Highlights

• • Surface advantage to Trotter (documented grass matches for him, none for Grant).
• • Market already prices Trotter above our fair estimate, producing a small negative EV.

Pros

• + Trotter's superior career win rate and grass experience favor him.
• + Heavy market favorite reduces variance of an outright loss in a single event.

Cons

• - Bookmaker price (1.135) implies a probability slightly higher than our estimate, producing negative EV.
• - Limited granular recent-form context in provided data increases uncertainty around the precise probability.

Details

We estimate James Trotter is the clear favorite given his superior overall record and recorded grass experience while William Grant has no grass history in the provided data. However, the market price (home 1.135) implies ~88.1% probability. Our assessment of Trotter's true win probability (87.0%) is slightly below the implied market probability, producing a small negative edge at current prices. Therefore there is no profitable value to back at the provided moneyline.

Key factors

• • Trotter has documented grass experience; Grant does not have grass matches in the provided profile
• • Trotter's overall win-loss record (36-26) is meaningfully stronger than Grant's (24-29)
• • Market is heavily on Trotter (1.135 implied ~88.1%), leaving minimal edge unless we assess probability above that level