182 pool fixtures · 5,000 simulations · knockout ties are on the overview, in the bracket

Round 1

Vannes
26-25average
Bayonne
51%

2% draw

46%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 7 to Vannes by 8 · median Vannes by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Vannes by 1 is 21-20 as readily as 31-30.

Toulon
28-23average
Bordeaux Begles
64%

2% draw

34%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 4 to Toulon by 13 · median Toulon by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 4 is 22-18 as readily as 32-28.

Castres Olympique
7 – 8played
Stade Toulousain

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Clermont Auvergne
25 – 16played
Stade Francais Paris

Conditions, squads and match statistics

La Rochelle
10 – 20played
Racing 92

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Perpignan
26-23average
Lyon
65%

3% draw

32%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 3 to Perpignan by 11 · median Perpignan by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Perpignan by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 32-28.

Montpellier Herault
19 – 27played
Pau

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 2

Bayonne
27 – 26played
Toulon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Vannes
23 – 29played
Stade Toulousain

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Bordeaux Begles
40 – 10played
Stade Francais Paris

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Castres Olympique
26-23average
Racing 92
64%

3% draw

34%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 4 to Castres Olympique by 12 · median Castres Olympique by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 32-28.

Perpignan
27-23average
Clermont Auvergne
65%

3% draw

32%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Clermont Auvergne by 3 to Perpignan by 12 · median Perpignan by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Perpignan by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 32-28.

Pau
39 – 17played
La Rochelle

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Montpellier Herault
32-19average
Lyon
85%

3% draw

12%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 3 to Montpellier Herault by 22 · median Montpellier Herault by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Round 3

Stade Toulousain
45 – 34played
Bayonne

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Toulon
28-22average
Stade Francais Paris
68%

3% draw

30%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 3 to Toulon by 14 · median Toulon by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 5 is 22-17 as readily as 32-27.

Racing 92
33-18average
Vannes
87%

2% draw

11%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 4 to Racing 92 by 24 · median Racing 92 by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 36-24.

Perpignan
38 – 25played
Bordeaux Begles

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Pau
35 – 26played
Castres Olympique

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Clermont Auvergne
25-28average
Montpellier Herault
42%

3% draw

56%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 12 to Clermont Auvergne by 5 · median Montpellier Herault by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 75 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 33-31.

Lyon
16 – 28played
La Rochelle

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 4

Bayonne
35 – 32played
Stade Francais Paris

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Toulousain
32-19average
Racing 92
82%

3% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 2 to Stade Toulousain by 22 · median Stade Toulousain by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Perpignan
26-25average
Toulon
51%

3% draw

46%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 7 to Perpignan by 8 · median Perpignan by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Perpignan by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Bordeaux Begles
26-23average
Montpellier Herault
60%

3% draw

37%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 5 to Bordeaux Begles by 11 · median Bordeaux Begles by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 3 is 21-18 as readily as 31-28.

Castres Olympique
27-22average
Lyon
69%

2% draw

29%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 2 to Castres Olympique by 13 · median Castres Olympique by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 5 is 21-16 as readily as 32-27.

La Rochelle
38 – 13played
Clermont Auvergne

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 5

Racing 92
17 – 20played
Bayonne

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Francais Paris
28 – 26played
Perpignan

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Pau
26-23average
Stade Toulousain
56%

2% draw

42%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 5 to Pau by 12 · median Pau by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 30-28.

Montpellier Herault
28 – 0played
Toulon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Lyon
31-19average
Vannes
84%

2% draw

14%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 2 to Lyon by 21 · median Lyon by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 10 is 25-15 as readily as 35-25.

La Rochelle
27-21average
Bordeaux Begles
75%

3% draw

23%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to La Rochelle by 15 · median La Rochelle by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 32-26.

Clermont Auvergne
20 – 6played
Castres Olympique

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 6

Bayonne
31-18average
Perpignan
81%

3% draw

16%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 2 to Bayonne by 21 · median Bayonne by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 10 is 24-14 as readily as 34-24.

Racing 92
27-21average
Pau
68%

2% draw

30%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 2 to Racing 92 by 14 · median Racing 92 by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 5 is 21-16 as readily as 32-27.

Stade Francais Paris
30 – 22played
Montpellier Herault

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Lyon
24-29average
Stade Toulousain
35%

2% draw

63%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 13 to Lyon by 4 · median Stade Toulousain by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 74 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 4 is 22-18 as readily as 34-30.

Toulon
20 – 21played
La Rochelle

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Vannes
25-24average
Clermont Auvergne
56%

2% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Clermont Auvergne by 6 to Vannes by 9 · median Vannes by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Vannes by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

Castres Olympique
25-26average
Bordeaux Begles
50%

2% draw

48%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 9 to Castres Olympique by 7 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 20-20 as readily as 31-31.

Round 7

Montpellier Herault
50 – 13played
Perpignan

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Racing 92
31 – 48played
Lyon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Francais Paris
26-22average
La Rochelle
63%

2% draw

35%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 5 to Stade Francais Paris by 12 · median Stade Francais Paris by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 31-27.

Stade Toulousain
34-17average
Clermont Auvergne
87%

2% draw

11%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 4 to Stade Toulousain by 26 · median Stade Toulousain by 14

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 14 is 27-13 as readily as 38-24.

Castres Olympique
29 – 27played
Toulon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Vannes
21-29average
Bordeaux Begles
31%

3% draw

67%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 17 to Vannes by 2 · median Bordeaux Begles by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 6 is 23-17 as readily as 34-28.

Round 8

Montpellier Herault
33-18average
Bayonne
84%

2% draw

14%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 3 to Montpellier Herault by 23 · median Montpellier Herault by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

La Rochelle
33-18average
Perpignan
85%

2% draw

13%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 3 to La Rochelle by 24 · median La Rochelle by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Clermont Auvergne
26-24average
Racing 92
58%

3% draw

40%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 6 to Clermont Auvergne by 10 · median Clermont Auvergne by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 31-29.

Castres Olympique
27-25average
Stade Francais Paris
56%

3% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 6 to Castres Olympique by 10 · median Castres Olympique by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Stade Toulousain
48 – 12played
Bordeaux Begles

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Toulon
28 – 10played
Vannes

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 9

Bayonne
27-22average
Lyon
72%

3% draw

25%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 1 to Bayonne by 14 · median Bayonne by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 5 is 22-17 as readily as 32-27.

Montpellier Herault
30-19average
La Rochelle
77%

3% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 1 to Montpellier Herault by 19 · median Montpellier Herault by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 8 is 23-15 as readily as 33-25.

Pau
32-18average
Clermont Auvergne
84%

2% draw

13%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 3 to Pau by 22 · median Pau by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 35-24.

Perpignan
43 – 29played
Castres Olympique

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Bordeaux Begles
64 – 5played
Racing 92

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Francais Paris
33-18average
Vannes
88%

3% draw

10%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 4 to Stade Francais Paris by 23 · median Stade Francais Paris by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Stade Toulousain
33-19average
Toulon
83%

2% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 2 to Stade Toulousain by 22 · median Stade Toulousain by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Round 10

La Rochelle
31-19average
Bayonne
81%

3% draw

17%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 2 to La Rochelle by 21 · median La Rochelle by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 10 is 24-14 as readily as 35-25.

Lyon
40 – 36played
Clermont Auvergne

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Montpellier Herault
33-18average
Castres Olympique
86%

2% draw

12%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 4 to Montpellier Herault by 24 · median Montpellier Herault by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Bordeaux Begles
28-21average
Pau
70%

2% draw

28%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 1 to Bordeaux Begles by 15 · median Bordeaux Begles by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 33-27.

Perpignan
21 – 12played
Vannes

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Toulon
29 – 15played
Racing 92

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Francais Paris
26-25average
Stade Toulousain
49%

3% draw

48%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 7 to Stade Francais Paris by 8 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 20-20 as readily as 31-31.

Round 11

Bayonne
46 – 24played
Clermont Auvergne

Conditions, squads and match statistics

La Rochelle
32-18average
Castres Olympique
84%

3% draw

13%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 3 to La Rochelle by 22 · median La Rochelle by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Bordeaux Begles
51 – 28played
Lyon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Vannes
12 – 26played
Montpellier Herault

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Toulon
28-22average
Pau
65%

2% draw

33%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 3 to Toulon by 14 · median Toulon by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 5 is 22-17 as readily as 33-28.

Stade Toulousain
35-19average
Perpignan
89%

3% draw

9%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 4 to Stade Toulousain by 25 · median Stade Toulousain by 13

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 33 and 76 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 13 is 27-14 as readily as 38-25.

Racing 92
27-22average
Stade Francais Paris
65%

3% draw

32%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 4 to Racing 92 by 14 · median Racing 92 by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 5 is 22-17 as readily as 32-27.

Round 12

Bayonne
29-20average
Castres Olympique
75%

3% draw

23%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Bayonne by 18 · median Bayonne by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Clermont Auvergne
22 – 23played
Bordeaux Begles

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Vannes
23-28average
La Rochelle
37%

3% draw

61%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 14 to Vannes by 4 · median La Rochelle by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 74 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 4 is 22-18 as readily as 33-29.

Lyon
26-23average
Toulon
57%

2% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 5 to Lyon by 12 · median Lyon by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 30-28.

Stade Toulousain
40 – 18played
Montpellier Herault

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Pau
28-21average
Stade Francais Paris
74%

2% draw

24%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Pau by 15 · median Pau by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 33-27.

Racing 92
55 – 25played
Perpignan

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Round 13

Bordeaux Begles
31-19average
Bayonne
81%

2% draw

17%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 2 to Bordeaux Begles by 21 · median Bordeaux Begles by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 10 is 25-15 as readily as 35-25.

Castres Olympique
29 – 20played
Vannes

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Clermont Auvergne
26-23average
Toulon
58%

3% draw

40%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 5 to Clermont Auvergne by 12 · median Clermont Auvergne by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

La Rochelle
30 – 27played
Stade Toulousain

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Stade Francais Paris
31 – 10played
Lyon

Conditions, squads and match statistics

Racing 92
24-26average
Montpellier Herault
48%

2% draw

50%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 10 to Racing 92 by 7 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 19-19 as readily as 30-30.

Pau
33-18average
Perpignan
85%

3% draw

13%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 3 to Pau by 24 · median Pau by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 36-24.

Round 14

Bayonne
33-17average
Vannes
83%

3% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 3 to Bayonne by 25 · median Bayonne by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 12 is 25-13 as readily as 36-24.

Bordeaux Begles
31-19average
Toulon
77%

3% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 1 to Bordeaux Begles by 21 · median Bordeaux Begles by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 35-26.

Stade Toulousain
33-18average
Castres Olympique
86%

2% draw

12%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 3 to Stade Toulousain by 24 · median Stade Toulousain by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Stade Francais Paris
31-19average
Clermont Auvergne
82%

2% draw

16%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 2 to Stade Francais Paris by 21 · median Stade Francais Paris by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 10 is 24-14 as readily as 35-25.

Racing 92
27-22average
La Rochelle
63%

3% draw

35%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 4 to Racing 92 by 13 · median Racing 92 by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 31-27.

Lyon
28-21average
Perpignan
72%

3% draw

25%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Lyon by 15 · median Lyon by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 33-27.

Pau
26-24average
Montpellier Herault
58%

2% draw

40%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 6 to Pau by 11 · median Pau by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

Round 15

Toulon
29-19average
Bayonne
75%

3% draw

23%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Toulon by 18 · median Toulon by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Stade Toulousain
35-18average
Vannes
89%

2% draw

9%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 5 to Stade Toulousain by 26 · median Stade Toulousain by 14

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 33 and 75 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 14 is 28-14 as readily as 39-25.

Stade Francais Paris
26-23average
Bordeaux Begles
63%

3% draw

34%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 4 to Stade Francais Paris by 11 · median Stade Francais Paris by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 3 is 20-17 as readily as 31-28.

Racing 92
30-20average
Castres Olympique
77%

2% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 1 to Racing 92 by 19 · median Racing 92 by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 8 is 23-15 as readily as 34-26.

Clermont Auvergne
28-20average
Perpignan
72%

3% draw

25%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Perpignan by 1 to Clermont Auvergne by 17 · median Clermont Auvergne by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

La Rochelle
28-21average
Pau
75%

2% draw

23%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to La Rochelle by 15 · median La Rochelle by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 32-26.

Lyon
24-27average
Montpellier Herault
38%

2% draw

60%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 12 to Lyon by 5 · median Montpellier Herault by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 3 is 22-19 as readily as 32-29.

Round 16

Bayonne
25-26average
Stade Toulousain
45%

2% draw

53%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 10 to Bayonne by 7 · median Stade Toulousain by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Stade Francais Paris
28-21average
Toulon
72%

3% draw

25%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 1 to Stade Francais Paris by 16 · median Stade Francais Paris by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 7 is 23-16 as readily as 33-26.

Vannes
24-27average
Racing 92
42%

2% draw

56%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 12 to Vannes by 5 · median Racing 92 by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Bordeaux Begles
33-18average
Perpignan
84%

2% draw

13%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 3 to Bordeaux Begles by 24 · median Bordeaux Begles by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Castres Olympique
24-27average
Pau
48%

3% draw

49%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 11 to Castres Olympique by 6 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 20-20 as readily as 31-31.

Montpellier Herault
34-18average
Clermont Auvergne
88%

2% draw

10%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 4 to Montpellier Herault by 24 · median Montpellier Herault by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 74 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

La Rochelle
31-20average
Lyon
82%

3% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 2 to La Rochelle by 19 · median La Rochelle by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 9 is 25-16 as readily as 35-26.

Round 17

Stade Francais Paris
29-21average
Bayonne
77%

3% draw

20%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 1 to Stade Francais Paris by 17 · median Stade Francais Paris by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 7 is 23-16 as readily as 34-27.

Racing 92
26-25average
Stade Toulousain
49%

2% draw

48%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 8 to Racing 92 by 9 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 20-20 as readily as 30-30.

Toulon
32-18average
Perpignan
82%

3% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 2 to Toulon by 22 · median Toulon by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Pau
33-18average
Vannes
86%

3% draw

11%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 4 to Pau by 24 · median Pau by 12

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 12 is 26-14 as readily as 37-25.

Montpellier Herault
28-20average
Bordeaux Begles
76%

3% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 1 to Montpellier Herault by 16 · median Montpellier Herault by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Lyon
27-21average
Castres Olympique
71%

3% draw

27%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Castres Olympique by 1 to Lyon by 14 · median Lyon by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 5 is 21-16 as readily as 31-26.

Clermont Auvergne
26-25average
La Rochelle
50%

3% draw

48%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 7 to Clermont Auvergne by 8 · median a draw

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a a draw is 20-20 as readily as 31-31.

Round 18

Bayonne
27-22average
Racing 92
64%

3% draw

34%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 4 to Bayonne by 13 · median Bayonne by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 31-27.

Perpignan
25-26average
Stade Francais Paris
45%

2% draw

53%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 10 to Perpignan by 7 · median Stade Francais Paris by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 1 is 21-20 as readily as 31-30.

Stade Toulousain
30-19average
Pau
77%

2% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 1 to Stade Toulousain by 20 · median Stade Toulousain by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 34-25.

Toulon
26-24average
Montpellier Herault
57%

2% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 6 to Toulon by 10 · median Toulon by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Vannes
25-25average
Lyon
53%

3% draw

45%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 7 to Vannes by 8 · median Vannes by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Vannes by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Bordeaux Begles
28-21average
La Rochelle
70%

3% draw

28%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 1 to Bordeaux Begles by 16 · median Bordeaux Begles by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 32-26.

Castres Olympique
27-21average
Clermont Auvergne
73%

2% draw

25%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Castres Olympique by 14 · median Castres Olympique by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 32-26.

Round 19

Perpignan
26-24average
Bayonne
59%

2% draw

39%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 6 to Perpignan by 10 · median Perpignan by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Perpignan by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

Pau
29-20average
Racing 92
77%

2% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 1 to Pau by 18 · median Pau by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 8 is 23-15 as readily as 34-26.

Montpellier Herault
31-19average
Stade Francais Paris
82%

3% draw

16%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 2 to Montpellier Herault by 20 · median Montpellier Herault by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 35-26.

Stade Toulousain
33-18average
Lyon
86%

3% draw

12%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 3 to Stade Toulousain by 23 · median Stade Toulousain by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 11 is 26-15 as readily as 36-25.

La Rochelle
30-19average
Toulon
80%

3% draw

17%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 2 to La Rochelle by 20 · median La Rochelle by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 34-25.

Clermont Auvergne
31-19average
Vannes
83%

2% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Clermont Auvergne by 2 to Clermont Auvergne by 21 · median Clermont Auvergne by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 10 is 25-15 as readily as 35-25.

Bordeaux Begles
33-19average
Castres Olympique
83%

3% draw

14%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 3 to Bordeaux Begles by 22 · median Bordeaux Begles by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Round 20

Bayonne
27-24average
Pau
56%

3% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 6 to Bayonne by 11 · median Bayonne by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Perpignan
23-29average
Montpellier Herault
35%

2% draw

63%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 15 to Perpignan by 3 · median Montpellier Herault by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 74 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 5 is 23-18 as readily as 34-29.

Lyon
26-23average
Racing 92
61%

3% draw

36%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 5 to Lyon by 11 · median Lyon by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 3 is 21-18 as readily as 31-28.

La Rochelle
28-21average
Stade Francais Paris
74%

3% draw

24%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to La Rochelle by 16 · median La Rochelle by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Clermont Auvergne
24-28average
Stade Toulousain
32%

2% draw

66%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 13 to Clermont Auvergne by 4 · median Stade Toulousain by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 75 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 4 is 22-18 as readily as 33-29.

Toulon
31-19average
Castres Olympique
82%

2% draw

16%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 2 to Toulon by 21 · median Toulon by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 10 is 24-14 as readily as 35-25.

Bordeaux Begles
34-17average
Vannes
87%

2% draw

11%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 4 to Bordeaux Begles by 26 · median Bordeaux Begles by 13

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 13 is 26-13 as readily as 37-24.

Round 21

Bayonne
24-27average
Montpellier Herault
43%

2% draw

55%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 11 to Bayonne by 6 · median Montpellier Herault by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Pau
31-20average
Lyon
82%

3% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 2 to Pau by 19 · median Pau by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 35-26.

Perpignan
24-27average
La Rochelle
44%

2% draw

54%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 11 to Perpignan by 6 · median La Rochelle by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Racing 92
29-21average
Clermont Auvergne
77%

3% draw

20%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 1 to Racing 92 by 17 · median Racing 92 by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 8 is 23-15 as readily as 34-26.

Stade Francais Paris
31-18average
Castres Olympique
83%

3% draw

14%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 3 to Stade Francais Paris by 22 · median Stade Francais Paris by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 35-24.

Bordeaux Begles
26-23average
Stade Toulousain
60%

2% draw

37%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 5 to Bordeaux Begles by 12 · median Bordeaux Begles by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 3 is 21-18 as readily as 31-28.

Vannes
24-27average
Toulon
41%

3% draw

56%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 12 to Vannes by 5 · median Toulon by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Round 22

Lyon
26-23average
Bayonne
65%

3% draw

32%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 4 to Lyon by 12 · median Lyon by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 32-28.

La Rochelle
27-23average
Montpellier Herault
62%

3% draw

36%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 4 to La Rochelle by 11 · median La Rochelle by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 3 is 21-18 as readily as 32-29.

Clermont Auvergne
26-24average
Pau
55%

2% draw

43%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 7 to Clermont Auvergne by 9 · median Clermont Auvergne by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Castres Olympique
28-20average
Perpignan
77%

2% draw

21%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Castres Olympique by 1 to Castres Olympique by 17 · median Castres Olympique by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Racing 92
27-22average
Bordeaux Begles
59%

2% draw

39%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 5 to Racing 92 by 13 · median Racing 92 by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 3 is 21-18 as readily as 31-28.

Vannes
25-28average
Stade Francais Paris
43%

3% draw

55%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 11 to Vannes by 6 · median Stade Francais Paris by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 75 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 1 is 21-20 as readily as 32-31.

Toulon
26-24average
Stade Toulousain
51%

2% draw

46%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 7 to Toulon by 10 · median Toulon by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Round 23

Bayonne
26-24average
La Rochelle
51%

3% draw

46%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 6 to Bayonne by 10 · median Bayonne by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Clermont Auvergne
26-22average
Lyon
68%

3% draw

29%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Lyon by 3 to Clermont Auvergne by 12 · median Clermont Auvergne by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 31-27.

Castres Olympique
24-28average
Montpellier Herault
39%

2% draw

59%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 11 to Castres Olympique by 5 · median Montpellier Herault by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 2 is 21-19 as readily as 32-30.

Pau
27-22average
Bordeaux Begles
69%

2% draw

29%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 2 to Pau by 13 · median Pau by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 5 is 21-16 as readily as 32-27.

Vannes
26-24average
Perpignan
58%

2% draw

40%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Perpignan by 6 to Vannes by 10 · median Vannes by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Vannes by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

Racing 92
28-20average
Toulon
68%

2% draw

30%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Racing 92 wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 2 to Racing 92 by 16 · median Racing 92 by 6

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Racing 92 by 6 is 22-16 as readily as 32-26.

Stade Toulousain
31-19average
Stade Francais Paris
79%

3% draw

18%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 1 to Stade Toulousain by 21 · median Stade Toulousain by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 34-25.

Round 24

Clermont Auvergne
26-23average
Bayonne
62%

3% draw

35%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Clermont Auvergne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 4 to Clermont Auvergne by 11 · median Clermont Auvergne by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Clermont Auvergne by 3 is 20-17 as readily as 31-28.

Castres Olympique
26-25average
La Rochelle
52%

3% draw

46%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 7 to Castres Olympique by 8 · median Castres Olympique by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Lyon
25-26average
Bordeaux Begles
43%

3% draw

55%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 9 to Lyon by 7 · median Bordeaux Begles by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Montpellier Herault
35-18average
Vannes
90%

3% draw

7%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 5 to Montpellier Herault by 26 · median Montpellier Herault by 14

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 32 and 76 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 14 is 28-14 as readily as 39-25.

Pau
30-19average
Toulon
78%

2% draw

20%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Pau wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 1 to Pau by 19 · median Pau by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 8 is 23-15 as readily as 34-26.

Perpignan
23-29average
Stade Toulousain
38%

3% draw

60%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 14 to Perpignan by 4 · median Stade Toulousain by 3

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 75 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 3 is 22-19 as readily as 33-30.

Stade Francais Paris
28-20average
Racing 92
75%

3% draw

22%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: a draw to Stade Francais Paris by 17 · median Stade Francais Paris by 7

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 29 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 7 is 22-15 as readily as 33-26.

Round 25

Castres Olympique
27-22average
Bayonne
65%

2% draw

33%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Castres Olympique wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bayonne by 4 to Castres Olympique by 14 · median Castres Olympique by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Castres Olympique by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 32-28.

Bordeaux Begles
32-18average
Clermont Auvergne
83%

3% draw

14%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bordeaux Begles wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 3 to Bordeaux Begles by 23 · median Bordeaux Begles by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bordeaux Begles by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

La Rochelle
34-17average
Vannes
89%

2% draw

9%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are La Rochelle wins.

Middle half of outcomes: La Rochelle by 5 to La Rochelle by 25 · median La Rochelle by 13

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a La Rochelle by 13 is 26-13 as readily as 37-24.

Toulon
30-20average
Lyon
78%

2% draw

20%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 1 to Toulon by 18 · median Toulon by 8

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 8 is 24-16 as readily as 34-26.

Montpellier Herault
27-21average
Stade Toulousain
67%

2% draw

30%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 2 to Montpellier Herault by 14 · median Montpellier Herault by 5

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 5 is 21-16 as readily as 32-27.

Stade Francais Paris
26-22average
Pau
62%

3% draw

35%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Francais Paris wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 4 to Stade Francais Paris by 13 · median Stade Francais Paris by 4

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 68 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Francais Paris by 4 is 21-17 as readily as 31-27.

Perpignan
26-25average
Racing 92
53%

2% draw

45%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Racing 92 by 7 to Perpignan by 9 · median Perpignan by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Perpignan by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Round 26

Bayonne
26-25average
Bordeaux Begles
53%

2% draw

45%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Bayonne wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Bordeaux Begles by 7 to Bayonne by 9 · median Bayonne by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Bayonne by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Vannes
26-24average
Castres Olympique
56%

3% draw

41%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Vannes wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Castres Olympique by 6 to Vannes by 10 · median Vannes by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Vannes by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 31-29.

Toulon
31-18average
Clermont Auvergne
82%

2% draw

16%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Toulon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Toulon by 2 to Toulon by 21 · median Toulon by 10

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 70 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Toulon by 10 is 24-14 as readily as 35-25.

Stade Toulousain
30-20average
La Rochelle
78%

3% draw

20%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Stade Toulousain wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Toulousain by 1 to Stade Toulousain by 19 · median Stade Toulousain by 9

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 71 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Stade Toulousain by 9 is 24-15 as readily as 35-26.

Lyon
26-23average
Stade Francais Paris
59%

3% draw

39%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Lyon wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Stade Francais Paris by 5 to Lyon by 11 · median Lyon by 2

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 30 and 69 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Lyon by 2 is 20-18 as readily as 30-28.

Montpellier Herault
32-18average
Racing 92
83%

2% draw

15%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Montpellier Herault wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Montpellier Herault by 2 to Montpellier Herault by 23 · median Montpellier Herault by 11

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 72 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Montpellier Herault by 11 is 25-14 as readily as 36-25.

Perpignan
25-26average
Pau
45%

2% draw

53%

Winning margin across 5,000 simulations. Bars right of nil are Perpignan wins.

Middle half of outcomes: Pau by 9 to Perpignan by 7 · median Pau by 1

These are gaps, not scorelines. The combined score is drawn separately and lands between 31 and 73 points in most runs, so one bar covers many scores — a Pau by 1 is 20-19 as readily as 31-30.

Rugby Tournament Predictor — unofficial, and not affiliated with any union, club or competition. About and sourcesForecasts are probabilities, not predictions of one result.

Search

Jump to a tournament, a page, or a team