MaxBetto
< Back

Manas Manoj Dhamne vs Arthur Nagel

Tennis
2025-09-11 08:42
Start: 2025-09-11 08:47

Summary

Pick: away
EV: 0.18

Current Odds

Home 1.2|Away 4.1
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Manas Manoj Dhamne_Arthur Nagel_2025-09-11

Analysis

Summary: We find value backing Arthur Nagel at 2.95 given a conservative 40% win estimate; this yields ~18% ROI versus the market-implied 33.9%.

Highlights

  • Away price 2.95 implies 33.9% chance; our estimate 40% gives positive EV
  • Nagel's multi-surface experience and 17-17 record support a higher-than-implied win probability

Pros

  • + Clear positive EV at current market price (min required odds 2.50, market 2.95)
  • + Player shows competency across surfaces and active recent play in provided data

Cons

  • - Limited information on the home player Manas Manoj Dhamne in the provided research
  • - Small career sample and some inconsistent recent results increase variance and uncertainty

Details

The market prices Manas as a heavy favorite at 1.36 (implied home win probability ~73.5%) and Arthur Nagel at 2.95 (implied ~33.9%). Nagel has a 17-17 career record across multiple surfaces, including clay, and recent matches show he is active and capable of wins at this level. Given the lack of injury notes or disqualifying form and his demonstrated adaptability to different surfaces, we estimate Nagel's true chance higher than the market-implied 33.9%. Using a conservative true probability of 40%, the away price of 2.95 yields positive expected value (EV = 0.40 * 2.95 - 1 = 0.18). Because the quoted decimal (2.95) exceeds the break-even decimal of 2.50 for our probability estimate, this represents a value bet. We note limited data on the home player and small sample size for Nagel, so the estimate carries uncertainty.

Key factors

  • Market-implied away probability (1/2.95 = 33.9%) is lower than our estimated true probability (40%)
  • Arthur Nagel has a balanced 17-17 career record and experience on multiple surfaces including clay
  • No reported injuries or disqualifying form in the provided research, but opponent data is missing (increases uncertainty)