Highlights

• • Book implied probability (96.15%) is far above our estimated true probability (70%).
• • Fair decimal we estimate ~1.429; current market 1.04 gives strongly negative EV.

Pros

• + Conservative approach avoids taking a bet with clearly negative expected value.
• + We base conclusion on documented recent form and the huge discrepancy between market and our probability estimate.

Cons

• - Limited publicly available data on Benedict Graft prevents a more precise model.
• - If unknown contextual factors (injury, withdrawal, large ranking gap) exist, our probability estimate could be off.

Details

We see an extreme market price: Adam Jilly is trading at 1.04 (implied win probability ~96.15%) while Benedict Graft is 11.0 (implied ~9.09%). Our independent read based on the available match research does not support a ~96% chance for Jilly. Jilly's documented match history (5-8 career record, recent string of losses) shows limited form and a small sample size, and there is no corroborating information that Benedict Graft is significantly weaker or injured. Even with a generous estimate that Jilly is the stronger player, we estimate his true win probability around 70%. At that probability the fair price would be ~1.429 decimal, far above the available 1.04. Plugging our estimate into EV (p * odds - 1) gives a large negative EV at current market odds, so there is no value on either side at these prices. We therefore recommend taking no side.

Key factors

• • Market implies ~96% probability for Adam Jilly (1.04) which is extreme
• • Adam Jilly's documented recent form is weak (5-8 career, recent losses)
• • No information showing Benedict Graft is significantly inferior or injured