Highlights

• • Home implied probability: 40.3% vs our estimate 45.0%
• • EV at current odds (2.48) ≈ +0.116 (11.6% ROI on a 1-unit bet)

Pros

• + Clear price gap between market implied probability and our conservative estimate
• + Doubles and smaller events carry higher variance, which can favor underdogs

Cons

• - No access to injuries, recent form, surface preferences, or H2H data increases model risk
• - Edge is modest and could evaporate if unseen factors (injury, lineup change) exist

Details

We believe the market overstates the away team at 1.49 (implied away win ~67.1%), while the home pair priced at 2.48 implies a ~40.3% chance. With no reliable external data on injuries, recent form, or H2H, we apply a conservative adjustment toward parity because doubles matches and lower-tier events carry higher variance. We estimate the home pairing's true win probability at 45.0%, which is higher than the market-implied 40.3%, creating value on the home moneyline. At our estimated probability the minimum fair decimal price is 2.222; the current price of 2.48 offers positive expected value. Given the information vacuum, we remain cautious about uncertainty and model risk, but the price gap is large enough to justify a value play on the home side.

Key factors

• • Market implies home win ~40.3% (1/2.48) and away win ~67.1% (1/1.49); discrepancy suggests possible market overreaction
• • No public injury, form, or H2H data -> higher uncertainty; doubles matches often have elevated upset potential
• • Our conservative estimate (45%) assumes a closer match than market implies, giving value to the underdog
• • Smaller events and doubles increase variance, which inflates pricing inefficiencies