Tennis model: Elo + serve/return point model, venue speed, matchups, form/fatigue (PLAN.md P1-P6). No pressure layer. The same matches are priced separately on the Tennis Pressure tab.
card 2026-11-12 15:50 UTC · state built 2026-11-12 06:39 · 36 open ATP/Challenger moneylines · 2839 tracked, 2717 graded · backtest model 0.5920 vs Pinnacle 0.5818 log loss (24529 tour matches)
Data lag: box scores through 2026-11-08 (ManTennisData publishes once a week, Saturdays). Since then 242 results from the Polymarket archive are overlaid (winner only: ratings, matches this week and rest days move; hours on court are estimated at 95 min, serve stats and live venue speed cannot update until the next Saturday file).
| price source | log-loss | n |
|---|---|---|
| model (raw) | 0.6292 | 1311 |
| model shrunk to market (what stakes use) | 0.6377 | 1169 |
| Elo layer | 0.6303 | 1311 |
| point model | 0.6410 | 1311 |
| Polymarket mid at snapshot | 0.6488 | 1311 |
| Polymarket close | 0.5969 | 1311 |
| market price used | n | fitted weight on market | ± se | log loss: model | market | fit | policy blend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| snapshot mid | 2717 | 0.54 | 0.06 | 0.6214 | 0.6185 | 0.6099 | 0.6112 |
| closing mid | 2708 | 1.00 | 0.09 | 0.6222 | 0.5941 | 0.5946 | 0.5966 |
Green = the policy weight sits inside the fitted 2-se band; red = the data has separated from it. Read by tier once each has a few hundred matches.
| subset | n | mean move | moved toward us |
|---|---|---|---|
| all graded with a close | 2717 | +3.3 pts | 53% |
| logged bets (edge ≥ 5%) | 1311 | +6.6 pts | 64% |
| edge ≥ 10% | 66 | +1.4 pts | 48% |
| edge ≥ 15% | 21 | -0.1 pts | 48% |
| filter | bets | hits | staked | PnL | ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| all bets | 458 | 223 | 573.6u | -11.76u | -2.1% |
| edge ≥ 5% | 190 | 73 | 410.2u | -37.48u | -9.1% |
| edge ≥ 10% | 66 | 26 | 201.4u | -7.60u | -3.8% |
| edge ≥ 15% | 21 | 7 | 85.4u | -19.80u | -23.2% |
| start (UTC) | match | wager | % to win | Poly price | edge | tournament | speed | flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-12 13:10 · LIVE | Dalibor Svrcina vs Otto Virtanenarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / big-serve/mid-return/tall sizing: raw model A 51.9% -> shrunk 46.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 51.9% (Elo 58.0%, point model 55.2%) · PM mid A 44.5% Elo 1940 vs 1884 · hold 73% vs 71% · serve 60.0%/66.2% · return 45.6%/38.1% · rank 107 vs 158 · matches 332/312 · venue speed 1.15 (prior 1.15, 0 seen) form A: 6.2h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.25 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d -0.33, F3 matches 7d +0.21, F1 strength +0.18, F6 serve vs return -0.16, F1 ranking +0.15, F6 height -0.05 in plain English: Dalibor Svrcina has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.2 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Dalibor Svrcina. Dalibor Svrcina has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Dalibor Svrcina is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1940 vs 1884), a small push. Otto Virtanen's serve matches up well against Dalibor Svrcina's return, a small effect. Rankings favour Dalibor Svrcina (107 vs 158), a small effect on top of Elo. Otto Virtanen is the taller player (191 vs 178 cm), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.5u on Dalibor Svrcina @ 0.43 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 46.7% | 0.45 | +1.7% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 1.7% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 13:30 · LIVE | Moez Echargui vs Mika Petkovicarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 64.8% -> shrunk 66.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 64.8% (Elo 60.8%, point model 48.7%) · PM mid A 67.5% Elo 1709 vs 1632 · hold 73% vs 73% · serve 61.8%/61.0% · return 38.6%/39.7% · rank 142 vs 501 · matches 252/37 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 1.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.35 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -1.00 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.49, age -0.26, F1 strength +0.24, F3 2nd-serve trend +0.10, F3 hours 14d +0.02 in plain English: Rankings favour Moez Echargui (142 vs 501), a big effect on top of Elo. The age curve favours Mika Petkovic (the younger player tends to be improving), a solid effect. Moez Echargui is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1709 vs 1632), a solid push. Second-serve form over the last three matches favours Moez Echargui (Moez Echargui +0.3 sd vs Mika Petkovic -1.0 sd against their own norms), a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Moez Echargui @ 0.66 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 33.3% | 0.33 | +0.3% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 13:30 · LIVE | Kilian Feldbausch vs Mae Maligearchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 75.7% -> shrunk 77.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 75.7% (Elo 74.4%, point model 83.1%) · PM mid A 77.5% Elo 1741 vs 1556 · hold 73% vs 56% · serve 62.0%/57.1% · return 42.1%/39.6% · rank 287 vs 545 · matches 132/50 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 7.2h last 7d, 4 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 4.8h, 3 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F1 strength +0.58, F1 ranking +0.25, F2 point model +0.21, F3 hours 7d -0.17, F3 hours 14d +0.11, F3 matches 7d +0.11 in plain English: Kilian Feldbausch is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1741 vs 1556), a big push. Rankings favour Kilian Feldbausch (287 vs 545), a solid effect on top of Elo. The serve-and-return numbers give Kilian Feldbausch a solid extra edge: projected holds 73% vs 56%. Kilian Feldbausch has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (7.2 h vs 4.8 h), a small fatigue penalty against Kilian Feldbausch. Kilian Feldbausch has played more tennis in the last 14 days (11.5 h vs 4.8 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. Kilian Feldbausch has played more matches this week (4 vs 3): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Kilian Feldbausch @ 0.98 placed 11-11 18:05 UTC · held | 23.0% | 0.23 | +0.0% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.0% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 14:00 · LIVE | Thiago Agustin Tirante vs Alexander Shevchenkoarchetypes: mid-serve/mid-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 64.7% -> shrunk 54.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 64.7% (Elo 59.9%, point model 65.6%) · PM mid A 49.5% Elo 1929 vs 1859 · hold 85% vs 80% · serve 67.1%/64.8% · return 38.2%/37.4% · rank 52 vs 97 · matches 405/361 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 0.0h last 7d, 0 matches, rest 8d, 2nd-serve z -0.32 · form B: 0.9h, 1 matches, rest 7d, z +0.15 drivers (logit): F2 point model +0.32, F1 strength +0.17, F1 ranking +0.07, F3 hours 14d +0.04, F3 matches 7d -0.04, F3 hours 7d +0.04 in plain English: The serve-and-return numbers give Thiago Agustin Tirante a solid extra edge: projected holds 85% vs 80%. Thiago Agustin Tirante is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1929 vs 1859), a small push. Rankings favour Thiago Agustin Tirante (52 vs 97), a marginal effect on top of Elo. | ✓ 0.0u on Thiago Agustin Tirante @ 0.98 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 54.2% | 0.50 | +4.2% | BNP Paribas Nordic Open 250 Hard | 1.03 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); venue unresolved; edge 4.2% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 14:40 · LIVE | Pedro Martinez vs Matteo Martineauarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 56.2% -> shrunk 43.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 56.2% (Elo 57.7%, point model 44.9%) · PM mid A 38.5% Elo 1828 vs 1775 · hold 76% vs 78% · serve 60.8%/64.7% · return 40.7%/37.4% · rank 139 vs 335 · matches 581/367 · venue speed 1.15 (prior 1.15, 0 seen) form A: 1.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.46 · form B: 6.3h, 4 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.34, F3 hours 7d +0.34, F3 matches 7d -0.32, F1 strength +0.17, F3 hours 14d -0.15, F3 2nd-serve trend -0.04 in plain English: Rankings favour Pedro Martinez (139 vs 335), a solid effect on top of Elo. Matteo Martineau has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.3 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Matteo Martineau. Matteo Martineau has played more matches this week (4 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Pedro Martinez is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1828 vs 1775), a small push. Matteo Martineau has played more tennis in the last 14 days (10.8 h vs 1.6 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Pedro Martinez @ 0.98 placed 11-11 18:05 UTC · held | 43.7% | 0.39 | +4.7% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.7% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 16:00 | Alan Magadan vs Alex Barrenaarchetypes: ? / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 36.7% -> shrunk 27.9% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 36.7% (Elo 34.2%, point model 31.1%) · PM mid A 24.5% Elo 1635 vs 1749 · hold 65% vs 73% · serve 59.0%/59.0% · return 39.8%/42.4% · rank 649 vs 197 · matches 55/177 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 4.8h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 0.0h, 0 matches, rest 17d, z -0.67 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.47, F1 strength -0.36, F3 hours 7d -0.34, F3 matches 7d +0.32, F3 rest +0.21, F3 hours 14d +0.12 in plain English: Rankings favour Alex Barrena (649 vs 197), a big effect on top of Elo. Alex Barrena is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1635 vs 1749), a solid push. Alan Magadan has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.8 h vs 0.0 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Alan Magadan. Alan Magadan has played more matches this week (3 vs 0): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Alex Barrena has had the longer break (17 vs 2 days since the last match); in the data long gaps mean rust or an injury more often than freshness, a solid effect for Alan Magadan. Alan Magadan has played more tennis in the last 14 days (7.1 h vs 0.0 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.2u on Alan Magadan @ 0.24 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 27.9% | 0.25 | +2.9% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 2.9% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 16:00 | Ozan Baris vs Michael Zheng | — | — | 27.5% | — | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | — | not priced: player unresolved: Ozan Baris |
| 11-12 17:30 | Franco Roncadelli vs Francisco Comesanaarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 29.1% -> shrunk 23.6% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 29.1% (Elo 28.3%, point model 31.2%) · PM mid A 21.5% Elo 1709 vs 1871 · hold 66% vs 74% · serve 57.6%/63.7% · return 43.4%/40.9% · rank 227 vs 89 · matches 141/288 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 4.8h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.17 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.51, F1 ranking -0.37, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F3 matches 7d +0.21, F2 point model -0.11, F3 hours 14d +0.09 in plain English: Francisco Comesana is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1709 vs 1871), a big push. Rankings favour Francisco Comesana (227 vs 89), a solid effect on top of Elo. Franco Roncadelli has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.8 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Franco Roncadelli. Franco Roncadelli has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Francisco Comesana a small extra edge: projected holds 66% vs 74%. Franco Roncadelli has played more tennis in the last 14 days (9.8 h vs 4.5 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Franco Roncadelli @ 0.28 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 23.6% | 0.22 | +1.6% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 1.6% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 17:30 | Stefan Kozlov vs Braden Shickarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 50.6% -> shrunk 63.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 50.6% (Elo 53.6%, point model 62.8%) · PM mid A 68.5% Elo 1759 vs 1734 · hold 74% vs 69% · serve 60.0%/61.3% · return 41.6%/37.9% · rank 319 vs ? · matches 519/47 · venue speed 1.17 (prior 1.17, 0 seen) form A: 6.1h last 7d, 4 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 2.6h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z +0.38 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d -0.25, F3 matches 7d +0.21, age -0.11, F1 strength +0.08, F2 point model +0.07, F3 hours 14d +0.07 in plain English: Stefan Kozlov has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.1 h vs 2.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Stefan Kozlov. Stefan Kozlov has played more matches this week (4 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. The age curve favours Braden Shick (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Stefan Kozlov is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1759 vs 1734), a marginal push. The serve-and-return numbers give Stefan Kozlov a marginal extra edge: projected holds 74% vs 69%. Stefan Kozlov has played more tennis in the last 14 days (8.4 h vs 4.3 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Braden Shick @ 0.40 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 36.6% | 0.32 | +4.6% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.6% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 17:30 | Taylor Fritz vs Holger Runearchetypes: big-serve/mid-return/tall / mid-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 72.9% -> shrunk 68.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 72.9% (Elo 64.4%, point model 69.6%) · PM mid A 66.5% Elo 2194 vs 2090 · hold 89% vs 82% · serve 72.1%/67.9% · return 39.5%/39.8% · rank 9 vs 64 · matches 719/364 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 3.9h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 4d, 2nd-serve z +1.41 · form B: 0.0h, 0 matches, rest 10d, z +0.07 drivers (logit): F2 point model +0.42, F1 strength +0.25, F1 ranking +0.23, age -0.17, F3 hours 7d -0.15, F3 hours 14d +0.10 in plain English: The serve-and-return numbers give Taylor Fritz a big extra edge: projected holds 89% vs 82%. Taylor Fritz is the stronger player by rating (Elo 2194 vs 2090), a solid push. Rankings favour Taylor Fritz (9 vs 64), a solid effect on top of Elo. The age curve favours Holger Rune (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Taylor Fritz has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (3.9 h vs 0.0 h), a small fatigue penalty against Taylor Fritz. Taylor Fritz has played more tennis in the last 14 days (10.3 h vs 3.4 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Taylor Fritz @ 0.98 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 68.5% | 0.67 | +1.5% | BNP Paribas Nordic Open 250 Hard | 1.03 | venue unresolved; edge 1.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 18:00 | Sebastian Baez vs Calvin Hemeryarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 79.0% -> shrunk 75.6% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 79.0% (Elo 76.0%, point model 61.2%) · PM mid A 74.0% Elo 1910 vs 1710 · hold 81% vs 76% · serve 62.0%/64.1% · return 40.8%/36.2% · rank 56 vs 276 · matches 372/534 · venue speed 1.15 (prior 1.15, 0 seen) form A: 1.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.58 · form B: 4.8h, 3 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F1 strength +0.63, F1 ranking +0.62, F3 hours 7d +0.22, F3 matches 7d -0.21, age +0.11, F6 height -0.08 in plain English: Sebastian Baez is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1910 vs 1710), a big push. Rankings favour Sebastian Baez (56 vs 276), a big effect on top of Elo. Calvin Hemery has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.8 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Calvin Hemery. Calvin Hemery has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. The age curve favours Sebastian Baez (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Calvin Hemery is the taller player (191 vs 170 cm), a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Sebastian Baez @ 0.76 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 75.6% | 0.75 | +0.6% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 2c (need < 2c); edge 0.6% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 19:00 | Filip Jeff Planinsek vs Alastair Grayarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 38.2% -> shrunk 30.9% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 38.2% (Elo 43.0%, point model 21.8%) · PM mid A 28.0% Elo 1607 vs 1656 · hold 75% vs 86% · serve 59.6%/63.5% · return 34.6%/36.8% · rank 525 vs 269 · matches 16/105 · venue speed 1.17 (prior 1.17, 0 seen) form A: 4.8h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.27 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.26, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F3 matches 7d +0.21, F2 point model -0.17, F1 strength -0.15, age +0.06 in plain English: Rankings favour Alastair Gray (525 vs 269), a solid effect on top of Elo. Filip Jeff Planinsek has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.8 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Filip Jeff Planinsek. Filip Jeff Planinsek has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Alastair Gray a small extra edge: projected holds 75% vs 86%. Alastair Gray is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1607 vs 1656), a small push. The age curve favours Filip Jeff Planinsek (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Filip Jeff Planinsek @ 0.38 placed 11-11 00:24 UTC · held | 30.9% | 0.29 | +1.9% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; thin data (16/105 matches); quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 2c (need < 2c); edge 1.9% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 19:00 | Lorenzo Musetti vs Ugo Humbertarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 65.0% -> shrunk 64.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 65.0% (Elo 66.5%, point model 57.3%) · PM mid A 64.5% Elo 2158 vs 2039 · hold 85% vs 82% · serve 68.2%/68.9% · return 40.8%/38.6% · rank 16 vs 33 · matches 447/512 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 2.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 6d, 2nd-serve z +0.52 · form B: 0.0h, 0 matches, rest 8d, z +0.02 drivers (logit): F1 strength +0.29, F2 point model +0.15, age +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.10, F1 ranking +0.09, F3 matches 7d +0.04 in plain English: Lorenzo Musetti is the stronger player by rating (Elo 2158 vs 2039), a solid push. The serve-and-return numbers give Lorenzo Musetti a small extra edge: projected holds 85% vs 82%. The age curve favours Lorenzo Musetti (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Lorenzo Musetti has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (2.6 h vs 0.0 h), a small fatigue penalty against Lorenzo Musetti. Rankings favour Lorenzo Musetti (16 vs 33), a small effect on top of Elo. | ✓ 0.0u on Ugo Humbert @ 0.34 placed 11-11 19:05 UTC · held | 64.7% | 0.65 | -0.3% | BNP Paribas Nordic Open 250 Hard | 1.03 | venue unresolved; edge -0.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 19:30 | Nishesh Basavareddy vs Kyrian Jacquetarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 54.5% -> shrunk 55.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 54.5% (Elo 47.8%, point model 53.8%) · PM mid A 55.5% Elo 1934 vs 1950 · hold 79% vs 78% · serve 64.9%/65.0% · return 41.1%/40.0% · rank 136 vs 146 · matches 181/279 · venue speed 1.15 (prior 1.15, 0 seen) form A: 2.9h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.18 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.83 drivers (logit): F3 matches 7d +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.09, age +0.07, F1 strength -0.05, F3 2nd-serve trend +0.05, F3 hours 14d +0.05 in plain English: Nishesh Basavareddy has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Nishesh Basavareddy has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (2.9 h vs 1.6 h), a small fatigue penalty against Nishesh Basavareddy. The age curve favours Nishesh Basavareddy (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Kyrian Jacquet @ 0.46 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 44.8% | 0.45 | -0.2% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge -0.2% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 22:00 | Marcos Giron vs Abedallah Shelbayharchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / low-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 74.8% -> shrunk 73.9% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 74.8% (Elo 69.4%, point model 65.9%) · PM mid A 73.5% Elo 1899 vs 1756 · hold 82% vs 76% · serve 65.5%/61.5% · return 38.4%/39.0% · rank 88 vs 308 · matches 623/252 · venue speed 1.17 (prior 1.17, 0 seen) form A: 2.9h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.58 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.42 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.49, F1 strength +0.45, age -0.19, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.09, opp. retirement hazard +0.09 in plain English: Rankings favour Marcos Giron (88 vs 308), a big effect on top of Elo. Marcos Giron is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1899 vs 1756), a big push. The age curve favours Abedallah Shelbayh (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Marcos Giron has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Marcos Giron has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (2.9 h vs 1.6 h), a small fatigue penalty against Marcos Giron. Abedallah Shelbayh retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Marcos Giron. | ✓ 0.0u on Marcos Giron @ 0.72 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 73.9% | 0.74 | -0.1% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge -0.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 22:30 | Joao Lucas Da Silva vs Gonzalo Buenoarchetypes: ? / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 42.7% -> shrunk 54.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 42.7% (Elo 46.4%, point model 43.5%) · PM mid A 59.5% Elo 1769 vs 1794 · hold 66% vs 69% · serve 58.8%/58.5% · return 41.2%/42.3% · rank ? vs 180 · matches 5/230 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 4.3h, 3 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 7d +0.08, F1 strength -0.08, age -0.07, F2 point model -0.04, F3 hours 14d -0.03 in plain English: Gonzalo Bueno has played more matches this week (3 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Gonzalo Bueno has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.3 h vs 3.2 h), a small fatigue penalty against Gonzalo Bueno. Gonzalo Bueno is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1769 vs 1794), a marginal push. The age curve favours Gonzalo Bueno (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.2u on Gonzalo Bueno @ 0.46 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 45.5% | 0.41 | +4.5% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; thin data (5/230 matches); edge 4.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 00:00 | Genaro Alberto Olivieri vs Juan Pablo Varillasarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / low-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 55.3% -> shrunk 44.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 55.3% (Elo 44.5%, point model 48.7%) · PM mid A 39.5% Elo 1738 vs 1777 · hold 71% vs 71% · serve 58.5%/61.3% · return 42.1%/40.6% · rank 202 vs 307 · matches 359/518 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 6.5h last 7d, 4 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z -0.56 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d -0.35, F3 matches 7d +0.32, F1 ranking +0.16, F1 strength -0.12, F3 hours 14d +0.08, age +0.05 in plain English: Genaro Alberto Olivieri has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.5 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Genaro Alberto Olivieri. Genaro Alberto Olivieri has played more matches this week (4 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Rankings favour Genaro Alberto Olivieri (202 vs 307), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. Juan Pablo Varillas is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1738 vs 1777), a small push. Genaro Alberto Olivieri has played more tennis in the last 14 days (9.3 h vs 4.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. The age curve favours Genaro Alberto Olivieri (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.2u on Genaro Alberto Olivieri @ 0.43 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 44.2% | 0.40 | +4.2% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.2% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 01:00 | Sebastian Gorzny vs Alex Boltarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 28.5% -> shrunk 44.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 28.5% (Elo 43.9%, point model 46.3%) · PM mid A 51.5% Elo 1740 vs 1782 · hold 82% vs 83% · serve 63.4%/65.6% · return 38.5%/36.7% · rank 1285 vs 157 · matches 24/544 · venue speed 1.16 (prior 1.16, 0 seen) form A: 1.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.05 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.02 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.82, F1 strength -0.14, age +0.13, F3 hours 7d +0.11, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 14d -0.03 in plain English: Rankings favour Alex Bolt (1285 vs 157), a big effect on top of Elo. Alex Bolt is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1740 vs 1782), a small push. The age curve favours Sebastian Gorzny (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Alex Bolt has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (3.2 h vs 1.6 h), a small fatigue penalty against Alex Bolt. Alex Bolt has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. | ✓ 1.0u on Alex Bolt @ 0.56 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 55.8% | 0.49 | +6.8% | Brisbane 3 ch100 Hard AUS | 1.16 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet |
| 11-13 02:00 | Yu-Hsiou Hsu vs Jay Dylan Friendarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 37.1% -> shrunk 40.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 37.1% (Elo 32.9%, point model 31.6%) · PM mid A 41.5% Elo 1719 vs 1843 · hold 72% vs 80% · serve 60.9%/64.7% · return 38.8%/38.7% · rank 206 vs ? · matches 233/64 · venue speed 0.99 (prior 0.99, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.38 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.15 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.39, F2 point model -0.10, F3 hours 14d +0.10, age -0.09, F6 serve vs return -0.02 in plain English: Jay Dylan Friend is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1719 vs 1843), a solid push. The serve-and-return numbers give Jay Dylan Friend a small extra edge: projected holds 72% vs 80%. Yu-Hsiou Hsu has played more tennis in the last 14 days (9.4 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. The age curve favours Jay Dylan Friend (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Jay Dylan Friend @ 0.59 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 59.8% | 0.59 | +0.8% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.8% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 02:00 | Rio Noguchi vs Taro Danielarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 45.3% -> shrunk 35.8% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 45.3% (Elo 40.0%, point model 43.5%) · PM mid A 32.0% Elo 1736 vs 1806 · hold 70% vs 73% · serve 60.2%/63.4% · return 40.9%/39.0% · rank 223 vs 293 · matches 283/865 · venue speed 0.99 (prior 0.99, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z -0.45 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 1d, z +0.02 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.22, F3 hours 7d -0.11, age +0.11, F1 ranking +0.11, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F6 height -0.09 in plain English: Taro Daniel is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1736 vs 1806), a solid push. Rio Noguchi has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (3.2 h vs 1.6 h), a small fatigue penalty against Rio Noguchi. The age curve favours Rio Noguchi (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Rankings favour Rio Noguchi (223 vs 293), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. Rio Noguchi has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Taro Daniel is the taller player (191 vs 168 cm), a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Rio Noguchi @ 0.98 placed 11-12 06:14 UTC · held | 35.8% | 0.35 | +0.8% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 6c (need < 2c); edge 0.8% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 02:30 | Dane Sweeny vs Juncheng Shangarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 41.1% -> shrunk 35.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 41.1% (Elo 28.5%, point model 31.7%) · PM mid A 33.5% Elo 1766 vs 1926 · hold 75% vs 82% · serve 60.5%/65.9% · return 39.5%/38.7% · rank 132 vs 264 · matches 217/210 · venue speed 1.16 (prior 1.16, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z -0.32 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 1d, z -0.88 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.51, F1 ranking +0.27, opp. retirement hazard +0.11, F2 point model -0.10, age -0.07, F6 height -0.05 in plain English: Juncheng Shang is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1766 vs 1926), a big push. Rankings favour Dane Sweeny (132 vs 264), a solid effect, pulling against the Elo read. Juncheng Shang retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Dane Sweeny. The serve-and-return numbers give Juncheng Shang a small extra edge: projected holds 75% vs 82%. The age curve favours Juncheng Shang (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. Juncheng Shang is the taller player (183 vs 170 cm), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Juncheng Shang @ 0.98 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 35.7% | 0.37 | -1.3% | Brisbane 3 ch100 Hard AUS | 1.16 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 7c (need < 2c); edge -1.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 03:30 | Kaichi Uchida vs Billy Harrisarchetypes: mid-serve/mid-return / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 24.1% -> shrunk 22.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 24.1% (Elo 23.7%, point model 28.6%) · PM mid A 21.5% Elo 1555 vs 1758 · hold 76% vs 84% · serve 62.1%/63.1% · return 34.6%/38.2% · rank 253 vs 144 · matches 459/336 · venue speed 0.99 (prior 0.99, 0 seen) form A: 1.6h last 7d, 1 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.19 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z +0.52 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.64, F1 ranking -0.22, F2 point model -0.12, F3 hours 7d +0.11, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 2nd-serve trend -0.06 in plain English: Billy Harris is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1555 vs 1758), a big push. Rankings favour Billy Harris (253 vs 144), a solid effect on top of Elo. The serve-and-return numbers give Billy Harris a small extra edge: projected holds 76% vs 84%. Billy Harris has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (3.2 h vs 1.6 h), a small fatigue penalty against Billy Harris. Billy Harris has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Second-serve form over the last three matches favours Billy Harris (Kaichi Uchida -0.2 sd vs Billy Harris +0.5 sd against their own norms), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Kaichi Uchida @ 0.24 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 22.3% | 0.22 | +0.3% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 03:30 | Rei Sakamoto vs Ognjen Milicarchetypes: big-serve/mid-return/tall / ? sizing: raw model A 83.9% -> shrunk 84.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 83.9% (Elo 87.5%, point model 77.2%) · PM mid A 84.0% Elo 1971 vs 1634 · hold 87% vs 77% · serve 67.2%/61.8% · return 37.4%/36.9% · rank 149 vs 358 · matches 151/32 · venue speed 0.99 (prior 0.99, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 1d, z -0.02 drivers (logit): F1 strength +1.06, F1 ranking +0.34, F2 point model +0.16, F6 height +0.05, F6 2nd serve +0.03 in plain English: Rei Sakamoto is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1971 vs 1634), a big push. Rankings favour Rei Sakamoto (149 vs 358), a solid effect on top of Elo. The serve-and-return numbers give Rei Sakamoto a small extra edge: projected holds 87% vs 77%. Rei Sakamoto is the taller player (193 vs 180 cm), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Rei Sakamoto @ 0.98 placed 11-12 06:14 UTC · held | 16.0% | 0.21 | -5.0% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 10c (need < 2c); edge -5.0% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 04:00 | Bernard Tomic vs August Holmgrenarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return/tall / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 47.0% -> shrunk 43.8% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 47.0% (Elo 58.7%, point model 53.6%) · PM mid A 42.5% Elo 1805 vs 1744 · hold 87% vs 86% · serve 64.8%/66.5% · return 37.4%/35.3% · rank 188 vs 148 · matches 775/216 · venue speed 1.16 (prior 1.16, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.02 drivers (logit): F1 strength +0.19, opp. retirement hazard -0.12, age -0.10, F1 ranking -0.09, F3 hours 14d -0.05, F6 height +0.03 in plain English: Bernard Tomic is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1805 vs 1744), a small push. Bernard Tomic retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for August Holmgren. The age curve favours August Holmgren (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Rankings favour August Holmgren (188 vs 148), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. August Holmgren has played more tennis in the last 14 days (6.2 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Bernard Tomic @ 0.45 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 43.8% | 0.43 | +0.8% | Brisbane 3 ch100 Hard AUS | 1.16 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.8% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 05:30 | Akira Santillan vs Christian Langmoarchetypes: mid-serve/mid-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 50.5% -> shrunk 54.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 50.5% (Elo 51.8%, point model 58.6%) · PM mid A 55.5% Elo 1651 vs 1638 · hold 84% vs 81% · serve 61.9%/63.7% · return 37.9%/34.2% · rank 309 vs 476 · matches 386/215 · venue speed 1.16 (prior 1.16, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 6.8h, 4 matches, rest 1d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d +0.26, F3 matches 7d -0.21, F1 ranking +0.17, opp. retirement hazard -0.12, F3 hours 14d -0.08, F2 point model +0.05 in plain English: Christian Langmo has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.8 h vs 3.2 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Christian Langmo. Christian Langmo has played more matches this week (4 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Rankings favour Akira Santillan (309 vs 476), a small effect on top of Elo. Akira Santillan retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Christian Langmo. Christian Langmo has played more tennis in the last 14 days (8.2 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Christian Langmo @ 0.98 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 46.0% | 0.49 | -3.0% | Brisbane 3 ch100 Hard AUS | 1.16 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 9c (need < 2c); edge -3.0% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Massimo Giunta vs Henry Searlearchetypes: mid-serve/mid-return / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 42.9% -> shrunk 40.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 42.9% (Elo 42.6%, point model 43.8%) · PM mid A 39.5% Elo 1686 vs 1738 · hold 81% vs 83% · serve 64.6%/64.0% · return 35.5%/37.1% · rank 509 vs 346 · matches 58/85 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.04 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.09 drivers (logit): F1 strength -0.16, F1 ranking -0.15, F3 hours 14d +0.07, F2 point model -0.03, age -0.03 in plain English: Henry Searle is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1686 vs 1738), a small push. Rankings favour Henry Searle (509 vs 346), a small effect on top of Elo. Massimo Giunta has played more tennis in the last 14 days (7.7 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.1u on Massimo Giunta @ 0.40 placed 11-12 08:03 UTC · held | 40.5% | 0.40 | +0.5% | Hersonissos 3 ch50 Hard GRE | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Francesco Maestrelli vs Sumit Nagalarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return/tall / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 63.1% -> shrunk 57.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 63.1% (Elo 49.9%, point model 44.8%) · PM mid A 55.0% Elo 1765 vs 1765 · hold 72% vs 74% · serve 64.2%/61.7% · return 37.9%/41.1% · rank 126 vs 278 · matches 315/505 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 4.7h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 5.9h, 3 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.31, age +0.10, F3 hours 7d +0.09, F6 height x speed -0.06, F6 height +0.06, opp. retirement hazard +0.06 in plain English: Rankings favour Francesco Maestrelli (126 vs 278), a solid effect, pulling against the Elo read. The age curve favours Francesco Maestrelli (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Sumit Nagal has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (5.9 h vs 4.7 h), a small fatigue penalty against Sumit Nagal. Height matters more on a slow court: a marginal effect for Sumit Nagal. Francesco Maestrelli is the taller player (193 vs 178 cm), a marginal effect. Sumit Nagal retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a marginal effect for Francesco Maestrelli. | ✓ 0.3u on Francesco Maestrelli @ 0.55 placed 11-12 08:03 UTC · held | 57.5% | 0.56 | +1.5% | Hersonissos 3 ch50 Hard GRE | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 2c (need < 2c); edge 1.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Lorenzo Carboni vs Philip Henningarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 33.3% -> shrunk 31.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 33.3% (Elo 38.4%, point model 24.5%) · PM mid A 31.0% Elo 1651 vs 1733 · hold 62% vs 74% · serve 58.7%/63.6% · return 39.2%/39.4% · rank 478 vs 250 · matches 82/65 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 6.3h last 7d, 4 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 1.6h, 1 matches, rest 2d, z +0.06 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d -0.34, F3 matches 7d +0.32, F1 strength -0.26, F1 ranking -0.25, F2 point model -0.15, opp. retirement hazard -0.12 in plain English: Lorenzo Carboni has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.3 h vs 1.6 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Lorenzo Carboni. Lorenzo Carboni has played more matches this week (4 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Philip Henning is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1651 vs 1733), a solid push. Rankings favour Philip Henning (478 vs 250), a solid effect on top of Elo. The serve-and-return numbers give Philip Henning a small extra edge: projected holds 62% vs 74%. Lorenzo Carboni retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Philip Henning. | ✓ 0.0u on Philip Henning @ 0.98 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 31.7% | 0.37 | -5.3% | Hersonissos 3 ch50 Hard GRE | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 12c (need < 2c); edge -5.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Michele Ribecai vs Adrian Andreevarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 67.1% -> shrunk 53.6% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 67.1% (Elo 50.5%, point model 54.0%) · PM mid A 47.5% Elo 1695 vs 1692 · hold 67% vs 65% · serve 60.7%/61.1% · return 40.9%/39.7% · rank 285 vs 1122 · matches 78/267 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z -0.22 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.27 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.54, opp. retirement hazard +0.16, F3 hours 14d -0.09, age +0.03, F3 rest +0.03, F6 height -0.03 in plain English: Rankings favour Michele Ribecai (285 vs 1122), a big effect on top of Elo. Adrian Andreev retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Michele Ribecai. Adrian Andreev has played more tennis in the last 14 days (10.4 h vs 4.7 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Michele Ribecai @ 0.99 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 53.6% | 0.86 | -32.4% | Hersonissos 3 ch50 Hard GRE | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 77c (need < 2c); edge -32.4% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 10:00 | Pedro Vives Marcos vs Alejandro Moro Canasarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 31.2% -> shrunk 36.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 31.2% (Elo 36.5%, point model 41.1%) · PM mid A 38.5% Elo 1675 vs 1772 · hold 73% vs 77% · serve 61.5%/63.6% · return 39.1%/39.0% · rank 539 vs 236 · matches 47/277 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 6.3h last 7d, 4 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.22 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.32, F1 strength -0.30, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F3 matches 7d +0.21, opp. retirement hazard -0.15, F3 hours 14d +0.05 in plain English: Rankings favour Alejandro Moro Canas (539 vs 236), a solid effect on top of Elo. Alejandro Moro Canas is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1675 vs 1772), a solid push. Pedro Vives Marcos has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.3 h vs 3.2 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Pedro Vives Marcos. Pedro Vives Marcos has played more matches this week (4 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Pedro Vives Marcos retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a small effect for Alejandro Moro Canas. Pedro Vives Marcos has played more tennis in the last 14 days (6.3 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Alejandro Moro Canas @ 0.64 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 63.8% | 0.63 | +0.8% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 3c (need < 2c); edge 0.8% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 10:00 | Jonas Forejtek vs Luka Mikrutarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 43.3% -> shrunk 42.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 43.3% (Elo 47.3%, point model 52.5%) · PM mid A 42.5% Elo 1735 vs 1754 · hold 78% vs 77% · serve 64.0%/63.1% · return 38.5%/39.0% · rank 314 vs 169 · matches 266/120 · venue speed 1.03 (prior 1.03, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.48 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.67 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.24, F3 hours 14d +0.07, F1 strength -0.06, age -0.06, opp. retirement hazard +0.03, F6 height -0.02 in plain English: Rankings favour Luka Mikrut (314 vs 169), a solid effect on top of Elo. Jonas Forejtek has played more tennis in the last 14 days (7.3 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. Luka Mikrut is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1735 vs 1754), a marginal push. The age curve favours Luka Mikrut (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Jonas Forejtek @ 0.43 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 42.7% | 0.45 | -2.3% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 5c (need < 2c); edge -2.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 10:00 | Zsombor Piros vs Daniel Altmaierarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 41.5% -> shrunk 39.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 41.5% (Elo 46.7%, point model 55.0%) · PM mid A 38.5% Elo 1894 vs 1917 · hold 82% vs 80% · serve 63.0%/65.3% · return 40.1%/36.9% · rank 183 vs 85 · matches 410/507 · venue speed 1.15 (prior 1.15, 0 seen) form A: 5.3h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z +0.17 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.30, F3 hours 7d -0.15, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F1 strength -0.07, F3 hours 14d +0.07, F6 height -0.03 in plain English: Rankings favour Daniel Altmaier (183 vs 85), a solid effect on top of Elo. Zsombor Piros has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (5.3 h vs 3.2 h), a small fatigue penalty against Zsombor Piros. Zsombor Piros has played more matches this week (3 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Daniel Altmaier is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1894 vs 1917), a marginal push. Zsombor Piros has played more tennis in the last 14 days (8.7 h vs 4.6 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Zsombor Piros @ 0.43 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 39.4% | 0.39 | +0.4% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.4% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 15:00 | Tristan Boyer vs Max Alcala Gurriarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 47.8% -> shrunk 44.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 47.8% (Elo 44.4%, point model 32.3%) · PM mid A 43.0% Elo 1818 vs 1857 · hold 66% vs 74% · serve 61.8%/59.3% · return 40.2%/45.1% · rank 198 vs 275 · matches 226/115 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z +0.10 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 2d, z -0.42 drivers (logit): F1 ranking +0.13, F1 strength -0.12, F2 point model -0.10, F6 height x speed -0.04, F3 2nd-serve trend +0.04, F6 height +0.04 in plain English: Rankings favour Tristan Boyer (198 vs 275), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. Max Alcala Gurri is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1818 vs 1857), a small push. The serve-and-return numbers give Max Alcala Gurri a small extra edge: projected holds 66% vs 74%. | ✓ 0.0u on Tristan Boyer @ 0.46 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 44.4% | 0.46 | -1.6% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 6c (need < 2c); edge -1.6% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 15:00 | Liam Draxl vs Clement Chidekharchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 44.4% -> shrunk 42.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 44.4% (Elo 44.8%, point model 27.0%) · PM mid A 41.5% Elo 1879 vs 1915 · hold 69% vs 79% · serve 62.8%/64.4% · return 40.2%/42.5% · rank 163 vs ? · matches 231/186 · venue speed 1.17 (prior 1.17, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.47 · form B: 6.4h, 4 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F3 hours 7d +0.23, F3 matches 7d -0.21, F2 point model -0.13, F1 strength -0.11, F3 hours 14d +0.04, F3 2nd-serve trend -0.04 in plain English: Clement Chidekh has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.4 h vs 3.2 h), a solid fatigue penalty against Clement Chidekh. Clement Chidekh has played more matches this week (4 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Clement Chidekh a small extra edge: projected holds 69% vs 79%. Clement Chidekh is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1879 vs 1915), a small push. | ✓ 0.0u on Liam Draxl @ 0.47 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 42.4% | 0.47 | -4.6% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 11c (need < 2c); edge -4.6% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 15:00 | Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo vs Miguel Tobonarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / low-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 65.3% -> shrunk 69.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 65.3% (Elo 64.6%, point model 67.4%) · PM mid A 70.5% Elo 1792 vs 1687 · hold 78% vs 71% · serve 61.1%/60.6% · return 42.2%/39.3% · rank 226 vs 473 · matches 309/91 · venue speed 0.78 (prior 0.78, 0 seen) form A: 3.2h last 7d, 2 matches, rest 2d, 2nd-serve z -0.25 · form B: 3.2h, 2 matches, rest 1d, z -0.35 drivers (logit): F1 strength +0.33, F1 ranking +0.29, age -0.13, F2 point model +0.10, F6 serve vs return +0.02 in plain English: Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1792 vs 1687), a solid push. Rankings favour Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo (226 vs 473), a solid effect on top of Elo. The age curve favours Miguel Tobon (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo a small extra edge: projected holds 78% vs 71%. | ✓ 0.0u on Miguel Tobon @ 0.31 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 31.0% | 0.31 | +0.0% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 3c (need < 2c); edge 0.0% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 15:00 | Max Hans Rehberg vs Daniel Milavskyarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 45.1% -> shrunk 49.9% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 45.1% (Elo 49.4%, point model 57.5%) · PM mid A 52.0% Elo 1802 vs 1806 · hold 81% vs 78% · serve 64.3%/63.1% · return 38.5%/38.3% · rank 526 vs 351 · matches 188/73 · venue speed 1.17 (prior 1.17, 0 seen) form A: 4.8h last 7d, 3 matches, rest 1d, 2nd-serve z +0.00 · form B: 6.3h, 4 matches, rest 2d, z +0.00 drivers (logit): F1 ranking -0.16, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 7d +0.11, F3 hours 14d -0.05, F2 point model +0.04, F6 height -0.04 in plain English: Rankings favour Daniel Milavsky (526 vs 351), a small effect on top of Elo. Daniel Milavsky has played more matches this week (4 vs 3): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Daniel Milavsky has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (6.3 h vs 4.8 h), a small fatigue penalty against Daniel Milavsky. Daniel Milavsky has played more tennis in the last 14 days (14.6 h vs 11.4 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Daniel Milavsky @ 0.50 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 50.1% | 0.50 | +0.1% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 4c (need < 2c); edge 0.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| edition | surface | tier | live speed | prior | matches seen | read |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Co'met Orleans Open Orleans | Hard | ch | 1.15 | 1.15 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| MONASTIR OPEN Monastir | Hard | ch | 1.03 | 1.03 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Hard | 250 | 1.03 | 1.03 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| LIMA CHALLENGER presented by VISA Lima | Clay | ch | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| Knoxville Challenger Knoxville | Hard | ch | 1.17 | 1.17 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| BRISBANE QTC TENNIS INTERNATIONAL #3 Brisbane | Hard | ch | 1.16 | 1.16 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| UNICHARM EHIME INTERNATIONAL OPEN Matsuyama | Hard | ch | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
| Hersonissos Challenger 3 Hersonissos | Hard | ch | 0.78 | 0.78 | 0 | no box scores yet: prior only (data through 2026-11-08) |
watch 2026-11-12 15:50 UTC · hazard state 2026-11-12 06:43 · 26 open moneylines scored, 2 high risk (H ≥ 1.04%, 2x the 0.52% base rate). Out of sample 2020-26 this flag hit 5.3% of matches; 1.64% of those walked over (17% of all walkovers).
Record since logging began (50-50 resolution = walkover or cancellation): flagged: 2 of 55 resolved 50-50 (expected 0.8); not flagged: 40 of 990 resolved 50-50 (expected 3.7).
| start (UTC) | tournament | match | H | x base | A withdraws | B withdraws | why (log-odds vs average player) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚠️ | 11-13 04:00 | Brisbane 3 | Bernard Tomic vs August Holmgren | 1.27% | 2.5 | 1.12% | 0.15% | Tomic: own retirement/withdrawal rate 6.6% (+1.1); Tomic: age 34 (+0.3); Tomic: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Holmgren: 2 days since last match (+0.3) |
| ⚠️ | 11-13 05:30 | Brisbane 3 | Akira Santillan vs Christian Langmo | 1.25% | 2.4 | 0.59% | 0.66% | Santillan: own retirement/withdrawal rate 4.8% (+0.8); Santillan: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Langmo: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Langmo: 13 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.4); Langmo: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.5% (+0.4) |
| 11-13 02:30 | Brisbane 3 | Dane Sweeny vs Juncheng Shang | 0.86% | 1.7 | 0.19% | 0.67% | Sweeny: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Sweeny: little recent load from losses (3 h) (+0.2); Shang: own retirement/withdrawal rate 5.2% (+0.9); Shang: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Shang: little recent load from losses (2 h) (+0.3) | |
| 11-13 10:00 | Monastir | Pedro Vives Marcos vs Alejandro Moro Canas | 0.70% | 1.4 | 0.55% | 0.15% | Marcos: own retirement/withdrawal rate 4.2% (+0.7); Marcos: little recent load from losses (2 h) (+0.3); Marcos: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Canas: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Canas: 9 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.2) | |
| 11-13 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Michele Ribecai vs Adrian Andreev | 0.70% | 1.3 | 0.14% | 0.56% | Ribecai: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Ribecai: 9 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.2); Andreev: own retirement/withdrawal rate 5.7% (+1.0) | |
| 11-12 18:00 | Orleans | Sebastian Baez vs Calvin Hemery | 0.67% | 1.3 | 0.18% | 0.49% | Baez: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.8% (+0.5); Baez: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Hemery: own retirement/withdrawal rate 4.7% (+0.8); Hemery: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Hemery: age 32 (+0.2) | |
| 11-13 10:00 | Monastir | Jonas Forejtek vs Luka Mikrut | 0.53% | 1.0 | 0.19% | 0.34% | Forejtek: 10 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.3); Forejtek: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Mikrut: little recent load from losses (1 h) (+0.3); Mikrut: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.4% (+0.3); Mikrut: 2 days since last match (+0.3) | |
| 11-13 10:00 | Orleans | Zsombor Piros vs Daniel Altmaier | 0.53% | 1.0 | 0.30% | 0.24% | Piros: 11 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.3); Piros: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Piros: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.0% (+0.2); Altmaier: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.3% (+0.3); Altmaier: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Altmaier: 9 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.2) | |
| 11-13 03:30 | Matsuyama | Rei Sakamoto vs Ognjen Milic | 0.53% | 1.0 | 0.36% | 0.16% | Sakamoto: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Sakamoto: own retirement/withdrawal rate 2.2% (+0.3); Sakamoto: 10 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.2); Milic: 1 days since last match (+0.5) | |
| 11-13 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Lorenzo Carboni vs Philip Henning | 0.52% | 1.0 | 0.38% | 0.14% | Carboni: own retirement/withdrawal rate 4.5% (+0.8); Carboni: 1 days since last match (+0.5); Carboni: little recent load from losses (1 h) (+0.4) | |
| 11-12 17:30 | Knoxville | Stefan Kozlov vs Braden Shick | 0.50% | 1.0 | 0.33% | 0.17% | Kozlov: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Kozlov: 9 h of recent load from wins (deep runs) (+0.2); Shick: 1 days since last match (+0.5) | |
| 11-12 19:00 | Knoxville | Filip Jeff Planinsek vs Alastair Gray | 0.50% | 1.0 | 0.21% | 0.29% | Planinsek: little recent load from losses (0 h) (+0.5); Planinsek: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Gray: little recent load from losses (2 h) (+0.3); Gray: 2 days since last match (+0.3); Gray: own retirement/withdrawal rate 1.8% (+0.2) |
14 more scored matches below 2x not shown.
| start (UTC) | tournament | match | model A | PM snap | PM close | winner | trade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-12 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Lorenzo Carboni vs Ioannis Xilas | 45.4% | 47.0% | 43.5% | Lorenzo Carboni | Ioannis Xilas miss 0.0u @ 0.60 → +0.00u |
| 11-12 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Michele Ribecai vs Carlo Alberto Caniato | 52.2% | 42.5% | 42.5% | Michele Ribecai | Michele Ribecai HIT 0.3u @ 0.43 → +0.38u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Matsuyama | Max Schoenhaus vs Taro Daniel | 50.1% | 35.0% | 36.5% | Taro Daniel | Max Schoenhaus miss 0.6u @ 0.36 → -0.56u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Matsuyama | Rio Noguchi vs Yi Zhou | 39.9% | 33.5% | 36.5% | Rio Noguchi | Rio Noguchi HIT 0.1u @ 0.35 → +0.11u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Brisbane 3 | Christian Langmo vs James McCabe | 42.8% | 50.0% | 38.5% | Christian Langmo | James McCabe miss 0.0u @ 0.94 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 20:30 | Knoxville | Liam Draxl vs Petr Nesterov | 74.0% | 50.0% | 77.5% | Liam Draxl | Liam Draxl HIT 0.0u @ 0.92 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 19:30 | Orleans | Mattia Bellucci vs Sascha Gueymard-Wayenburg | 76.8% | 63.5% | 67.5% | Sascha Gueymard-Wayenburg | Mattia Bellucci miss 0.7u @ 0.66 → -0.66u |
| 11-11 18:30 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Miomir Kecmanovic vs Holger Rune | 26.2% | 30.5% | 29.5% | Holger Rune | Holger Rune HIT 0.0u @ 0.72 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 17:30 | Knoxville | Daniel Milavsky vs Michael Mmoh | 47.4% | 48.5% | 40.5% | Daniel Milavsky | Michael Mmoh miss 0.0u @ 0.93 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 16:00 | Monastir | Moise Kouame vs Jonas Forejtek | 68.5% | 72.0% | 70.5% | Jonas Forejtek | Jonas Forejtek HIT 0.0u @ 0.34 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Knoxville | Nicolas Mejia vs Max Hans Rehberg | 55.8% | 41.5% | 37.5% | Max Hans Rehberg | Nicolas Mejia miss 0.8u @ 0.42 → -0.79u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Lautaro Midon vs Miguel Tobon | 65.4% | 63.5% | 64.5% | Miguel Tobon | Lautaro Midon miss 0.0u @ 0.70 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Tristan Boyer vs Ryo Tabata | 72.8% | 50.0% | 83.5% | Tristan Boyer | Tristan Boyer HIT 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Knoxville | Lui Maxted vs Clement Chidekh | 23.1% | 50.0% | 20.5% | Clement Chidekh | Clement Chidekh HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Santiago De La Fuente vs Max Alcala Gurri | 20.3% | 40.5% | 9.5% | Max Alcala Gurri | Max Alcala Gurri HIT 0.0u @ 0.93 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo vs Filip Misolic | 36.8% | 51.0% | 38.5% | Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo | Filip Misolic miss 0.0u @ 0.91 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 14:30 | Orleans | Zsombor Piros vs Clement Tabur | 49.3% | 50.0% | 41.5% | Zsombor Piros | Clement Tabur miss 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 13:30 | Monastir | Aziz Dougaz vs Alejandro Moro Canas | 36.0% | 50.0% | 41.5% | Alejandro Moro Canas | Alejandro Moro Canas HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Borna Gojo vs Ugo Humbert | 30.1% | 33.5% | 33.5% | Ugo Humbert | Ugo Humbert HIT 0.2u @ 0.67 → +0.08u |
| 11-11 12:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Alexander Shevchenko vs Casper Ruud | 17.3% | 49.0% | 18.5% | Alexander Shevchenko | Casper Ruud miss 0.0u @ 0.78 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | Monastir | Eliakim Coulibaly vs Luka Mikrut | 38.5% | 42.5% | 40.5% | Luka Mikrut | Luka Mikrut HIT 0.0u @ 0.61 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Lorenzo Sonego vs Alejandro Tabilo | 46.1% | 58.5% | 59.5% | Alejandro Tabilo | Alejandro Tabilo HIT 0.5u @ 0.42 → +0.76u |
| 11-11 12:00 | Monastir | Jay Clarke vs Pedro Vives Marcos | 61.7% | 50.0% | 53.5% | Pedro Vives Marcos | Jay Clarke miss 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 11:30 | Orleans | Buvaysar Gadamauri vs Daniel Altmaier | 32.0% | 50.0% | 30.5% | Daniel Altmaier | Daniel Altmaier HIT 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 10:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Taylor Fritz vs Cameron Norrie | 79.8% | 74.5% | 74.5% | Taylor Fritz | Taylor Fritz HIT 0.5u @ 0.75 → +0.16u |
| 11-11 10:00 | Orleans | Benjamin Bonzi vs Tom Gentzsch | 70.7% | 77.5% | 81.5% | Tom Gentzsch | Tom Gentzsch HIT 0.2u @ 0.23 → +0.74u |
| 11-11 09:30 | Hersonissos 3 | Francesco Maestrelli vs Johannus Monday | 62.2% | 62.0% | 61.5% | Francesco Maestrelli | Francesco Maestrelli HIT 0.0u @ 0.63 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 09:30 | Hersonissos 3 | Felix Gill vs Massimo Giunta | 64.2% | 53.0% | 53.5% | Massimo Giunta | Felix Gill miss 0.4u @ 0.54 → -0.37u |
| 11-11 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Robin Bertrand vs Henry Searle | 26.3% | 34.0% | 25.5% | Henry Searle | Henry Searle HIT 0.0u @ 0.73 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Michael Geerts vs Sumit Nagal | 35.5% | 50.0% | 29.5% | Sumit Nagal | Sumit Nagal HIT 0.0u @ 0.94 → +0.00u |
Model: Elo + serve/return point model + venue speed + matchup + form layers, combined per tier group; walk-forward 2015-2026. Rendered 2026-11-12 15:57 UTC, auto-refreshes every 5 min.