Harlequins vs Ulster
What the model says about this fixture, at either ground and at a neutral one, with the record behind it. Ratings as at 2026-08-24.
Harlequins 58.6%draw 2.5%38.9% UlsterUlster 65.4%draw 2.5%32.1% HarlequinsHarlequins 44.7%draw 2.5%52.8% UlsterEach figure is 5,000 simulations of this fixture. The score is where those runs are centred, not a likely scoreline — a rugby result is spread far too widely for any single one to be likely.
How the runs finished
Winning margin across 5,000 simulations of this fixture. Bars right of the centre are Harlequins wins; the faded bars at each end hold everything beyond 75 points.
Margin percentiles
Eight runs in ten finished between 12 Ulster and 27 Harlequins, with the middle run at 3 Harlequins.
Those are gaps rather than scorelines. How much scoring the match produces is drawn separately — between 30 and 70 points in eight runs out of ten — so one bar covers many scores. The middle run above is 21-18 on a tight afternoon and 31-28 on an open one.
Why Harlequins are favoured
Starting from an even match and adding what the model reads, in percentage points of win probability. Positive favours Harlequins, negative favours Ulster.
Harlequins 1668, Ulster 1633 — 34 points, favouring Harlequins
Harlequins are at home
Recent results, head-to-head record and rest days, as the XGBoost heads weigh them. Deliberately capped, so it can nudge the rating but never overrule it.
Head to head
Harlequins1–0–5Ulster6 meetings, 2017 to 2024 · Ulster by 12.2 on average
| Date | Match | Competition | Venue |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-20 | Harlequins 47–19 Ulster | European Champions Cup | Twickenham Stoop |
| 2021-04-04 | Harlequins 21–57 Ulster | European Challenge Cup | Twickenham Stoop |
| 2019-12-13 | Harlequins 10–34 Ulster | European Champions Cup | Twickenham Stoop |
| 2019-12-07 | Ulster 25–24 Harlequins | European Champions Cup | Affidea Stadium |
| 2017-12-15 | Ulster 52–24 Harlequins | European Champions Cup | Affidea Stadium |
The 5 most recent meetings; the record above covers all 6. None of this feeds the forecast: both ratings already contain these results.