-for-3 · 0.667 OPS
C. Rea
SPStarting pitcherQuality start
7.0 IP · 11 K · 1 ER · 4 H
A. Hays
LFBatter of the game
2-for-3 · 1 R · 1.333 OPS
H. Greene
SPStarting pitcherGem
9.0 IP · 9 K · 0 ER · 1 H · 1 BB
How it ended
CIN beat CHC 1-0.
Win probability
CIN vs CHC
Clutch moments · top swings
ranked by WP impactBenson · doubled to center, Hays scored.
Busch · flied out to right.
Linescore (innings)
| Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | R |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHC | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| CIN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | 1 |
Period scoring
CHC won 0 · CIN won 1
Inn 1
Inn 2
Inn 3
Inn 4
Benson 1
Inn 5
Inn 6
Inn 7
Inn 8
Inn 9
Play-by-play · 433 plays
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Happ struck out looking.
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
+5pp
Pitch 5 : Strike 3 Looking
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 4 : Ball 1
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 3 : Strike 2 Foul
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 2 : Strike 2 Swinging
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 1 : Strike 1 Foul
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Hunter Greene pitches to Ian Happ
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Hoerner struck out looking.BIG MOMENT
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
+6pp
Pitch 3 : Strike 3 Looking
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 2 : Strike 2 Swinging
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 1 : Strike 1 Swinging
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Hunter Greene pitches to Nico Hoerner
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Busch flied out to right.BIG MOMENT
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
+8pp
Pitch 8 : Ball In Play
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 7 : Strike 2 Foul
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 6 : Ball 3
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 5 : Ball 2
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 4 : Strike 2 Foul
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 3 : Ball 1
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 2 : Strike 2 Swinging
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Pitch 1 : Strike 1 Looking
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Hunter Greene pitches to Michael Busch
·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Hayes at third base.
CHC 0·CIN 1
Top of the 9th inning
CHC 0·CIN 1
End of the 8th inning
CHC 0·CIN 1
· ·
CHC 0·CIN 1
Lux grounded out to catcher.
· ·
CHC 0·CIN 1
−2pp
Team stats
CHC
Away
Stat
CIN
Home
0
Runs
1
1
Hits
4
0
Errors
1
2
TB
6
0
HR
0
1
BB
1
9
K
12
5
LOB
9
STATCAST · Tonight’s standouts
5 of 15 players in cohortPlayer projections
Per-player stat projections built from a recency-weighted blend of the last ten games, season average, and matchup context. Confidence reflects sample size and stability — the top of each list is who to watch.
123
projections · 78 high confidence
Strikeouts
Hits
Total bases
RBIs
Earned runs
Projections recompute every 30 minutes · prop lines plug in once sportsbook ingest lands
Model ensemble · how the prediction is built
Each sub-model uses a different rating substrate. Bayesian model averaging weights them by rolling Brier score so the ensemble inherits each model's strengths. Disagreement flags games where the sub-models don't see eye-to-eye — lower confidence, wider band.
39.7%
ensemble · CHC favored
Elo Static
45.6%
P(CIN win)
33%
weight
Elo Pitching
47.1%
P(CIN win)
33%
weight
Bullpen Park
46.5%
P(CIN win)
34%
weight
Disagreement
0.61 pp
weighted σ across sub-models
Confidence
96% · high
maps from disagreement
Substrate count
3 / 3 active
ones with full inputs tonight
Weights recalibrated nightly on a 90-day rolling window with strict point-in-time correctness — no model gets credit for a game it hasn't seen. Headline % is Platt-scaled per league; sub-model rows show raw BMA inputs.