MaxBetto
< Back

Sonja Zhenikhova vs Gina Feistel

Tennis
2025-09-12 21:36
Start: 2025-09-13 09:30

Summary

No pick
EV: 0

Current Odds

Home 2.63|Away 1.465
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Sonja Zhenikhova_Gina Feistel_2025-09-13

Analysis

Summary: No value: based on the available data we estimate Sonja Zhenikhova's true win chance at ~45%, requiring ~2.222 to be +EV but market offers 2.09, so we pass.

Highlights

  • Market-implied probabilities are close to our estimates after removing vig
  • Current prices do not reach the break-even threshold for either player

Pros

  • + Transparent reasoning: identical profiles and lack of distinguishing factors reduce forecasting bias
  • + We calculated the break-even odds (2.222) so bettors know the threshold for value

Cons

  • - Research is limited and lacks H2H, detailed recent-match stats, and surface specifics
  • - Small information gaps mean our probability estimate carries uncertainty

Details

We find no profitable edge. The listed prices (Home 2.09, Away 1.685) imply a bookmaker overround (~7.1%); normalizing gives market win probabilities near Home 44.6% / Away 55.4%. The players' available profiles show nearly identical career records (10-21) and mixed results on clay/hard with no clear recent advantage for either player. Given the lack of distinctive form, H2H, surface advantage or injury information in the research, we model Sonja Zhenikhova (home) at a true win probability of 45%. At that probability the break-even decimal price is ~2.222; the current home price 2.09 is too short and yields a negative EV. The away price (1.685) would require an implied win probability >59.3% to be +EV, which exceeds our estimated true probability for Gina Feistel. Therefore neither side offers positive expected value at available prices.

Key factors

  • Both players show near-identical career records and recent results in the provided profiles
  • Market contains a meaningful overround; normalized market probs ~Home 44.6% / Away 55.4%
  • No surface, injury, or head-to-head detail in the research to justify diverging from market