Yvonne Cavalle-Reimers / Alicia Herrero Linana vs Anna Rogers / Janice Tjen

Highlights

• • Market-implied probability (~53.3%) is higher than our estimated probability (48%)
• • Required fair price for value is ~2.083; current quotes are too short

Pros

• + Both sides priced identically, so there is no clear market-favored team to exploit
• + Conservative approach protects bankroll from wide uncertainty due to sparse data

Cons

• - Limited player/partner information and lack of H2H make the probability estimate uncertain
• - If our probability underestimates one team's synergy, value could exist but is unconfirmable from provided research

Details

We see both sides posted at identical decimals (1.877) implying an implied probability of ~53.3% per side (1 / 1.877 = 0.533). Our assessment of true win probability is lower (48%) based on the limited, negative form data available for two known players (Alicia Herrero Linana and Janice Tjen each showing losing records and limited match wins on the documented span), no head-to-head data, and no clear surface or pairing advantage evident from the provided research. At our estimate (p = 0.48), the fair decimal price would be ~2.083; the current market price of 1.877 is too short and produces a negative expected value (EV = 0.48 * 1.877 - 1 = -0.099). Therefore we do not recommend taking either side at the current prices — the market must offer at least ~2.083 on a side for value given our probability estimate.

Key factors

• • Both researched players (Alicia Herrero Linana and Janice Tjen) show poor recent win-loss records (approx. 10-21), indicating negative recent form
• • Market is symmetric (both sides 1.877) — implies ~53.3% per side including vig, leaving little margin for value against our conservative probability
• • No head-to-head data, incomplete information on the other partners (Yvonne Cavalle-Reimers and Anna Rogers) and surface/team synergy increases uncertainty