M. Damm/A. Rybakov vs P. Maloney/L. Martinez

Highlights

• • Home implied probability (market) ~69%; our conservative estimate 66%
• • Neither side produces positive EV at current odds (home EV ≈ -0.043, away EV ≈ -0.116)

Pros

• + Market clearly favors the home pair, consistent with a likely stronger probability
• + We used a conservative shrink of the market edge to avoid overrating incomplete information

Cons

• - Insufficient public data on form, injuries, surface and H2H increases uncertainty
• - Both sides show negative expected value at available prices, so no profitable play exists now

Details

We compared the market prices to a conservative in-house estimate. The market implies the home pair at 1.45 has an implied probability of ~68.97%, but given the absence of recent form, injury, surface and H2H data and the volatility of doubles, we shrink the market edge and estimate the true win probability for the home team at 66.0%. At that probability the minimum fair decimal odds are 1.515. The current home quote of 1.45 is below that threshold (no value). Using our 66.0% estimate, EV at the current home price is 0.66*1.45 - 1 = -0.043 (negative). The away side (implied by 1 - our home estimate = 34.0%) produces EV = 0.34*2.6 - 1 = -0.116, also negative. With both sides showing negative expected value under conservative assumptions, we do not recommend a bet.

Key factors

• • Market-implied probability (home 1.45 ~ 68.97%) vs conservative true-probability estimate (66.0%)
• • Lack of verifiable form, injury, surface and head-to-head data forces conservative shrinkage toward the market
• • Doubles results can be volatile and bookmakers often price with a margin that removes small perceived edges