Highlights

• • Home implied probability (19.6%) is below our conservative estimate (23%).
• • Current odds (5.1) exceed our min-required odds (4.348) for value.

Pros

• + Price provides clear positive EV under our conservative probability model.
• + Doubles volatility increases frequency of underdog wins versus singles, supporting value hunts.

Cons

• - No available data on surface, injuries, recent form or H2H; market may be pricing unknown factors.
• - Large favorite on the other side suggests the market may know something we don't; higher uncertainty.

Details

We have no external research available, so we take a conservative, model-driven approach. The market gives the home pair A. Stevens/M. Tikhonko decimal odds 5.1 (implied probability ~19.6%) and the away pair E. Coleman/A. Hrastar 1.15 (implied ~87.0%). Given typical volatility in doubles and the frequent occurrence of underdog wins in lower-profile events, we conservatively estimate the home pair's true win probability at 23.0%. That is materially higher than the market-implied 19.6%, producing positive expected value. Calculation: EV = p * odds - 1 = 0.23 * 5.1 - 1 = 0.173 (17.3% ROI). The minimum fair decimal odds for our estimate is 1 / 0.23 = 4.348; the market price of 5.1 exceeds this threshold, so we identify value on the home side. Key caveats: we lack lineup, surface, injury, and H2H details—any of which the market may be pricing—so uncertainty is elevated and our probability is intentionally conservative.

Key factors

• • Market-implied home probability ~19.6% vs our conservative estimate 23.0%
• • Doubles matches (lower-tier events) have higher upset volatility, supporting a slightly higher true chance for underdogs
• • No available external info on surface, injuries, or lineups increases uncertainty and model risk