Highlights

• • Bookmakers imply an 84.7% chance for Sharygin, but research shows only a single recorded match (0-1).
• • Home underdog at 4.50 would need >22.2% true win probability to be profitable; we lack support for that level.

Pros

• + If Sharygin is substantially better than his one recorded match suggests, the market price could be justified.
• + Large underdog odds (4.50) provide high upside if unknown home player is actually competitive.

Cons

• - Extremely limited data on both players in the provided research increases uncertainty.
• - Current favorite price (1.18) yields a negative expected value under conservative probability estimates.

Details

We compare the market-implied probabilities to a conservative estimate of the true win probability given the very limited research. The market prices Evan Sharygin at decimal 1.18 (implied ~84.7%) despite only one recorded professional match (0-1 on hard), which indicates a very small sample and substantial model uncertainty. Thomas Giles is listed as a long home underdog at 4.50 (implied ~22.2%) but we have no performance data for him in the provided research to justify a probability materially above the implied 22.2%. Using a cautious estimate that Sharygin's true win probability is about 70% (reflecting bookmaker favoritism but accounting for tiny sample/no clear evidence), the expected value on Sharygin at 1.18 is negative (EV = 0.70*1.18 - 1 = -0.174). To recommend a side we need positive EV at available prices; neither side shows provable positive EV given the information provided, so we recommend no bet.

Key factors

• • Market-implied probability for Sharygin (1.18) is ~84.7%, which is high relative to available evidence
• • Sharygin has only one recorded match (0-1 on hard) — extremely small sample and high uncertainty
• • No performance or form data provided for Thomas Giles to justify backing the 4.50 underdog