Highlights

• • Market heavy favorite (1.40) implies 71% — research doesn't support that gap
• • Underdog Sloane at 3.10 yields ~0.395 EV using a 45% true probability

Pros

• + Large discrepancy between implied and estimated true probability creates clear value
• + Simple, conservative model based on directly comparable records from the provided data

Cons

• - Research provides limited detail (no H2H, injuries, or deeper form context), increasing variance
• - If unknown contextual factors (recent practice, draws, or off-court issues) favor the market favorite, EV could disappear

Details

We see both players with nearly identical recent profiles (each 10-21 in the provided span) and no additional injury or H2H information in the research. The market prices the away player at 1.40 (implied ~71.4%), which is far higher than the parity suggested by the records. We estimate the true win probability for Sloane Stephens (home) at 45% based on the similar form and lack of distinguishing factors; that translates to a fair decimal price of ~2.222. At the current bookmaker price of 3.10 for Stephens, the bet offers positive expected value (EV = 0.45 * 3.10 - 1 = 0.395). The away price (1.40) contains negative EV under our probability estimate for that player, so we recommend backing the underdog (home) because the market appears to overstate the favorite given the available data.

Key factors

• • Both players show identical season records in the provided research (10-21), implying similar recent form
• • Market implies ~71% for the away player (1.40) which is inconsistent with parity from the profiles
• • No injury, head-to-head, or surface advantage information in the research increases model uncertainty