A. Delgado/S. Dostanic vs J J. Bianchi/D. Milavsky

Highlights

• • Market-normalized home win probability ~44.8%; we estimate 45.0%
• • At 2.07 the home side yields negative EV (~-0.069 per unit)

Pros

• + Home price >2.00 offers decent payout if an informational edge existed
• + Doubles lines can be less efficient than singles, leaving occasional value

Cons

• - No specific data to justify upgrading our probability above the conservative estimate
• - Current odds do not offer positive expected value; home needs 2.222+ to break even

Details

With no external form, injury, or H2H data available we adopt a conservative stance and use market-implied probabilities as a baseline. The listed moneyline implies raw probabilities of 48.3% for the home pair (1/2.07) and 59.5% for the away pair (1/1.68); after removing the bookmaker margin (overround ~7.8%) the fair-market probabilities become ~44.8% home / ~55.2% away. We tilt slightly in favor of the market and set our estimated true probability for the home side at 45.0% (a modest premium to the fair market home probability). At the current home price of 2.07 that estimate yields a negative expected value (EV = 0.45 * 2.07 - 1 ≈ -0.069). The home side would require decimal odds of at least 2.222 to reach breakeven given our probability. Because neither side shows positive EV at the available prices and we lack specific informational edges (surface, recent form, injuries, H2H), we recommend no bet.

Key factors

• • No independent form/injury/H2H data available — conservative market-based estimate only
• • Bookmaker overround (~7.8%) raises implied prices; normalized fair-market home probability ~44.8%
• • Current home decimal (2.07) is below our min required odds (2.222) for positive EV