F. Dorofeeva-Rybas/L. Virc vs P. Goina/T. Nikcevic

Highlights

• • Home implied probability: 71.4% (1.40); our estimate: 68.0%
• • Required minimum odds to break even on our estimate: 1.471 (market is 1.40)

Pros

• + Market identifies a clear favorite, which aligns with our estimate that the home side is more likely to win
• + Odds are widely available and stable, so there is no evidence of mispricing in the current market

Cons

• - Implied price for the favorite is shorter than our conservative true probability — negative EV
• - Lack of match-level data (form, surface, injuries, head-to-head) increases uncertainty and downside risk

Details

We compared the market prices to a conservative estimated win probability for the home pair. The market implies a 71.4% chance for the home side at 1.40 (1/1.40 = 0.714). Given no external data and the higher variance of doubles, we estimate the home true win probability at 68.0%; this produces a negative expected value at the current home price (EV = 0.68 * 1.40 - 1 = -0.048). The away side (2.80 implied 35.7%) is also below our conservative estimate for the away (32.0%), so neither side offers positive EV at the quoted prices.

Key factors

• • No independent recent data available for form, surface, or injuries — we apply a conservative assumption set
• • Market-implied probability for the home side (71.4%) exceeds our conservative true win probability (68.0%), producing negative EV
• • Doubles matches and unknown pair chemistry increase outcome variance, so we avoid marginal edges without clear value