Highlights

• • Bilibili at 2.18 shows a tiny positive EV under our conservative estimate
• • Invictus favored by market; we find no value on the away side

Pros

• + Small positive expected value relative to our conservative probability
• + Clear, simple logic: normalize odds then shrink toward 50% for uncertainty

Cons

• - Edge is very small (EV ≈ 0.28%), sensitive to small probability changes
• - No external data (form, roster, H2H) — high model uncertainty

Details

We compared the listed moneyline prices (Bilibili 2.18, Invictus 1.694) and, with no external match data available, normalized implied probabilities to remove bookmaker margin and then applied a conservative shrinkage toward 50/50 to reflect high uncertainty. Normalized implied probabilities gave Bilibili roughly 43.7% and Invictus 56.3%; we adjusted these conservatively to an estimated true probability of 46.0% for Bilibili (54.0% for Invictus). At our 46% estimate, the home price 2.18 yields a tiny positive expected value (EV = 0.46 * 2.18 - 1 ≈ 0.0028). The away price shows negative EV versus our estimate. Given the absence of form, roster, and H2H inputs, we are deliberately conservative; the slight edge on Bilibili is marginal and should be treated as high-uncertainty value rather than a clear advantage.

Key factors

• • Bookmaker prices: Home 2.18 vs Away 1.694
• • Normalization of implied probabilities to remove margin
• • Conservative shrinkage toward 50/50 due to no additional data