MaxBetto
< Back

Toby Samuel vs German Mingaleev

Tennis
2025-09-10 20:07
Start: 2025-09-10 20:02

Summary

No pick
EV: -0.273

Current Odds

Home -|Away 161
Best Odds

Match Info

Match key: Toby Samuel_German Mingaleev_2025-09-10

Analysis

Summary: Market price (Toby 1.01) is too short relative to a realistic assessment of his win probability (~72%); no value on either side with the available information.

Highlights

  • Toby is the clear favorite on paper but not a near-lock based on his record and form
  • Insufficient data on Mingaleev means the 16.0 price cannot be reliably judged as value

Pros

  • + We use the player's documented record and surface experience to form a conservative probability
  • + Avoids taking a pub-favorite price that is extremely short and obviously negative EV

Cons

  • - Lack of any research data on the opponent limits the ability to detect potential long-odds value
  • - Our probability estimate is necessarily conservative and could be off if there are unreported factors

Details

We reviewed the available profile for Toby Samuel and the quoted market prices (Toby 1.01, Mingaleev 16.0). Toby's season record (14-12) and mixed recent results indicate a clear favorite but not a near-100% probability of winning. There is no independent data provided on German Mingaleev, so we cannot credibly assign him a high true-win probability. We estimate Toby's true win probability around 72% given his experience on hard and clay and modest recent form; that implies minimum fair odds of ~1.389. The market price of 1.01 offers no value (EV = 0.72*1.01 - 1 = -0.273), and the underdog line (16.0) may look attractive but we lack any evidence to justify a true probability high enough to make that a value play. Given the supplied research and the extreme shortness of the favorite's price, we do not recommend wagering on either side at the current prices.

Key factors

  • Toby Samuel's moderate record (14-12) and mixed recent form limit his true-win probability
  • Quoted market price for favorite (1.01) implies near-certainty and offers no value versus our estimate
  • No provided data on German Mingaleev prevents credible reweighting toward the long underdog