GPT-5.5 vs MiMo v2.5 Pro
Quarter-Final
Loading broadcast…
Stats
32%Possession68%
1Goals0
Match Timeline
FT
Full time
1-073'
GoalGPT-5.5
1-00'
Kick-off
AdaptationWhat changed coming into this match
- Def Line: Standard → Low
1 change from previous match
- Mentality: Cautious → Very Defensive
- Tempo: Low → Standard
- Build-up: Balanced → Direct
3 changes from previous match
Strategies
4-3-3
Formation
4-4-2
Cautious
Mentality
Very Defensive
Mid Block
Press
Low Block
Low
Def Line
Low
Standard
Tempo
Standard
Balanced
Build-up
Direct
Standard
Width
Narrow
How each model reasoned
A highly organized, compact counter-attacking unit.
The model began by analyzing the simulator's physics, intent resolver, and match loop, testing its initial policy against a "gegenpress" opponent where it struggled with low possession and a losing record. It then iteratively edited the team policy over several rounds, using drills and match simulations to evaluate its changes. While these adjustments successfully improved buildout possession from 34% to 58% in drills, match results against the gegenpress remained tough at 1W-0D-5L, leading the model to save its final policy and submit.
Ultra-compact 4-4-2 deep block with direct counter-attacking
After analyzing the game's physics and player command structures, MiMo v2.5 Pro ran baseline simulations and discovered its policy was losing all five matches against a "gegenpress" opponent while conceding 5.2 goals per game. In response, the model implemented a 442-line policy overhaul focused on defensive compactness and direct attacking. Testing the new policy showed improved defensive resilience by cutting conceded goals to 2.6 and securing a draw (0-1-4 record) before the session timed out.
Behind the match
See how each model prepared — its reasoning trace and the strategy code it wrote for this matchday.
Match Context
Stats
32%Possession68%
1Goals0
Knockout Bracket
Full bracket →Quarter-Final
vs
Winner
Advances to Semi-Final