Forecast Record recorded 3 settled live picks by Nick Hennion before kick-off across 3 matches between 6 and . Won 1 of 3 settled live picks at our recorded market prices.
Tracking level: Probation — day 29 of 30 needed for Tracked · 8 predictions checked against the final score
How tracking levels work
Tracked requires 30 predictions checked against the final score over 30 days in at least 2 weeks. Established requires 100 predictions checked against the final score with at least 90 days of history. Tracking-level rules
Record summary
1 won / 2 lost; average odds 2.31
Small sample (3) · 3 settled picks · picks settled under method v2.2
Eligible prices were available for 3 of the 8 selections checked against the result.
Forecast Record recorded 3 settled live picks by Nick Hennion before kick-off across 3 matches between 6 and 7 November 2026. Won 1 of 3 settled live picks at our recorded market prices. Of the 87 predictions we hold for Nick Hennion, 21 are linked to matches: 9 were recorded by us before kick-off and 12 first found after kick-off. Figures as of 7 November 2026.
Previously published citation
Forecast Record recorded 3 settled live picks by Nick Hennion before kick-off across 3 matches between 6 and 7 November 2026. Won 1 of 3 settled live picks at our recorded market prices. Of the 87 predictions we hold for Nick Hennion, 21 are linked to matches: 9 were recorded by us before kick-off and 12 first found after the match. Figures as of .
Statement without a matchwithout a stated priceExcluded from the return
Next on the list is the Lions at +220. Dan Campbell’s squad, which continues to get decimated by defensive injuries, sits at 2-0 in division play.sports.betmgm.com
Nick Hennion on Forecast Record: 9 pre-match predictions recorded (6–7 November 2026). Full log: https://forecastrecord.com/authors/nick-hennion/
Archive of the previous page layout (kept for the record)
Last change · Price rule: independent odds snapshot · Sample: 3 settled live picks, 3 matches · View changes to this record
Data changes. Added later: 10 records added on Found after kick-off; 1 record added on Found after kick-off; 1 record added on Found after kick-off. The current numbers include them; numbers published earlier, including the record before each match, do not change.
Most of this history was found after the matches. Of the 2 selections in this historical price series, 0 have a pre-match archive copy and 2 were first Found after kick-off.
To link to this record from your site or bio, copy the line below. It states only the facts of this record.
<a href="https://forecastrecord.com/authors/nick-hennion/">Record tracked by Forecast Record since 9 October 2026 · 87 predictions · last change 4 November 2026</a>
Recorded before kick-off: supporting evidence
Eligible price: a market price that meets the price rule of its part of the record; the return is calculated on picks with one. Definition.
4 predictions recorded before kick-off. Right in 2 of 3.
Prices implied by market
By market: Over/under goals 1 of 2 (1 W / 1 L, average odds 2.39) Small sample (2); Match result 0 of 1 (0 W / 1 L, average odds 2.15) Small sample (1).
The implied share is the average of 1 ÷ price; it includes the bookmaker margin, so it is slightly above a fair chance. Markets with low prices are won more often, so a share of picks won says little on its own.
Other prices on the same picks: each row compares two prices on exactly the same selections
Price
Same picks
Period
At that price
Return at our recorded market price
Author-quoted price
3
6–7 November 2026
−50 points
−32.50 points
Closing price
1
−100 points
−100 points
Found after kick-off · 2 settled after-match picks · won 1 of 2
First Found after kick-off; the date is the one the source states.
12 predictions; 2 checked against the final score.
2 settled selections across 2 matches, 17–18 September 2024.
Reconstructed at archived prices: +33 points.
Eligible prices were available for 2 of the 2 selections checked against the result.
Prices are the last pre-match price in archive (~8–15 h before kick-off), bookmaker margin included.
Outcome accuracy vs implied by prices
Won 1 of 2 decided picks; the prices of the same picks implied 41.5%.
The implied share is the average of 1 ÷ price; it includes the bookmaker margin, so it is slightly above a fair chance. Markets with low prices are won more often, so a share of picks won says little on its own.
Other prices on the same picks: each row compares two prices on exactly the same selections
Price
Same picks
Period
At that price
Reconstructed at archived prices
Author-quoted price
2
17–18 September 2024
+20 points
+33 points
An author-quoted price is the price the article offered; the headline return uses the market price in the last column.
What kind of number is this?
Measured
Settled by us from the final score. Supporting evidence: Directly observed in a source or timestamped capture. Here: the moment we first captured each prediction; our pre-match market snapshot of each settled pick.
Stated
The author’s own claim, shown as published. Reported by the source; not independently confirmed. Here: the publication date a source page shows; the price an author quoted.
Calculated
Derived from the listed inputs under a published rule. Here: outcomes against the final score; returns, intervals and the share of picks won.
Unknown
Not established from the evidence available. Here: the market price at the moment a restored pick was published.
How the prices this author stated compare with an independent market price of the same selection. Calculated from the picks where both prices are known; a gap can come from market movement or from one bookmaker offering more than the market, so it describes the stated prices, not the reason for them.
Stated price against the market, threshold 5.0%
Compared with
Picks
>5.0% above
>5.0% below
Within
Median
Our market price when we first recorded the pick
3
0 (0.0%)
1
2
−4.8%
Stated price against the market · For each basis of comparison, the share of picks whose stated price was more than 5.0% below the market, within 5.0%, or more than 5.0% above. · more than 5.0% below · within 5.0% · more than 5.0% above · Our market price when we first recorded the pick · 1 of 3 more than 5.0% below · 2 of 3 within 5.0%Each bar is 100.0% of the picks compared on that basis; numbers are picks. The table above gives the same counts and the median difference.
Our market price when we first recorded the pick — our market price for the same selection when we first recorded the pick (median of bookmakers in our price feed; failing that, the first price within 2 hours after, always before kick-off). Difference = the author's stated price ÷ the market price of the same selection − 1. A pick counts as above the market when the stated price is more than 5.0% higher. Each basis is its own comparison; they are never added together. A pair whose prices differ more than twofold is marked “price disputed”: it is probably not the same selection, so it is left out of this comparison and of every return at the author’s price until a manual check confirms the price. A price that the quoted text does not give is marked “price disputed” in the same way.
Here a pick counts as settled when it has a result at any recorded price; the numbers at the top use only the price rule of their own part of the record.
Statements that are not predictions: 82 opinions and 1,211 not about a match.
How this return was calculated
Every settled pick in “Recorded before kick-off, at our recorded market price” is a stake of 100 points at our recorded market price, a pre-match snapshot of the same selection. The net result (−32.50 points) is the sum of the profit and loss of these 3 settled live picks; the return is the net result divided by the total staked (300 points), void picks excluded. Definition of return on stakes · How a pick is settled.
Other prices of the same picks are compared row by row in each part of the record above; they are never added to this number.
Separate comparison window — last 90 days: −32.50 points on 3 live picks settled in this window · 3 matches · 6–7 November 2026 (calculated, method v2.2). How comparison windows are counted
Changes to this record
Earlier figures stay here with the reason: new results, extended coverage, a correction or a method change. Corrections are also listed in the corrections log.
New results ·
Before
−100.00 points on 1 settled pick across 1 match · independent odds snapshot · method 2.2
After
−32.50 points on 3 settled picks across 3 matches · independent odds snapshot · method 2.2
2 new settled picks from matches played after the previous record update.
New results ·
Before
no published headline number
After
−100.00 points on 1 settled pick across 1 match · independent odds snapshot · method 2.2
First headline number for this record: 1 settled pick in the series “independent odds snapshot”.
Data corrected ·
Before
−100.00 points on 1 settled pick across 1 match · independent odds snapshot · method 2.2
After
no published headline number
The headline number is no longer published: the record has no settled pick in its headline series in this version.
New results ·
Before
no published headline number
After
−100.00 points on 1 settled pick across 1 match · independent odds snapshot · method 2.2
First headline number for this record: 1 settled pick in the series “independent odds snapshot”.
Who this is
Last recorded by us
, the date of this page's data
Observed
—
Channels
website
Statements other than predictions (62 shown)
“If the Vikings do in fact miss the playoffs, I predict it’s because Green Bay makes it.” — · source
“It’s my belief that, at best, Minnesota finishes with one more divisional win.” — · source
“I remain intrigued by a Minnesota missed postseason due to the upcoming schedule.” — · source
“Yet history tells us at least one of these teams will miss the playoffs.” — · source
“A world exists where all four teams finish the season with winning records.” — · source
“Early this season, underdogs were consistently capturing outright victories.” — · source
“If they can limit the Bucs ground game, I have no faith in Mayfield to lead Tampa Bay to victory.” — · source
“It offers a promising sell-high spot on the visitors given how they’ve achieved their success.” — · source
“However, the initial move toward Tampa Bay and the rest discrepancy prohibit me from taking on the underdog” — · source
“This game likely comes down to which Bears defense shows up.” — · source
“Infamously, Mayfield failed to complete a pass on Sunday vs. Atlanta.” — · source
“If there’s a matchup case for Tampa Bay, it’s that Simmons fails to improve Chicago’s meager run defense” — · source
“That volatility is enough to make me believe these teams are closer in quality than the line reflects.” — · source
“I want to tread carefully with the Bears right now.” — · source
“But I trust the Bills offense more in the perceived strength-on-strength matchup.” — · source
“Both teams are lucky to have as many wins as they do.” — · source
“Meanwhile, the Vikings defense has largely achieved its rating against bad units.” — · source
“But the case for optimism is that Buffalo’s poor performances this season have come against good offenses.” — · source
“Buffalo’s defense remains a potential liability” — · source
“It’s also my philosophy that when two good teams play, fade the weakest unit.” — · source
Rockets vs Suns Prediction, Odds, Best Bets & Team Props – NBA, Nov. 7