Highlights

• • Market-implied probabilities normalized to Home 74.5% / Away 25.5%
• • Home needs ≥1.342 decimal to be profitable; listed 1.25 is too short

Pros

• + Conservative, market-based probability approach avoids overestimating value
• + Clear break-even thresholds provided for future odds movement

Cons

• - No match-level data (surface, form, H2H, injuries) increases uncertainty
• - Small edges could exist if unseen information contradicts our conservative estimate

Details

We have no external form, surface, or injury data, so we use the market prices and a conservative de-vig normalization to estimate true probabilities. Market-implied probabilities are Home 1/1.25 = 0.800 and Away 1/3.65 = 0.274 (sum 1.074). Removing the bookmaker margin by normalizing gives estimated true probabilities Home = 0.800/1.074 = 0.745 and Away = 0.274/1.074 = 0.255. At those estimates the expected return on the listed home price (1.25) is 0.745*1.25 - 1 = -0.06875 (negative) and the away price (3.65) yields 0.255*3.65 - 1 = -0.06925 (also negative). Both lines are worse than our conservatively estimated true chances, so there is no positive expected value at the quoted prices. For reference, the home would need at least decimal 1.342 to breakeven (1/0.745) and the away would need at least ~3.922 (1/0.255) to offer value.

Key factors

• • No external match/form/injury data available — we rely on market prices and normalization
• • Market contains bookmaker margin; de-vig normalization produces Home ~74.5%, Away ~25.5%
• • Both sides' current prices produce negative EV versus our conservative probability estimates