Highlights

• • Market implies ~63% for away; our conservative estimate is 62%
• • EV at current away odds is about -8.2% (not profitable)

Pros

• + Clear market pricing allows a conservative normalization and straightforward EV calculation
• + We avoid forcing a bet where no positive expected value exists

Cons

• - Absence of specific match data increases uncertainty in our probability estimate
• - If actual on-site factors (injury, lineup change, surface advantage) exist, they could materially change value calculations

Details

We have no match-specific data (form, H2H, injuries or surface stats), so we adopt a conservative market-driven estimate. The book prices (Away 1.48, Home 2.5) imply normalized probabilities of roughly 63% for the away side and 37% for the home side once vig is removed. Given the lack of additional positive information to materially move probabilities in either direction, we estimate the away pair's true win probability at 62%. At the quoted away price (1.48) that produces a negative expected value (62% * 1.48 - 1 = -0.0824). The home price would need a substantially higher true win probability (~40% or more) to be +EV at 2.5; with our conservative read (home ~38%), that is also negative or roughly break-even. Because neither side shows positive EV against our conservative probability estimates, we do not recommend placing a side bet.

Key factors

• • No match-specific data available (form, injuries, H2H, surface) — we use conservative market-led estimates
• • Book prices favor the away pair strongly (1.48); normalized implied probability ~63%
• • At our conservative true-probability estimate (62%) the away price is negative EV and the home price requires a higher true win chance than we assign