MaxBetto
< Back

Mila Masic vs Alexandra Vasilyeva

Tennis
2025-09-14 07:22
Start: 2025-09-14 07:18

Summary

Pick: home
EV: 0.193

Current Odds

Home 1.03|Away 12.5
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Mila Masic_Alexandra Vasilyeva_2025-09-14

Analysis

Summary: We find value on the home (Mila Masic) at 2.65 — our conservative true-win estimate of 45% yields a ~19% expected ROI versus the market-implied 37.7%.

Highlights

  • Current home odds (2.65) imply only ~37.7% chance but we estimate ~45%
  • Positive EV of ~0.193 (19.3% ROI) at the quoted home price

Pros

  • + Market appears to overvalue the away player despite near-identical records
  • + Odds margin (2.65 vs required 2.222) provides a clear buffer for value

Cons

  • - Both players have poor recent form and limited data — outcome variance is high
  • - No H2H or venue-specific edge; estimate relies on parity reasoning rather than strong positive indicators

Details

We view the market as overpricing Alexandra Vasilyeva despite both players showing nearly identical career records (10-21) and similar recent form. The sportsbook-implied probabilities are ~69.9% for the away win (1.43) and ~37.7% for the home win (2.65). Given the parity in available data (same career span, same surfaces played, no reported injuries or H2H advantage), we estimate Mila Masic's true win probability is materially higher than the market-implied 37.7% — we use 45% as a conservative, evidence-based estimate. At that probability the expected value is positive: EV = 0.45 * 2.65 - 1 = 0.193 (19.3% ROI on a 1-unit stake). The minimum fair decimal odds for a +EV play at our probability is 2.222; current home odds of 2.65 exceed that threshold, producing positive value. We therefore recommend backing the home under a value-focused, tiered-odds approach while noting limited data and elevated variance.

Key factors

  • Both players show nearly identical career records and recent form (10-21), limiting a clear edge
  • Market strongly favors the away player (implied ~69.9%), which looks overstated given parity in available data
  • No reported injuries, similar surface experience (clay, hard), and no H2H data to justify the market gap