Highlights

• • PVISION implied by market: ~62.2%; our conservative estimate: 60%
• • EV at current PVISION price: about -3.6% (negative)
• • Both sides are negative EV under conservative assumptions, so no bet recommended

Pros

• + Market clearly identifies a favorite, so prices are liquid and widely available
• + We used conservative, simple probability estimates to avoid overrating value

Cons

• - Lack of any match-specific data (form, roster changes, map veto performance) increases uncertainty
• - Even small shifts in true probability could flip EV; current margins are thin

Details

We have no external research so we make a conservative estimate that PVISION (home) has a ~60% true chance to win (0.60) and Tidebound ~40% (0.40). The market moneyline implies probabilities of ~62.2% (1/1.606) for PVISION and ~42.7% (1/2.34) for Tidebound, which include a bookmaker margin. Using our conservative true probabilities, the fair decimal for PVISION would be 1.667 (1/0.60). The current PVISION price of 1.606 is shorter than our required 1.667, producing negative expected value (EV = 0.60 * 1.606 - 1 = -0.0364, about -3.6% ROI). Tidebound at 2.34 is also shorter than the 2.5 we’d require for a 40% win estimate (EV = 0.40 * 2.34 - 1 = -0.064, about -6.4% ROI). Given both sides show negative EV against our conservative probabilities, we do not recommend a bet. We note high uncertainty due to lack of form, roster, and matchup data; if new information shifts our win probabilities enough to make EV positive, we would re-evaluate.

Key factors

• • No external/current roster, form, or head-to-head data available
• • Market prices imply PVISION as favorite (1.606) with bookmaker margin
• • Conservative probability estimates place both sides with negative EV at current odds