E. De Filippo/F. Mazzola vs F. Andaloro/D. Augenti

Highlights

• • Normalized market implies Away ~51.5%
• • Required fair odds (≈1.942) exceed current best price (1.81) — no positive EV

Pros

• + Market prices are tight and reflect a close contest — reduces wild mispricing risk
• + Conservative, margin-adjusted approach avoids overestimating edge in no-information situations

Cons

• - No match-specific data (surface, recent form, injuries, H2H) increases uncertainty
• - Bookmaker margin removes small edges in tight markets; current prices offer negative expected value

Details

We calculated market-implied probabilities from the quoted moneylines (Home 1.92, Away 1.81). Raw implied: Home 1/1.92 = 0.5208, Away 1/1.81 = 0.5525; summed probability = 1.0733 indicating a bookmaker margin. After removing the margin (normalizing), the market implies Home ≈ 48.5% and Away ≈ 51.5%. With no additional surface, form, injury or H2H information available, we use a conservative estimate equal to the margin-adjusted market probability for the more likely side (Away ≈ 0.515). At the offered Away price (1.81) the expected value = p * odds - 1 = 0.515 * 1.81 - 1 ≈ -0.068 (negative). The break-even decimal odds for that probability are ≈ 1.942, which is higher than the current best-away price of 1.81; therefore there is no value on either side at current prices and we recommend no bet.

Key factors

• • No external data available on form, surface, injuries or H2H — we adopt conservative market-normalized probabilities
• • Market prices imply Away ≈ 51.5% after removing bookmaker margin; this does not produce positive EV at offered odds
• • Bookmaker margin (vig) meaningfully reduces value in a close-priced matchup