Henri Squire vs Facundo Diaz Acosta

Highlights

• • Current market underprices Squire relative to our model
• • Modest positive EV (≈12.8%) at the quoted 2.82 price

Pros

• + Underdog price (2.82) is above our fair-price threshold (2.50)
• + Squire’s larger match sample and .500 career record suggest more reliability than Diaz’s 10-17

Cons

• - Diaz Acosta has explicit grass experience while Squire’s profile lacks grass matches — increases downside risk
• - Limited and mixed recent form for both players raises variance; the edge is not large

Details

We compare market-implied probabilities to our estimate of each player’s chance. The book gives Henri Squire 2.82 (implied 35.5%) and Facundo Diaz Acosta 1.457 (implied 68.7%). From the provided profiles: Squire has a larger match sample (30-30) and recent Challenger activity, while Diaz Acosta has a weaker overall win-loss (10-17) but is one of the few with grass listed among his surfaces. Both show recent losses on clay, so form is mixed. Given Diaz Acosta’s poorer career win rate and limited recent form despite grass experience, we estimate Squire’s true chance is higher than the market’s 35.5% (~40%). At our estimated probability (0.40) the fair decimal price is 2.50; the market 2.82 offers value. Calculation: EV = 0.40 * 2.82 - 1 = 0.128 (12.8% ROI). Because this EV > 0 at the current widely-available price, we recommend backing the home underdog.

Key factors

• • Market implies Diaz Acosta ~68.7% while Squire is ~35.5% — we view the underdog as undervalued
• • Squire has a larger match sample and a .500 career record (30-30) vs Diaz Acosta's weaker 10-17
• • Surface: Diaz has grass listed but Squire has no grass history in provided profile — increases uncertainty
• • Recent form: both coming off losses on clay, so recent momentum is neutral-to-negative for both
• • Sample size and limited data increase variance; edge is modest but present at current odds