Highlights

• • Home at 2.6 implies only a 38.5% chance; our model gives Trevisan ~48%
• • EV on Trevisan at current price ~+0.248 (24.8% ROI per unit) given our probability

Pros

• + Clear pricing gap between market-implied probability and assessed chance
• + Both players' supplied data are virtually identical, reducing justification for strong favoritism

Cons

• - Data set is limited and recent form for both players is weak, increasing variance
• - No head-to-head, injury, or venue-specific advantage information in the research

Details

We see a clear discrepancy between the market price and what the limited match data supports. The market prices Rebecca Marino as a strong favorite (1.5 => implied 66.7%), but the provided profiles show both players with identical overall records (10-21) and near-identical recent results on similar surfaces, which does not justify such a wide gap. Given the parity in form, surface experience, and absence of injury or head-to-head information in the research, we estimate Martina Trevisan's true win probability materially above the market-implied 38.5% (2.6 => implied 38.5%). Using an estimated true probability of 48% for Trevisan produces positive expected value at the current 2.6 price. We acknowledge high uncertainty due to limited and similar data for both players, but the market overprices Marino relative to the available evidence, creating value on the home underdog.

Key factors

• • Both players show identical overall records (10-21) in the provided research
• • Recent match listings and surface exposure are similar, providing no strong edge to the favorite
• • Market-implied probability for the away favorite (66.7%) is not supported by the supplied data