Highlights

• • Favorite implied probability (market) ≈ 98.0%; our conservative estimate = 96.0%
• • At 1.02 the favorite shows negative EV under our model (≈ -0.0208 per unit)

Pros

• + We avoid speculative contrarian plays on an extreme market split with no supporting data
• + Conservative probability protects against overestimating upset chances

Cons

• - If there are unseen factors (injury, withdrawal risk) the market may be mispriced and we miss value
• - A small probability divergence would make the long-shot (35.37) attractive, but we lack evidence to assume that divergence

Details

We find the market extremely skewed: the home line of 1.02 implies ~98.0% probability while the away line of 35.37 implies ~2.8%. No independent data (form, surface, injuries, H2H) is available, so we apply a conservative assessment. We estimate the true probability of the favorite (Daniel De Jonge) at 96.0% — lower than the market-implied 98.0% to account for normal upset risk in tennis but still reflecting heavy favoritism. At that assessed probability the favorite at 1.02 yields negative expected value (EV = 0.96*1.02 - 1 = -0.0208 per unit staked). The underdog would only be a value if we believed his chance exceeds the market-implied ~2.8% by a material amount; absent supporting data we do not feel justified assigning such a higher probability. Given the very limited information and the small margin between our conservative probability and the book, we recommend no bet — the market prices leave no clear, evidence-backed value.

Key factors

• • Extreme market skew (home 1.02 vs away 35.37) with small bookmaker overround
• • No independent information on form, surface, injuries or H2H to justify deviating strongly from market
• • Conservative adjustment for upset risk (we set true probability lower than implied favorite price)