Highlights

• • Home implied probability ~87% vs our estimated away probability 50%
• • Minimum fair odds for a 50% chance is 2.00 — current 6.45 is well above that

Pros

• + Large positive expected value at the listed away price
• + Recommendation is driven by lack of support for heavy market favoritism in provided data

Cons

• - Recommendation depends on interpreting limited and symmetric player data; unseen factors (seeding, late injury, local conditions) could justify market odds
• - High nominal payout implies higher variance and match-level risk

Details

We find a large market discrepancy with the home moneyline at 1.146 (implied win probability ~87.3%) that is not supported by the research: both players show essentially identical career spans, overall records (10-21), surfaces and recent results in the provided profiles. There is no injury, H2H, nor surface advantage in the material to justify an 87% market probability for the home player. Given the lack of evidence for a heavy favorite, we estimate a near-even true chance for each player and therefore view the away price of 6.45 as strong value. Calculation: we estimate true P(away) = 0.50, so EV = 0.50 * 6.45 - 1 = 2.225 on a 1-unit stake. The minimum fair decimal price for this estimated probability is 2.000; the offered 6.45 materially exceeds that threshold, producing a large positive expected value. We recommend the away side only because current prices yield positive EV; this recommendation relies on the clear mismatch between market odds and the provided player data.

Key factors

• • Market-implied home probability (1/1.146 ≈ 87.3%) is not supported by the supplied player profiles
• • Both players have identical records and recent results in the provided research — no clear form edge
• • No injuries, surface or H2H information in the research indicating a heavy favorite