O. Gniewkowska/A. Lazar vs M. Horvit/M. Ngounoue

Highlights

• • Conservative estimated true probability for home: 40% (min required odds 2.5).
• • Current home price 2.8 yields EV ≈ +0.12 (12% ROI) per unit staked.

Pros

• + Clear positive expected value relative to our conservative probability estimate
• + Market appears to over-favor the away side based on implied probabilities

Cons

• - Very limited information on player form, surface and pairing chemistry increases uncertainty
• - Doubles outcomes can be volatile and more sensitive to small differences in teamwork and matchup

Details

We compare the bookmaker-implied probabilities (Away 1.4 => ~71.4%, Home 2.8 => ~35.7%) to our conservative true-probability estimate. With no external form, surface, injury, or H2H data available, we shrink our view toward parity but still allow for the underdog to have material chances in a doubles match. We estimate the home pair's true win probability at 40% (0.40). At decimal 2.8 this produces positive expected value (EV = 0.40 * 2.8 - 1 = 0.12, or +12% ROI). The market's price for the favourite (1.4) appears too short relative to our conservative estimate of its win probability (60%), so we avoid the favourite and recommend backing the home side only because the available odds (2.8) exceed the minimum fair odds implied by our estimate (2.5).

Key factors

• • No additional data on form, surface, injuries or H2H — we use conservative, shrinkage-based estimates
• • Bookmaker implied probability for away (1.4) is very high (~71%) and likely overstates certainty given unknowns
• • Home decimal 2.8 exceeds our required fair price (2.5) for a 40% win chance, creating positive EV