Highlights

• • Market favorite (1.43) is too short versus our conservative estimate
• • No reliable independent data to justify taking the underdog at 2.65

Pros

• + We avoid wagering when information is insufficient and prices lack value
• + Conservative stance protects bankroll from unquantified risks (injuries, surface, travel)

Cons

• - If additional positive intel (favorable form/H2H/surface advantage) were available, value might emerge
• - Conservative probabilities may miss small inefficiencies in market pricing

Details

We have no independent data (form, H2H, surface specifics, injuries) and must therefore use conservative assumptions versus the market. The market-implied probability for the home side at 1.43 is ~69.9%, but allowing for bookmaker margin and favorite-bias we estimate the true win probability for L. Lorusso/K. van Wyk at 66.0%. At that probability the fair decimal price is ~1.515 while the available price is 1.43, which produces negative expected value. The away side at 2.65 would need a true winning chance near 37.7% by raw implication; given symmetric uncertainty we estimate the away true probability lower than that (weaker than necessary to justify 2.65). With our conservative probabilities neither side offers positive EV at the current quoted prices, so we recommend not betting.

Key factors

• • No independent form, injury, surface or H2H data available — we use conservative assumptions
• • Market price 1.43 implies ~69.9% but includes bookmaker margin; we discount to 66.0% as a conservative true probability
• • At p=66% the fair odds (1.515) are higher than the available 1.43, producing negative EV