MaxBetto
< Back

Kaja Juvan vs Georgia Pedone

Tennis
2025-09-09 10:30
Start: 2025-09-10 08:00

Summary

Pick: away
EV: 0.74

Current Odds

Home 1.08|Away 8.5
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Kaja Juvan_Georgia Pedone_2025-09-10

Analysis

Summary: Given nearly identical player profiles in the research and the large market disparity, backing Georgia Pedone at 5.8 shows value under a conservative 30% true-win estimate.

Highlights

  • Market implies ~87.7% for home despite research showing parity
  • At 5.8, Pedone needs only ~17.24% true chance to be fair; our 30% estimate produces strong EV

Pros

  • + Large margin between implied probability and our conservative true probability
  • + Current price (5.8) comfortably exceeds the break-even odds (3.333) for our estimate

Cons

  • - Research dataset is limited and identical for both players, increasing model uncertainty
  • - If unseen factors (ranking, injuries, recent head-to-head) exist outside the provided sources, the edge may evaporate

Details

We find value on Georgia Pedone (away). The supplied profiles show both players with virtually identical recent records and surface history (10-21), with recent losses and no clear injury or form advantage to justify the market pricing. The market makes Kaja Juvan a heavy favorite at decimal 1.14 (implied ~87.7%), which is much higher than any evidence in the provided research supports. Conservatively estimating Pedone's true win probability at 30% (we consider parity in records and no decisive differentiator), the away price of 5.8 is oversized and yields positive expected value. We therefore recommend backing the away player at the quoted 5.8 only because that price exceeds our min-required decimal (3.333) for a 30% true probability. We note this call is based solely on the limited profiles provided and carries elevated model/uncertainty risk.

Key factors

  • Both players shown with identical win-loss records and surface history in the research (no clear edge)
  • Market price (home 1.14) implies an implausibly high probability given the supplied data
  • No injuries or favorable conditions in the research to justify the heavy favoritism