Highlights

• • Implied market probability for away = ~94.3%, for home = ~11.1%
• • Our estimated home probability (12%) implies fair odds 8.333; market offers 9.0

Pros

• + Clear mathematical edge at the quoted home price (EV ≈ +8%)
• + Large market skew increases potential value on longshot underdog

Cons

• - No external match data to reduce model uncertainty (surface, injuries, form unknown)
• - Edge is small and outcome variance for underdogs is high — risk of losing despite positive EV

Details

Market prices heavily favor the away pair at 1.06 (implied probability ~94.3%), pricing the home side at 9.0 (implied ~11.11%). We have no external data (surface, injuries, form, H2H) and therefore use conservative assumptions: while the away pair is likely the stronger team, a realistic upset probability in doubles is materially higher than the market-implied 5.7% (1 - 0.9434). We estimate the home pair's true win probability at 12.0% (0.12). At the quoted home price of 9.0 this yields EV = 0.12 * 9.0 - 1 = +0.08 (8% ROI on a 1-unit stake). The minimum fair decimal price for this estimated probability is 1 / 0.12 = 8.333; the market's 9.0 exceeds that, creating a small positive edge. Given the lack of corroborating data, this edge is modest and comes with high uncertainty, but it meets our criterion for recommending a value bet.

Key factors

• • Market strongly skews to the away side (1.06) creating a large underdog price for the home pair
• • No external data available (surface, injuries, recent form, H2H) — we use conservative assumptions increasing uncertainty
• • Doubles matches can have higher upset variance than singles, supporting a non-negligible upset probability