A. Fomina-Klotz/G. Pedone vs K. Juvan/K. Novak

Highlights

• • Home at 2.00 equals our fair-price baseline (no edge)
• • Away is favored by the market but we cannot justify the required >56.8% win probability

Pros

• + Market home price equals our neutral fair estimate, so no negative expected value if taking a conservative stance
• + Avoids betting under high informational uncertainty

Cons

• - No potential positive-ev opportunity at available prices
• - High uncertainty due to missing data on pair form, surface suitability, and injuries

Details

We have no match-specific data (form, injuries, surface history, or H2H) and therefore adopt a conservative 50/50 baseline for this doubles match. The market prices are Home 2.00 (implied 50.0%) and Away 1.76 (implied 56.8%); the market appears to price the away pair as a clear favorite. Using a neutral estimated true probability of 0.50 for the home side, the minimum fair decimal price would be 2.000. At the available home price of 2.00 the expected value is effectively zero (EV = 0.50 * 2.00 - 1 = 0.00). The away price (1.76) would require a true win probability of at least 1 / 1.76 = 0.568 to break even, which we cannot credibly assert given the lack of information and our neutral prior. Because expected_value is not greater than zero at available prices, we do not recommend a bet. If additional reliable information (injuries, pairing history, surface advantage) emerges that shifts our estimated probability above these thresholds, we would re-evaluate.

Key factors

• • No match-specific data available (form, injuries, H2H, surface records)
• • Market prices: Home 2.00 implies 50.0%, Away 1.76 implies ~56.8% (market favors away)
• • High uncertainty for doubles outcomes without pairing history; conservative 50/50 prior applied