Arsenal are 2nd in the real table but top of the rounded-xG table, with the best xG difference (+4.04) and only 4.7 xG conceded. Second place undersells them.
Back to the trend of the day: Likely starters and injured or banned players in this weekend's Premier League
Poly Rating · from the trend of the day
Premier League xPts Table 2026-27 After 6 Games
Manchester City have won all six games for 18 points, yet expected-points models give them only 10.9 to 12.9, while Nottingham Forest sit 15th with the second-best xG-scoreline record.
- No. 1: Nottingham Forest
- 10 places
01Final list
The leading AIs each built their own list of ten independently. Here is one result that is easy to check: every place has a reason, a source, and the list of AIs that included it.
A bright badge means this AI put the entry on its list. A dim badge means it did not.
- 1
Nottingham Forest
Forest are 15th on 5 points but 2nd on 12 in the xG-scoreline table, the biggest gap at 13 places. They have scored 5 goals from 10.5 xG.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta.In their lists: Claude: 4 · ChatGPT: 1 · Grok: 1 · Gemini: 7 · MiMo: 7 · DeepSeek: 1
What each AI noted 6
- Claudeplace 4
Squawka's xG scoreline table puts them on 12 points against 5 actual, and they were goalless in all three home games.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 1
15th in reality but second in Squawka's xG-scoreline table: a 13-place reversal driven by five goals from approximately ten expected.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 1
5 points actual vs ~11.4 xPts — largest underperformance; high xG but poor conversion.
Source ↗ - Geminiplace 7
Riding razor-thin margins into 8th place (10 pts) while conceding 10.4 xGA, yielding a +3.1 point surplus.
- MiMoplace 7
Five goals from 10.13 xG — 'wayward Forest' are the division's most wasteful attack, and the table undersells their play.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 1
Actual 15th, expected-points 3rd — a 10-place rank gap and six-point shortfall, the clearest “unlucky” team in the league.
Source ↗
6 AIs put it here - 2
Manchester City
City have a perfect 18 points against 10.9–12.9 xPts in three models, and the rounded-xG table has them only 5th. They also have the league's best conversion rate (19.1%), so this is partly finishing skill rather than pure luck.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta, MiMo.In their lists: Claude: 10 · ChatGPT: 2 · Grok: 3 · Gemini: 6 · DeepSeek: 2
What each AI noted 5
- Claudeplace 10
6 wins, 18 points, GD +11, and the league's best non-penalty xG per shot (0.15) and conversion (19.1%) after five games. This looks like lasting finishing, not luck.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 2
Six wins from six games, yet only fifth in the rounded-xG table; Statz calculates an extraordinary +7.1-point surplus.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 3
18 points actual vs ~11.7 xPts — biggest overperformance from clinical finishing.
Source ↗ - Geminiplace 6
Flawless on paper with 18 points from 18, City runs +3.4 points ahead of their 14.6 Opta xPts baseline.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 2
Perfect 18 points from 18, but Opta’s xPts has them near 11 — the biggest points overperformance in the division.
Source ↗
5 AIs put it here - 3
Bournemouth
Bournemouth are 18th on 3 points but 8th in the rounded-xG table, and they have dropped a league-high 9 points from winning positions. The xPts models disagree on the gap: Statz 9.2, The Fishy 6.5.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta, Gemini.In their lists: Claude: 3 · ChatGPT: 3 · Grok: 2 · MiMo: 5 · DeepSeek: 7
What each AI noted 5
- Claudeplace 3
6.95 xPts but 3 points and no wins; they also dropped nine points from winning positions.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 3
Three actual points against 9.2 Statz xPts; Squawka moves Bournemouth from 18th to eighth.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 2
3 points actual vs ~9.35 xPts; creating chances but not scoring them.
Source ↗ - MiMoplace 5
18th with three points — yet they've led in four of five games and thrown away a league-high nine points from winning positions.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 7
18th in the table but ninth on xG difference and 7.9 xPts — the biggest understatement outside Forest.
Source ↗
5 AIs put it here - 4
Sunderland
Sunderland are 17th in the real table but 6th in the xG-scoreline table, an 11-place gap. Their 4 points compare with 7.64 Opta xPts after five games.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta, Gemini.In their lists: Claude: 2 · ChatGPT: 4 · Grok: 6 · MiMo: 3 · DeepSeek: 10
What each AI noted 5
- Claudeplace 2
xPts of 7.64 against no more than 4 actual points: the biggest unlucky gap in the Analyst's figures.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 4
17th in the real table but sixth in Squawka's xG reconstruction, with a reported 11-place gap.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 6
4 points actual vs ~8.45 xPts; strong xG not matched by results.
Source ↗ - MiMoplace 3
17th in the real table, 6th in Squawka's xG-scoreline standings — an 11-place swing no other club matches.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 10
17th in the table, 10th on xG difference and 7.9 xPts — a seven-place understatement.
Source ↗
5 AIs put it here - 5
Manchester United
United are 13th on 6 points but 4th in both Opta xPts (8.3, after matchday 5) and the rounded-xG table. They have taken the most shots in the league (113) at the fifth-lowest conversion rate.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta.In their lists: Claude: 5 · ChatGPT: 6 · Grok: 9 · Gemini: 1 · MiMo: 1 · DeepSeek: 4
What each AI noted 6
- Claudeplace 5
Most touches in the opposition box (182) and fewest conceded (92), yet 13th on 6 points; Squawka's xG table has them on 11.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 6
13th in reality but fourth by rounded xG, with a positive underlying xG difference despite zero actual goal difference.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 9
6 points actual vs ~8.9 xPts; high xG but fewer points.
Source ↗ - Geminiplace 1
Languishing in 11th with 8 points despite Opta's model ranking them 4th with 11.4 xPts—a massive -3.4 point underperformance.
- MiMoplace 1
Fifth for xG and top of Opta's expected-points tree — yet 12th in the table: the biggest luck gap in the league at −4.2 points.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 4
13th in the table but fourth on xG difference — a nine-place understatement that makes them the biggest “good play, bad results” club after Forest.
Source ↗
6 AIs put it here - 6
Newcastle United
Newcastle had 8 points from 4.01 Opta xPts after five games, the lowest xPts in the league. By six games Statz puts the gap at only +2.0, so it is shrinking.
Included it: Claude, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: ChatGPT, Meta, Grok, Gemini.In their lists: Claude: 1 · MiMo: 2 · DeepSeek: 3
What each AI noted 3
- Claudeplace 1
8 points from 4.01 xPts after five games, the lowest xPts in the league. Nothing else in the data is as big a gap in the lucky direction.
Source ↗ - MiMoplace 2
Ninth in the real table, dead last on expected points in two different models — and they've lost the xG battle in every match.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 3
11th in the table, 19th on xG difference and 20th on xPts — the table flatters the Magpies by eight places.
Source ↗
3 AIs put it here - 7
Tottenham Hotspur
Spurs are 19th and winless, but 9th in the rounded-xG table, and Opta xPts moved them from 20th to 12th. Their xG difference of −1.94 shows some of the problem is real.
Included it: ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek. Did not include: Claude, Meta.In their lists: ChatGPT: 7 · Grok: 5 · Gemini: 8 · MiMo: 4 · DeepSeek: 8
What each AI noted 5
- ChatGPTplace 7
Only three goals in six games: Squawka's nine rounded-xG points would move Spurs ten places up the table.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 5
3 points actual vs ~7.7 xPts; winless start but better chance quality.
Source ↗ - Geminiplace 8
7th on 10 points despite controlling the 4th best net xG differential in the league (+4.2).
Source ↗ - MiMoplace 4
Winless after six games, yet 12th on Opta xPts and 10th for xG against — the table punishes Spurs far harder than the numbers do.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 8
19th in the table, but expected points say 5.7 and FotMob’s model says eight — a softer understatement than the table looks.
Source ↗
5 AIs put it here - 8
Fulham
Fulham are bottom on 2 points, yet Statz gives them 8.0 xPts (−6.0) and the rounded-xG table puts them 13th.
Included it: ChatGPT, Grok, DeepSeek. Did not include: Claude, Meta, Gemini, MiMo.In their lists: ChatGPT: 5 · Grok: 4 · DeepSeek: 9
What each AI noted 3
- ChatGPTplace 5
Bottom with two points, but Statz credits Fulham with 8.0 xPts; the rounded-xG method would lift them to 13th.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 4
2 points actual vs ~6.8 xPts; position understates underlying numbers.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 9
Bottom of the table on two points, but 14th on xG difference — six places of understatement.
Source ↗
3 AIs put it here - 9
Hull City
Hull are 8th on 9 points but 17th in the rounded-xG table. They have a +2 goal difference against −2.13 xG difference, and the lowest build-up attack rate in a Premier League season since 2018-19.
Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Grok, DeepSeek. Did not include: Meta, Gemini, MiMo.In their lists: Claude: 7 · ChatGPT: 8 · Grok: 7 · DeepSeek: 6
What each AI noted 4
- Claudeplace 7
9 points and 8th, despite the lowest build-up attack rate (0.4 per game) in a Premier League season since 2018-19. Judged from the stats; no xPts figure was found.
Source ↗ - ChatGPTplace 8
Eighth in actual standings but 17th in the xG-scoreline table; an eight-to-nine-place reversal depending on the comparison convention.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 7
9 points actual vs ~6.05 xPts — overperforming relative to chance quality.
Source ↗ - DeepSeekplace 6
Eighth in the table, 15th on xG difference and 16th on xPts — a seven-place overstatement.
Source ↗
4 AIs put it here - 10
Chelsea
Chelsea have scored 15 goals from 8.12 xG, the league's biggest finishing surplus. They are 6th in the real table but 12th in the rounded-xG table.
Included it: ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini, MiMo. Did not include: Claude, Meta, DeepSeek.In their lists: ChatGPT: 9 · Grok: 8 · Gemini: 2 · MiMo: 6
What each AI noted 4
- ChatGPTplace 9
Chelsea have 15 goals from just 8.12 Squawka xG, the league's largest positive finishing gap.
Source ↗ - Grokplace 8
10 points actual vs ~7.2 xPts; efficient in front of goal.
Source ↗ - Geminiplace 2
Sitting pretty in 3rd place with 13 points, yet Opta's shot simulations award them only 9.2 xPts (8th place).
- MiMoplace 6
15 goals from 8.84 xG — a +6.2 overperformance that is the league's biggest and the reason they sit above their process.
Source ↗
4 AIs put it here
02Worth knowing
What the AIs noticed while building the list.
Chelsea's 5–1 win over Bournemouth was a 1–1 draw on rounded xG. One hot finishing day can skew early-season tables.
Coventry have scored one goal from 4.88 xG, the league's biggest finishing shortfall, yet they have 6 points.
Brighton have the league's best goal difference (+13), better than City's +11, but sit 3rd on 13 points.
The sources cover different dates. The public Opta xPts figures stop at matchday 5, while the real table is after matchday 6, and one copy of Squawka's table dates from gameweek 4.
03Questions people ask
How does the Premier League table work?
A win is worth 3 points, a draw 1 and a defeat 0. Teams are ranked by points, then goal difference, then goals scored; City lead on 18 after six games.
Source ↗What is the Premier League table?
It is the standings of the 20 top-flight clubs over a 38-game season. After six rounds Manchester City have 18 points, Arsenal 15 and Brighton 13.
Source ↗Can you show the Premier League table?
The top six after six rounds are Manchester City 18, Arsenal 15, Brighton 13, Brentford 10, Everton 10 and Chelsea 10. Fulham are bottom on 2.
Source ↗Is the Premier League over?
No. Only 6 of the 38 rounds have been played, and matchweek 7 runs from 17 to 19 October 2026.
Source ↗04How we counted
In plain words, no formulas.
1The question
Top 10 Premier League Teams Whose Table Position Most Overstates or Understates Their Play After Six Rounds
2Why this topic
The reader sees which clubs have more points than their play suggests and which have fewer, and where two xG methods disagree about the same club. No single table shows this.
3Where it applies
Premier League 2026-27, after six rounds
4What we looked at
- Points gap between the actual table and Opta expected points (xPts)
- Rank gap between the actual table and the xG-difference ranking
- Agreement or disagreement between the Opta xPts method and the rounded-xG-scoreline method
- Direction, lucky or unlucky, so both ends of the table are covered
- Premier League (official table) — Actual points and goal difference after six rounds
- The Analyst (Opta) xPts — Expected points from shot-outcome probabilities; latest public figures are after matchday 5
- Squawka / Opta xG scoreline table — Each game rebuilt from rounded xG, then turned into points; updated 13 Oct after six rounds
- Statz xPts table — Expected points, xG and xGA for all 20 clubs over six games
5Who ranked
The leading AIs, each building its own list of ten independently and naming a source for every place: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Grok, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek.
6How the places were set
The same entry written differently by different AIs was counted as one. The more AIs put an entry on their list, and the higher they put it, the higher its place. "AI agreement" shows how many of the AIs had it on their own list. Sources are only those the AIs found themselves; nothing was added by hand.
05Each AI's own list
🇺🇸 Claude10 places · 4 notes
The same question, answered by Claude alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1Newcastle United
8 points from 4.01 xPts after five games, the lowest xPts in the league. Nothing else in the data is as big a gap in the lucky direction.
Source ↗ - 2Sunderland
xPts of 7.64 against no more than 4 actual points: the biggest unlucky gap in the Analyst's figures.
Source ↗ - 3Bournemouth
6.95 xPts but 3 points and no wins; they also dropped nine points from winning positions.
Source ↗ - 4Nottingham Forest
Squawka's xG scoreline table puts them on 12 points against 5 actual, and they were goalless in all three home games.
Source ↗ - 5Manchester United
Most touches in the opposition box (182) and fewest conceded (92), yet 13th on 6 points; Squawka's xG table has them on 11.
Source ↗ - 6Ipswich Town
Three wins and three defeats, GD -3, yet 10th on 9 points, helped by two stoppage-time winners.
Source ↗ - 7Hull City
9 points and 8th, despite the lowest build-up attack rate (0.4 per game) in a Premier League season since 2018-19. Judged from the stats; no xPts figure was found.
Source ↗ - 8Coventry City
One goal from 4.88 xG after five games (-3.88, the league's largest shortfall), yet 6 points, so results ran ahead of the finishing.
Source ↗ - 9Arsenal
Second on 15 points with a +5 goal difference; Squawka's xG table has them top on 13, so they are slightly ahead of their play.
Source ↗ - 10Manchester City
6 wins, 18 points, GD +11, and the league's best non-penalty xG per shot (0.15) and conversion (19.1%) after five games. This looks like lasting finishing, not luck.
Source ↗
What Claude noticed
Newcastle's 4.01 xPts is the lowest in the league, yet they have 8 points, so an overperforming table position should be read with care.
Coventry have scored one goal from 4.88 xG, the league's biggest shortfall, which suggests wasteful finishing that should regress.
Brighton's +13 goal difference is the best in the league, better than Manchester City's +11, but they sit third on 13 points.
Aston Villa's 4.56 xG is the league's lowest through five games.
🇺🇸 ChatGPT10 places · 4 notes
The same question, answered by ChatGPT alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1Nottingham Forest FC — Premier League 2026–27
15th in reality but second in Squawka's xG-scoreline table: a 13-place reversal driven by five goals from approximately ten expected.
Source ↗ - 2Manchester City FC — Premier League 2026–27
Six wins from six games, yet only fifth in the rounded-xG table; Statz calculates an extraordinary +7.1-point surplus.
Source ↗ - 3AFC Bournemouth — Premier League 2026–27
Three actual points against 9.2 Statz xPts; Squawka moves Bournemouth from 18th to eighth.
Source ↗ - 4Sunderland AFC — Premier League 2026–27
17th in the real table but sixth in Squawka's xG reconstruction, with a reported 11-place gap.
Source ↗ - 5Fulham FC — Premier League 2026–27
Bottom with two points, but Statz credits Fulham with 8.0 xPts; the rounded-xG method would lift them to 13th.
Source ↗ - 6Manchester United FC — Premier League 2026–27
13th in reality but fourth by rounded xG, with a positive underlying xG difference despite zero actual goal difference.
Source ↗ - 7Tottenham Hotspur FC — Premier League 2026–27
Only three goals in six games: Squawka's nine rounded-xG points would move Spurs ten places up the table.
Source ↗ - 8Hull City AFC — Premier League 2026–27
Eighth in actual standings but 17th in the xG-scoreline table; an eight-to-nine-place reversal depending on the comparison convention.
Source ↗ - 9Chelsea FC — Premier League 2026–27
Chelsea have 15 goals from just 8.12 Squawka xG, the league's largest positive finishing gap.
Source ↗ - 10Brighton & Hove Albion FC — Premier League 2026–27
Third in the actual and rounded-xG tables, yet Brighton's 18 goals substantially exceed their 11.71 Squawka xG.
Source ↗
What ChatGPT noticed
Nottingham Forest's 13-place improvement is the biggest in Squawka's reconstructed table: second on xG results but 15th in reality.
Manchester City's perfect 18-point start exceeds Statz's 10.9 expected points by 7.1; another model, The Fishy, estimates a smaller but still substantial 5.1-point surplus.
Chelsea's 5–1 win over Bournemouth came from a match that Squawka's rounded Opta xG values make 1–1. One spectacular finishing performance can substantially distort early-season judgments.
Arsenal are second in reality but first in Squawka's rounded-xG table, with the best raw xG differential at +4.04; this is why they are not among the ten largest misleading-table cases.
🇺🇸 Grok10 places · 3 notes
The same question, answered by Grok alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1Nottingham Forest
5 points actual vs ~11.4 xPts — largest underperformance; high xG but poor conversion.
Source ↗ - 2AFC Bournemouth
3 points actual vs ~9.35 xPts; creating chances but not scoring them.
Source ↗ - 3Manchester City
18 points actual vs ~11.7 xPts — biggest overperformance from clinical finishing.
Source ↗ - 4Fulham
2 points actual vs ~6.8 xPts; position understates underlying numbers.
Source ↗ - 5Tottenham Hotspur
3 points actual vs ~7.7 xPts; winless start but better chance quality.
Source ↗ - 6Sunderland
4 points actual vs ~8.45 xPts; strong xG not matched by results.
Source ↗ - 7Hull City
9 points actual vs ~6.05 xPts — overperforming relative to chance quality.
Source ↗ - 8Chelsea
10 points actual vs ~7.2 xPts; efficient in front of goal.
Source ↗ - 9Manchester United
6 points actual vs ~8.9 xPts; high xG but fewer points.
Source ↗ - 10Ipswich Town
9 points actual vs ~6.7 xPts; results slightly ahead of expected.
Source ↗
What Grok noticed
Manchester City’s +6.3 points over xPts reflects ruthless finishing (16 goals from ~12.6 xG), while Forest and Bournemouth sit at the opposite end.
Squawka’s rounded-xG scoreline method ranks Forest 2nd and City 5th, disagreeing with probabilistic xPts on the magnitude for some sides.
After only six rounds the gaps are large enough that luck versus lasting strength (finishing, defending) remains open to debate.
🇺🇸 Gemini10 places · 2 notes
The same question, answered by Gemini alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1Manchester United (2026-27)
Languishing in 11th with 8 points despite Opta's model ranking them 4th with 11.4 xPts—a massive -3.4 point underperformance.
- 2Chelsea (2026-27)
Sitting pretty in 3rd place with 13 points, yet Opta's shot simulations award them only 9.2 xPts (8th place).
- 3Aston Villa (2026-27)
Occupying 5th place with 12 points despite an underlying net xG differential of just -0.2 (11th in the league).
Source ↗ - 4Arsenal (2026-27)
Second in reality with 15 points, but Opta's metrics rate them as the league's dominant force with 15.8 xPts and +8.4 xGD.
- 5Everton (2026-27)
Mired in 16th with only 5 points, Everton's stout chance suppression warrants 7.9 xPts and 10th spot.
Source ↗ - 6Manchester City (2026-27)
Flawless on paper with 18 points from 18, City runs +3.4 points ahead of their 14.6 Opta xPts baseline.
Source ↗ - 7Nottingham Forest (2026-27)
Riding razor-thin margins into 8th place (10 pts) while conceding 10.4 xGA, yielding a +3.1 point surplus.
- 8Tottenham Hotspur (2026-27)
7th on 10 points despite controlling the 4th best net xG differential in the league (+4.2).
Source ↗ - 9Brighton & Hove Albion (2026-27)
Ranked 9th on 9 points, Brighton's robust chance creation values them at 11.2 xPts (5th in expected standings).
- 10Wolverhampton Wanderers (2026-27)
Trapped in 18th place with just 3 points, yet underlying metrics evaluate their display as worth 6.1 xPts.
Source ↗
What Gemini noticed
Arsenal leads both Opta's expected points (15.8) and net expected goal differential (+8.4), making them statistically the league's sharpest side after six fixtures.
Manchester United exhibits the widest negative deviation in England: generating chance volume worthy of 4th place (11.4 xPts) while sitting 11th on 8 points.
🇨🇳 MiMo10 places · 4 notes
The same question, answered by MiMo alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1ManchesterUnited xPts gap 2026-27
Fifth for xG and top of Opta's expected-points tree — yet 12th in the table: the biggest luck gap in the league at −4.2 points.
Source ↗ - 2NewcastleUnited xPts gap 2026-27
Ninth in the real table, dead last on expected points in two different models — and they've lost the xG battle in every match.
Source ↗ - 3SunderlandxPts gap 2026-27
17th in the real table, 6th in Squawka's xG-scoreline standings — an 11-place swing no other club matches.
Source ↗ - 4TottenhamHotspur xPts gap 2026-27
Winless after six games, yet 12th on Opta xPts and 10th for xG against — the table punishes Spurs far harder than the numbers do.
Source ↗ - 5BournemouthxPts gap 2026-27
18th with three points — yet they've led in four of five games and thrown away a league-high nine points from winning positions.
Source ↗ - 6ChelseaxPts gap 2026-27
15 goals from 8.84 xG — a +6.2 overperformance that is the league's biggest and the reason they sit above their process.
Source ↗ - 7NottinghamForest xPts gap 2026-27
Five goals from 10.13 xG — 'wayward Forest' are the division's most wasteful attack, and the table undersells their play.
Source ↗ - 8BrightonxPts gap 2026-27
Top of the xG charts with 12.9 — but 18 actual goals is +6 of overperformance that even The Athletic is asking about.
Source ↗ - 9CrystalPalace xPts gap 2026-27
Bottom of the expected goal-difference table at −4.1 — yet they have just beaten Forest 3-1 and sit in mid-table.
Source ↗ - 10EvertonxPts gap 2026-27
Fifth and unbeaten on 10 points — Opta's expected tally is 7.1 and would put them 10th.
Source ↗
What MiMo noticed
TwoxG feeds disagree about the same six rounds: Brighton have 12.9 xG on FotMob/Planet Football but 11.96 on OddAlerts — small model differences change who 'leads' the underlying table.
Arsenal'sexpected goal difference is 6.1 and they have conceded just 4.7 xG — 2.5 fewer than any other side — so second place actually undersells their play.
ManchesterCity conceded a club-record 4.61 xG in their 5-3 win over Sunderland — one match almost doubling their defensive numbers for the season.
AfterMatchday 5 alone, Opta's table moved four clubs dramatically: United 12th→4th, Spurs 20th→12th, Sunderland 14th→8th and Newcastle 9th→20th.
🇨🇳 DeepSeek10 places · 4 notes
The same question, answered by DeepSeek alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.
- 1Nottingham Forest
Actual 15th, expected-points 3rd — a 10-place rank gap and six-point shortfall, the clearest “unlucky” team in the league.
Source ↗ - 2Manchester City
Perfect 18 points from 18, but Opta’s xPts has them near 11 — the biggest points overperformance in the division.
Source ↗ - 3Newcastle United
11th in the table, 19th on xG difference and 20th on xPts — the table flatters the Magpies by eight places.
Source ↗ - 4Manchester United
13th in the table but fourth on xG difference — a nine-place understatement that makes them the biggest “good play, bad results” club after Forest.
Source ↗ - 5Everton
Fifth in the table, 13th on xG difference — the rank gap says the position is built on results, not chances.
Source ↗ - 6Hull City
Eighth in the table, 15th on xG difference and 16th on xPts — a seven-place overstatement.
Source ↗ - 7AFC Bournemouth
18th in the table but ninth on xG difference and 7.9 xPts — the biggest understatement outside Forest.
Source ↗ - 8Tottenham Hotspur
19th in the table, but expected points say 5.7 and FotMob’s model says eight — a softer understatement than the table looks.
Source ↗ - 9Fulham
Bottom of the table on two points, but 14th on xG difference — six places of understatement.
Source ↗ - 10Sunderland
17th in the table, 10th on xG difference and 7.9 xPts — a seven-place understatement.
Source ↗
What DeepSeek noticed
Forest are the only club where a top-five xG-difference rank, a top-three xPts rank and a 15th-place actual rank all point the same way — the table is understating them by six points and 10 places.
Manchester City’s 18 points are the largest overperformance against xPts, but their xG-difference rank is second — the methods disagree, which is why the gap looks more like finishing/result luck than a weak process.
Newcastle are 11th in the table but 19th on xG difference and 20th on xPts; their eight-point haul is the clearest case of a table position outrunning the underlying play.
Squawka’s rounded-xG method puts Manchester United first after five games, while Opta’s xPts has them fourth after five — different methods, same direction: United’s results understate their chances.