Highlights

• • Book market implies 93.5% for Evans; our estimate is 90%
• • Required fair price for value would be ≥ 1.111; current 1.07 offers no value

Pros

• + Evans is the stronger, more experienced player and comfortable on hard courts
• + Chen's tour-level win rate is poor, reducing his upset likelihood

Cons

• - Evans' recent overall record is not overwhelmingly dominant, introducing some uncertainty
• - Short-priced favorites carry volatility and low upside; bookmaker margin eliminates value at 1.07

Details

We estimate Daniel Evans is the clear favorite here based on experience, broader surface history (hard included) and a substantially better career profile than Charles Chen. The market price of 1.07 implies an implied probability of 93.46% (1/1.07). After reviewing form and sample sizes, we assign Evans a true win probability of 90.0% (0.90). At that probability the fair decimal price would be 1.111, so the current price of 1.07 is too short and offers negative expected value. EV calculation: EV = p * price - 1 = 0.90 * 1.07 - 1 = -0.037 (about -3.7% ROI). Because the bookmaker is offering a price that implies a higher probability than our model supports, there is no value on Evans at 1.07; likewise the away price 7.50 would require an implausibly high upset probability to offer value.

Key factors

• • Evans has more matches and greater success across surfaces including hard
• • Charles Chen has a limited record (6-16) and fewer matches, suggesting lower win probability
• • Market odds (1.07) imply >93% which exceeds our conservative true estimate of 90%