TactiQ
Sign InGet Started
TactiQ
Football Intelligence
Founding Beta

TactiQ is built around Player & Club Data, Match Intelligence, Predictive Modeling, and Research & Visualization — understand the system, not the surface.

Core
Club football as the permanent base
Launch
World Cup as the launch amplifier
Transparency
Public roadmap and visible system progress
The standard
Methodology →

Every score is deterministic, evidence-gated, and confidence-labelled. Football intelligence should be explainable — not a black box with a number on the front. The methodology is part of the product, not a legal page.

Deterministic scoringMulti-agent consensus gatedPublication gate active
Core
PlayersClubsMatchesWorld Cup 2026Roadmap
Product
CompareRankingsForecastMethodologyMembership
Legal
PrivacyTerms© 2026 TactiQ. All rights reserved.
Player Profile

Loading player profile...

Pulling current player details into TactiQ.

Player Profile

Mark Flekken

TactiQ Score, per-90 performance stats, and multi-season form — with direct routes into compare and rankings.

Current Team
Bayer 04 Leverkusen
Position
Goalkeeper
Date of Birth
Jun 13, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#1
League
Bundesliga
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Mark Flekken
Mark Flekken
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Bayer 04 Leverkusen
Position
Goalkeeper
Date of Birth
Jun 13, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#1
TactiQ Score
75.4
80% confidence
TactiQ Score v2
75.4
Form Score
65.0
Confidence
80%
Role
goalkeeper
League
Bundesliga
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
—
Key Pass
0.04
Tackles
—
Rating
6.80
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 9, 2026

A Bundesliga goalkeeper sitting at a TQ Score of 68.1 — adequate starter territory, consistent enough to hold a starting berth but not yet threatening the top tier of the position. With 1,871 minutes across 21 matches this season, the sample is meaningful, though role-specific metrics such as save percentage and clean sheet rate are absent from the data, limiting how precisely we can characterise shot-stopping quality. The 6.8 average match rating is the clearest per-90 signal available.

Why this score

The TQ Score of 68.1 is driven entirely by the composite FQ signal — no sub-scores (finishing, creation, progression, defense) are populated for this player, which is positionally expected but means the score rests on aggregate output rather than any single standout dimension. The absence of a defensive sub-score in particular prevents any elite-tier ceiling from being established.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 60.67 is 7.4 points below the TQ Score of 68.1 — this qualifies as a soft decline and warrants monitoring. If the trend continues, the composite score will likely compress downward toward the 60–65 range in the next evaluation cycle.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Dominik Greif

Greif's TQ Score of 68.46 is nearly identical, making him the closest statistical peer; the key distinction is that Greif's score sits marginally higher, suggesting a slight edge in composite output at this point in the season.

Compare →
Rankings
See where this player sits across all scored players.

Top 50 players by TactiQ Score — filter by position, form, and confidence.

Open Rankings →
Compare
Put this player next to another and find the real edges.

TactiQ Score, form, confidence, and season stats compared side by side — instantly.

Compare Player →
Methodology
Understand exactly how this score was built.

Every TactiQ Score is deterministic and traceable. Read the full methodology behind the numbers.

View Methodology →
Latest available season snapshot

Live statistics currently available for this profile

6 metrics surfaced
Appearances
23
Minutes
2040
Key passes
1
Rating
6.80
Successful dribbles
1
Clean sheets
5
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
Heavy minute load
2040 minutes suggest a significant current role in the squad rotation.
Save load
74 saves suggest a significant shot-stopping workload in current coverage.
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 80.3Form 80.8
Previous
TQ 78.7Form 78.9
Current
TQ 65.0Form 65.0
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
—
Key Passes
0.04
Tackles
—
Rating
6.80
Noah Atubolu

Atubolu's 67.18 TQ Score places him just below this player in the same adequate-starter band; both profiles share the same data limitations around goalkeeper-specific sub-scores.

Compare →
Alisson Ramsés Becker

Alisson's 66.74 TQ Score is comparable in raw number but the context differs sharply — Alisson's score reflects a high-difficulty environment and elite pedigree, whereas this player's 68.1 is set against a moderate Bundesliga context.

Compare →
Strengths
Where this player is genuinely above baseline
No clearly elite traits identified in current data.
Watchpoints
Real gaps relative to this player's role
Recent form

Form score of 60.67 sits 7.4 points below the season TQ Score of 68.1 — a soft-to-meaningful decline. For a goalkeeper, where consistency is the primary value proposition, a sustained dip of this magnitude over recent matches is a genuine concern rather than noise.

Granular shot-stopping data

All role-specific sub-scores (including defense) are null, meaning save percentage, clean sheet rate, and distribution quality cannot be assessed. The evaluation relies solely on the composite 68.1 FQ score, which limits confidence in identifying whether this player is a reliable No.1 or a rotation-level option.

Reading the score

What each number means

TactiQ Score

A 0–100 measure of overall quality. Combines statistical output with league difficulty, multi-season weighting, and a consistency factor. Target range for strong players: 70–85.

Form Score

Weighted toward recent matches. Can diverge from the TactiQ Score when current form is meaningfully stronger or weaker than the multi-season average.

Confidence

How much evidence supports this score. Lower confidence means thinner data — fewer seasons, fewer appearances, or gaps in coverage. A provisional score is real signal with appropriate caveats.

Methodology

TactiQ Scores are deterministic — given the same evidence, they produce the same output. The evidence packet system, confidence labels, and publication gate are all explained in full.

Read the full methodology →