Tennis Pressure model: the Tennis model plus the pressure layer (PRESSURE_PLAN.md), and it also prices the game-spread / total / set props (Props section below). Currently one extra input, luck: how many more matches a player has won than their points imply, shrunk and decayed over about two years. It passed its ablation on Challengers (log loss -0.0023) and was flat on tour. The break-point, tiebreak, hold-from-0-40 style stats failed the reliability gate (data/kill_table.md) and are not used. Separate state, card and paper log from the Tennis tab.
card 2026-11-12 15:50 UTC · state built 2026-11-12 06:42 · 36 open ATP/Challenger moneylines · 2476 tracked, 2361 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) | 0.6312 | 1207 |
| model shrunk to market (what stakes use) | 0.6359 | 1176 |
| Elo layer | 0.6326 | 1207 |
| point model | 0.6436 | 1207 |
| Polymarket mid at snapshot | 0.6548 | 1207 |
| Polymarket close | 0.6014 | 1207 |
| market price used | n | fitted weight on market | ± se | log loss: model | market | fit | policy blend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| snapshot mid | 2361 | 0.49 | 0.07 | 0.6227 | 0.6236 | 0.6129 | 0.6149 |
| closing mid | 2353 | 0.96 | 0.10 | 0.6235 | 0.5972 | 0.5972 | 0.5991 |
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 | 2361 | +3.7 pts | 53% |
| logged bets (edge ≥ 5%) | 1207 | +7.0 pts | 64% |
| edge ≥ 10% | 12 | +0.7 pts | 50% |
| edge ≥ 15% | 2 | +0.7 pts | 50% |
| filter | bets | hits | staked | PnL | ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| all bets | 366 | 182 | 309.1u | -8.97u | -2.9% |
| edge ≥ 5% | 88 | 32 | 138.1u | -25.90u | -18.8% |
| edge ≥ 10% | 12 | 3 | 34.7u | -14.07u | -40.6% |
| edge ≥ 15% | 2 | 0 | 8.1u | -8.15u | -100.0% |
| 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 56.4% -> shrunk 48.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 56.4% (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 -0.32, F1 strength +0.23, F3 matches 7d +0.22, F1 ranking +0.15, F6 serve vs return -0.14, F8 results vs points +0.13 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 is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1940 vs 1884), a solid push. Dalibor Svrcina has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. Rankings favour Dalibor Svrcina (107 vs 158), a small effect on top of Elo. Otto Virtanen's serve matches up well against Dalibor Svrcina's return, a small effect. Otto Virtanen has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.1 pp a match vs -0.6 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Dalibor Svrcina. | ✓ 0.8u on Dalibor Svrcina @ 0.43 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 48.1% | 0.45 | +3.1% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 3.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 13:30 · LIVE | Moez Echargui vs Mika Petkovicarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 58.6% -> shrunk 64.9% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 58.6% (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 +0.50, age -0.34, F1 strength +0.32, F8 results vs points -0.26, F3 2nd-serve trend +0.10, F3 hours 14d +0.03 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. Moez Echargui has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.2 pp a match vs -1.1 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid effect for Mika Petkovic. 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 Mika Petkovic @ 0.39 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 35.1% | 0.33 | +2.1% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 2.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 13:30 · LIVE | Kilian Feldbausch vs Mae Maligearchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 74.8% -> shrunk 76.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 74.8% (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 +0.77, F1 ranking +0.26, F3 hours 7d -0.17, F3 hours 14d +0.12, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F2 point model -0.07 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. 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. The serve-and-return numbers give Mae Malige a marginal extra edge: projected holds 73% vs 56%. | ✓ 0.0u on Kilian Feldbausch @ 0.98 placed 11-11 18:05 UTC · held | 23.3% | 0.23 | +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 14:00 · LIVE | Thiago Agustin Tirante vs Alexander Shevchenkoarchetypes: mid-serve/mid-return / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 64.8% -> shrunk 54.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 64.8% (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 +0.25, F1 strength +0.21, F1 ranking +0.08, F3 hours 14d +0.05, F3 matches 7d -0.04, F8 results vs points +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 solid 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 54.7% -> shrunk 43.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 54.7% (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 +0.35, F3 matches 7d -0.33, F3 hours 7d +0.33, F1 strength +0.22, F3 hours 14d -0.17, F8 results vs points -0.13 in plain English: Rankings favour Pedro Martinez (139 vs 335), a solid effect on top of Elo. Matteo Martineau has played more matches this week (4 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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. Pedro Martinez is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1828 vs 1775), a solid 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. Pedro Martinez has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.0 pp a match vs -0.6 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Matteo Martineau. | ✓ 0.0u on Pedro Martinez @ 0.98 placed 11-11 18:05 UTC · held | 43.3% | 0.39 | +4.3% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | in progress (pre-match model, live book); Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 16:00 | Alan Magadan vs Alex Barrenaarchetypes: ? / low-serve/elite-return/short sizing: raw model A 42.8% -> shrunk 29.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 42.8% (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 strength -0.47, F1 ranking -0.47, F3 matches 7d +0.33, F3 hours 7d -0.33, F8 results vs points +0.28, F3 rest +0.19 in plain English: Alex Barrena is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1635 vs 1749), a big push. Rankings favour Alex Barrena (649 vs 197), a big effect on top of Elo. Alan Magadan has played more matches this week (3 vs 0): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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. Alex Barrena has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.4 pp a match vs -0.1 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid effect for Alan Magadan. 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 small effect for Alan Magadan. | ✓ 0.3u on Alan Magadan @ 0.24 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 29.4% | 0.25 | +4.4% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.4% (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 25.7% -> shrunk 22.7% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 25.7% (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 -0.67, F1 ranking -0.37, F3 matches 7d +0.22, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F8 results vs points -0.14, F3 hours 14d +0.10 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 played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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 been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.1 pp a match vs -0.8 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Francisco Comesana. 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 | 22.7% | 0.22 | +0.7% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.7% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-12 17:30 | Stefan Kozlov vs Braden Shickarchetypes: mid-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 52.6% -> shrunk 64.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 52.6% (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 -0.24, F3 matches 7d +0.22, F8 results vs points +0.16, age -0.15, F1 strength +0.10, 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. Braden Shick has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.6 pp a match vs -0.2 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Stefan Kozlov. 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 small push. 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 | 36.0% | 0.32 | +4.0% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.0% (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 73.1% -> shrunk 68.6% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 73.1% (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 +0.32, F1 strength +0.31, F1 ranking +0.25, age -0.18, F3 hours 7d -0.16, F3 hours 14d +0.11 in plain English: The serve-and-return numbers give Taylor Fritz a solid 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 | 68.6% | 0.67 | +1.6% | BNP Paribas Nordic Open 250 Hard | 1.03 | venue unresolved; edge 1.6% (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 81.8% -> shrunk 76.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 81.8% (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 +0.83, F1 ranking +0.63, F3 matches 7d -0.22, F3 hours 7d +0.22, age +0.14, F6 height -0.09 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 played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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. 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 | 76.5% | 0.75 | +1.5% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | 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) |
| 11-12 19:00 | Filip Jeff Planinsek vs Alastair Grayarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/elite-return/tall sizing: raw model A 40.0% -> shrunk 31.4% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 40.0% (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 -0.27, F3 matches 7d +0.22, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F1 strength -0.20, F8 results vs points -0.11, age +0.07 in plain English: Rankings favour Alastair Gray (525 vs 269), a solid effect on top of Elo. Filip Jeff Planinsek has played more matches this week (3 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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. Alastair Gray is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1607 vs 1656), a solid push. Filip Jeff Planinsek has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.1 pp a match vs -0.7 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Alastair Gray. The age curve favours Filip Jeff Planinsek (the younger player tends to be improving), a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Alastair Gray @ 0.97 placed 11-11 00:08 UTC · held | 31.4% | 0.29 | +2.4% | 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 2.4% (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 63.0% -> shrunk 64.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.80 = tier 250 x1.00 · region unknown (?) x0.80 model A 63.0% (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 +0.35, F8 results vs points -0.14, age +0.12, F2 point model +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.11, F1 ranking +0.09 in plain English: Lorenzo Musetti is the stronger player by rating (Elo 2158 vs 2039), a solid push. Lorenzo Musetti has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.2 pp a match vs -0.9 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Ugo Humbert. The age curve favours Lorenzo Musetti (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Lorenzo Musetti a small extra edge: projected holds 85% vs 82%. 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 | 35.9% | 0.36 | -0.1% | BNP Paribas Nordic Open 250 Hard | 1.03 | venue unresolved; edge -0.1% (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 50.7% -> shrunk 54.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 50.7% (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): F8 results vs points -0.15, F3 matches 7d +0.11, age +0.10, F3 hours 7d -0.09, F1 strength -0.06, F3 hours 14d +0.05 in plain English: Nishesh Basavareddy has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.2 pp a match vs +0.5 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Kyrian Jacquet. Nishesh Basavareddy has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. The age curve favours Nishesh Basavareddy (the younger player tends to be improving), 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. Kyrian Jacquet is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1934 vs 1950), a marginal push. Nishesh Basavareddy has played more tennis in the last 14 days (5.7 h vs 2.9 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Kyrian Jacquet @ 0.46 placed 11-11 10:05 UTC · held | 45.9% | 0.45 | +0.9% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.9% (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 81.5% -> shrunk 76.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 81.5% (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 strength +0.59, F1 ranking +0.50, F8 results vs points +0.47, age -0.25, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.09 in plain English: Marcos Giron is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1899 vs 1756), a big push. Rankings favour Marcos Giron (88 vs 308), a big effect on top of Elo. Abedallah Shelbayh has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.9 pp a match vs -1.4 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a big effect for Marcos Giron. The age curve favours Abedallah Shelbayh (the younger player tends to be improving), a solid 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. | ✓ 0.9u on Marcos Giron @ 0.72 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 76.1% | 0.74 | +2.1% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 2.1% (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 52.0% -> shrunk 57.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 52.0% (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): F8 results vs points +0.37, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F1 strength -0.10, age -0.10, F3 hours 7d +0.08, F3 hours 14d -0.03 in plain English: Gonzalo Bueno has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.9 pp a match vs -0.0 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid effect for Joao Lucas Da Silva. Gonzalo Bueno has played more matches this week (3 vs 2): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Gonzalo Bueno is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1769 vs 1794), a small push. The age curve favours Gonzalo Bueno (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Gonzalo Bueno has spent more time on court in the last 7 days (4.3 h vs 3.2 h), a marginal fatigue penalty against Gonzalo Bueno. | ✓ 0.0u on Gonzalo Bueno @ 0.46 placed 11-11 15:05 UTC · held | 42.7% | 0.41 | +1.7% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; thin data (5/230 matches); edge 1.7% (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 55.2% -> shrunk 44.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 55.2% (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 -0.34, F3 matches 7d +0.33, F1 ranking +0.17, F1 strength -0.16, F3 hours 14d +0.09, age +0.07 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 | 44.1% | 0.40 | +4.1% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 4.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 01:00 | Sebastian Gorzny vs Alex Boltarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/mid-return sizing: raw model A 30.8% -> shrunk 45.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 30.8% (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 -0.84, F1 strength -0.18, age +0.17, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 7d +0.11, F8 results vs points +0.09 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 played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; 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 been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.4 pp a match vs -0.1 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Sebastian Gorzny. | ✓ 0.8u on Alex Bolt @ 0.56 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 55.0% | 0.49 | +6.0% | 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 41.5% -> shrunk 41.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 41.5% (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 -0.51, F8 results vs points +0.19, age -0.11, F3 hours 14d +0.11, F2 point model +0.03, F6 serve vs return -0.02 in plain English: Jay Dylan Friend is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1719 vs 1843), a big push. Jay Dylan Friend has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.2 pp a match vs +0.2 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Yu-Hsiou Hsu. The age curve favours Jay Dylan Friend (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. 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. | ✓ 0.0u on Jay Dylan Friend @ 0.59 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 41.5% | 0.42 | -0.5% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge -0.5% (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 47.2% -> shrunk 36.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 47.2% (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 -0.29, age +0.14, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F1 ranking +0.11, F3 hours 7d -0.11, F6 height -0.10 in plain English: Taro Daniel is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1736 vs 1806), a solid push. The age curve favours Rio Noguchi (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Rio Noguchi has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. Rankings favour Rio Noguchi (223 vs 293), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. 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. 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 | 36.3% | 0.35 | +1.3% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 6c (need < 2c); edge 1.3% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 02:30 | Dane Sweeny vs Juncheng Shangarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 39.6% -> shrunk 35.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 39.6% (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 -0.67, F1 ranking +0.28, age -0.10, F6 height -0.05, F8 results vs points +0.05, opp. retirement hazard +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. The age curve favours Juncheng Shang (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Juncheng Shang is the taller player (183 vs 170 cm), a marginal effect. Juncheng Shang has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.5 pp a match vs +0.3 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a marginal effect for Dane Sweeny. | ✓ 0.0u on Juncheng Shang @ 0.98 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 35.3% | 0.37 | -1.7% | 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 -1.7% (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 -0.84, F1 ranking -0.22, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 7d +0.11, F8 results vs points +0.06, F3 hours 14d -0.05 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. Billy Harris has played more matches this week (2 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a small effect. 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 been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.6 pp a match vs -0.9 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a marginal effect for Kaichi Uchida. Billy Harris has played more tennis in the last 14 days (7.5 h vs 4.5 h), a sign of match sharpness; 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 83.3% -> shrunk 83.8% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (JPN) x1.00 model A 83.3% (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 +1.41, F1 ranking +0.35, F8 results vs points -0.17, F6 height +0.05, F2 point model -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. Rei Sakamoto has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.5 pp a match vs +0.6 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Ognjen Milic. Rei Sakamoto is the taller player (193 vs 180 cm), a marginal effect. The serve-and-return numbers give Ognjen Milic a marginal extra edge: projected holds 87% vs 77%. | ✓ 0.0u on Rei Sakamoto @ 0.98 placed 11-12 06:14 UTC · held | 16.2% | 0.21 | -4.8% | Matsuyama ch100 Hard JPN | 0.99 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 10c (need < 2c); edge -4.8% (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 37.6% -> shrunk 41.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 37.6% (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): F8 results vs points -0.45, F1 strength +0.26, age -0.14, F1 ranking -0.10, F3 hours 14d -0.06, opp. retirement hazard -0.05 in plain English: Bernard Tomic has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.5 pp a match vs -0.8 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a big effect for August Holmgren. Bernard Tomic is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1805 vs 1744), a solid push. 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. Bernard Tomic retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a marginal effect for August Holmgren. | ✓ 0.2u on August Holmgren @ 0.57 placed 11-12 00:05 UTC · held | 59.0% | 0.58 | +1.0% | Brisbane 3 ch100 Hard AUS | 1.16 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 1.0% (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 54.9% -> shrunk 55.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.85 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region neutral (AUS) x1.00 model A 54.9% (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 +0.25, F3 matches 7d -0.22, F8 results vs points +0.17, F1 ranking +0.17, F3 hours 14d -0.09, F1 strength +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. Christian Langmo has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.7 pp a match vs -0.2 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Akira Santillan. Rankings favour Akira Santillan (309 vs 476), a small effect on top of Elo. 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. Akira Santillan is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1651 vs 1638), a marginal push. | ✓ 0.0u on Akira Santillan @ 0.99 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 44.7% | 0.49 | -4.3% | 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 -4.3% (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 45.6% -> shrunk 41.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 45.6% (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 -0.22, F1 ranking -0.15, F8 results vs points +0.12, F3 hours 14d +0.08, age -0.04 in plain English: Henry Searle is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1686 vs 1738), a solid push. Rankings favour Henry Searle (509 vs 346), a small effect on top of Elo. Henry Searle has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.2 pp a match vs -0.4 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Massimo Giunta. Massimo Giunta has played more tennis in the last 14 days (7.7 h vs 3.2 h), a sign of match sharpness; a small effect. | ✓ 0.1u on Massimo Giunta @ 0.40 placed 11-12 08:03 UTC · held | 41.3% | 0.40 | +1.3% | Hersonissos 3 ch50 Hard GRE | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 1.3% (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 61.8% -> shrunk 57.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 61.8% (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 +0.32, age +0.13, F3 hours 7d +0.08, F8 results vs points -0.08, F6 height x speed -0.07, F6 height +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. Francesco Maestrelli has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.2 pp a match vs -0.3 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for 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. | ✓ 0.3u on Francesco Maestrelli @ 0.55 placed 11-12 08:03 UTC · held | 57.1% | 0.56 | +1.1% | 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 1.1% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Lorenzo Carboni vs Philip Henningarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 36.3% -> shrunk 32.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 36.3% (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): F1 strength -0.34, F3 matches 7d +0.33, F3 hours 7d -0.33, F1 ranking -0.26, age +0.13, F8 results vs points -0.09 in plain English: Philip Henning is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1651 vs 1733), a solid push. Lorenzo Carboni has played more matches this week (4 vs 1): still in the draw, so playing well; a solid effect. 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. Rankings favour Philip Henning (478 vs 250), a solid effect on top of Elo. The age curve favours Lorenzo Carboni (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. Lorenzo Carboni has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.0 pp a match vs -0.5 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Philip Henning. | ✓ 0.0u on Philip Henning @ 0.98 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 32.5% | 0.37 | -4.5% | 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 -4.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 08:00 | Michele Ribecai vs Adrian Andreevarchetypes: low-serve/elite-return/short / ? sizing: raw model A 69.7% -> shrunk 54.5% (70% to market) · stake x0.56 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lowmid (GRE) x0.80 model A 69.7% (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 +0.55, F8 results vs points +0.22, F3 hours 14d -0.10, opp. retirement hazard +0.07, age +0.04, F6 height x speed +0.03 in plain English: Rankings favour Michele Ribecai (285 vs 1122), a big effect on top of Elo. Adrian Andreev has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.2 pp a match vs -0.9 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid 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. Adrian Andreev retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a marginal effect for Michele Ribecai. | ✓ 0.0u on Michele Ribecai @ 0.99 placed 11-12 12:05 UTC · held | 54.5% | 0.86 | -31.5% | 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 -31.5% (below the old 5% line) |
| 11-13 10:00 | Pedro Vives Marcos vs Alejandro Moro Canasarchetypes: ? / mid-serve/elite-return sizing: raw model A 30.3% -> shrunk 36.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 30.3% (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 strength -0.40, F1 ranking -0.33, F3 matches 7d +0.22, F3 hours 7d -0.22, F8 results vs points -0.11, opp. retirement hazard -0.07 in plain English: Alejandro Moro Canas is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1675 vs 1772), a big push. Rankings favour Alejandro Moro Canas (539 vs 236), a solid effect on top of Elo. 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 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 been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.0 pp a match vs -0.6 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Alejandro Moro Canas. Pedro Vives Marcos retires from matches more often than average, and this market pays out on a retirement; a marginal effect for Alejandro Moro Canas. | ✓ 0.0u on Alejandro Moro Canas @ 0.64 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 64.0% | 0.63 | +1.0% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 3c (need < 2c); edge 1.0% (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 48.0% -> shrunk 44.1% (70% to market) · stake x0.42 = tier ch50 x0.70 · region lower (TUN) x0.60 model A 48.0% (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): F8 results vs points +0.26, F1 ranking -0.25, F1 strength -0.08, age -0.08, F3 hours 14d +0.07, F6 height -0.02 in plain English: Luka Mikrut has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.9 pp a match vs -0.4 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid effect for Jonas Forejtek. Rankings favour Luka Mikrut (314 vs 169), a solid effect on top of Elo. 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. 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. | ✓ 0.1u on Jonas Forejtek @ 0.43 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 44.1% | 0.45 | -0.9% | Monastir ch50 Hard TUN | 1.03 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 5c (need < 2c); edge -0.9% (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 34.3% -> shrunk 37.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (FRA) x1.15 model A 34.3% (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, F8 results vs points -0.25, F3 hours 7d -0.15, F3 matches 7d +0.11, F1 strength -0.10, F3 hours 14d +0.07 in plain English: Rankings favour Daniel Altmaier (183 vs 85), a solid effect on top of Elo. Zsombor Piros has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +2.5 pp a match vs +1.2 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a solid effect for Daniel Altmaier. 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 small 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 Daniel Altmaier @ 0.64 placed 11-12 10:05 UTC · held | 62.8% | 0.62 | +0.8% | Orleans ch100 Hard FRA | 1.15 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; edge 0.8% (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 50.3% -> shrunk 45.2% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 50.3% (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 strength -0.16, F1 ranking +0.13, F6 height x speed -0.05, F6 height +0.04, F3 2nd-serve trend +0.04, age -0.04 in plain English: Max Alcala Gurri is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1818 vs 1857), a small push. Rankings favour Tristan Boyer (198 vs 275), a small effect, pulling against the Elo read. | ✓ 0.0u on Tristan Boyer @ 0.46 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 45.2% | 0.46 | -0.8% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | 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 15:00 | Liam Draxl vs Clement Chidekharchetypes: low-serve/elite-return / ? sizing: raw model A 36.5% -> shrunk 40.0% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 36.5% (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): F8 results vs points -0.47, F3 hours 7d +0.22, F3 matches 7d -0.22, F1 strength -0.15, F3 hours 14d +0.05, F2 point model +0.04 in plain English: Liam Draxl has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +1.6 pp a match vs -0.8 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a big effect for Clement Chidekh. 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. Clement Chidekh is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1879 vs 1915), a small push. Liam Draxl has played more tennis in the last 14 days (11.1 h vs 8.3 h), a sign of match sharpness; a marginal effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Clement Chidekh @ 0.64 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 60.0% | 0.64 | -4.0% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 11c (need < 2c); edge -4.0% (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 68.1% -> shrunk 69.8% (70% to market) · stake x0.51 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region lower (PER) x0.60 model A 68.1% (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 +0.44, F1 ranking +0.29, F8 results vs points +0.20, age -0.18, F2 point model -0.03 in plain English: Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo is the stronger player by rating (Elo 1792 vs 1687), a big push. Rankings favour Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo (226 vs 473), a solid effect on top of Elo. Miguel Tobon has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk -0.4 pp a match vs -1.4 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo. The age curve favours Miguel Tobon (the younger player tends to be improving), a small effect. | ✓ 0.0u on Miguel Tobon @ 0.31 placed 11-12 15:05 UTC · held | 30.2% | 0.31 | -0.8% | Lima ch100 Clay PER | 0.78 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 3c (need < 2c); edge -0.8% (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 46.4% -> shrunk 50.3% (70% to market) · stake x0.98 = tier ch100 x0.85 · region premium (USA) x1.15 model A 46.4% (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, F8 results vs points +0.12, F3 matches 7d -0.11, F3 hours 7d +0.10, F3 hours 14d -0.06, age +0.05 in plain English: Rankings favour Daniel Milavsky (526 vs 351), a small effect on top of Elo. Daniel Milavsky has been winning more matches than their points justify lately (shrunk +0.4 pp a match vs -0.2 pp), so their rating is probably inflated; a small effect for Max Hans Rehberg. 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 | 49.7% | 0.50 | -0.3% | Knoxville ch100 Hard USA | 1.17 | Challenger: no market benchmark yet; quote outside the gate: PM quote not counted: spread 4c (need < 2c); edge -0.3% (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) |
Prop paper log: 5536 logged, 689 wagers (642 graded): staked 1402.2u, P&L -80.91u (ROI -5.8%) · mean CLV -0.3c on 642.
This card: 225 prop markets on 31 matches, 0 with a counted Polymarket quote, 0 wagers. Only counted quotes are listed (most Challenger prop books are empty).
| start (UTC) | match | market | side | model | Poly price | edge | shape edge | wager | note |
|---|
| start | match | bet | price | P&L |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-08 14:00 | Ben Shelton vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 23.5 | 57.0% | -1.73u |
| 11-08 14:00 | Ben Shelton vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 22.5 | 49.0% | -2.08u |
| 11-08 14:00 | Ben Shelton vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 21.5 | 37.0% | -2.49u |
| 11-07 16:00 | Casper Ruud vs Carlos Alcaraz | Game spread Carlos Alcaraz -4.5 | 43.0% | -4.40u |
| 11-07 13:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Ben Shelton | Total games Under 23.5 | 55.0% | -3.36u |
| 11-07 13:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Ben Shelton | Set handicap Ben Shelton -1.5 | 52.0% | -2.30u |
| 11-07 13:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Ben Shelton | Total games Under 22.5 | 47.0% | -3.66u |
| 11-07 13:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Ben Shelton | Total games Under 21.5 | 36.0% | -3.85u |
| 11-06 19:30 | Casper Ruud vs Nuno Borges | Game spread Nuno Borges +2.5 | 45.0% | -1.35u |
| 11-06 18:00 | Taylor Fritz vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 22.5 | 47.0% | -2.57u |
| 11-06 18:00 | Taylor Fritz vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 21.5 | 37.0% | -2.66u |
| 11-06 18:00 | Taylor Fritz vs Carlos Alcaraz | Total games Under 23.5 | 55.0% | -2.28u |
| 11-06 18:00 | Taylor Fritz vs Carlos Alcaraz | Game spread Carlos Alcaraz -3.5 | 47.0% | +2.93u |
| 11-06 15:15 | Luca Van Assche vs Rinky Hijikata | Set 1 games Under 8.5 | 17.0% | -1.77u |
| 11-06 14:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Rinky Hijikata | Total games Under 23.5 | 52.0% | -1.74u |
| 11-06 14:30 | Luca Van Assche vs Rinky Hijikata | Total games Under 22.5 | 46.0% | -1.93u |
| 11-06 13:00 | Ben Shelton vs Tommy Paul | Total sets Under 2.5 | 56.0% | -1.48u |
| 11-06 13:00 | Ben Shelton vs Tommy Paul | Total games Under 23.5 | 48.0% | -2.00u |
| 11-06 13:00 | Ben Shelton vs Tommy Paul | Set 1 winner Ben Shelton | 46.0% | +3.89u |
| 11-05 19:30 | Arthur Fils vs Taylor Fritz | Set 1 games Under 10.5 | 60.0% | +1.55u |
| start (UTC) | tournament | match | model A | PM snap | PM close | winner | trade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-12 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Lorenzo Carboni vs Ioannis Xilas | 49.6% | 44.0% | 43.5% | Lorenzo Carboni | Lorenzo Carboni HIT 0.0u @ 0.48 → +0.00u |
| 11-12 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Michele Ribecai vs Carlo Alberto Caniato | 50.5% | 42.5% | 42.5% | Michele Ribecai | Michele Ribecai HIT 0.2u @ 0.43 → +0.30u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Matsuyama | Max Schoenhaus vs Taro Daniel | 56.6% | 35.0% | 36.5% | Taro Daniel | Max Schoenhaus miss 0.9u @ 0.36 → -0.87u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Matsuyama | Rio Noguchi vs Yi Zhou | 35.2% | 33.5% | 36.5% | Rio Noguchi | Rio Noguchi HIT 0.0u @ 0.35 → +0.00u |
| 11-12 00:00 | Brisbane 3 | Christian Langmo vs James McCabe | 42.4% | 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 | 69.3% | 50.0% | 77.5% | Liam Draxl | Liam Draxl HIT 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 19:30 | Orleans | Mattia Bellucci vs Sascha Gueymard-Wayenburg | 78.8% | 65.5% | 67.5% | Sascha Gueymard-Wayenburg | Mattia Bellucci miss 1.1u @ 0.67 → -1.08u |
| 11-11 18:30 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Miomir Kecmanovic vs Holger Rune | 29.3% | 55.5% | 29.5% | Holger Rune | Holger Rune HIT 0.0u @ 0.71 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 17:30 | Knoxville | Daniel Milavsky vs Michael Mmoh | 49.4% | 50.0% | 40.5% | Daniel Milavsky | Michael Mmoh miss 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 16:00 | Monastir | Moise Kouame vs Jonas Forejtek | 72.6% | 50.0% | 70.5% | Jonas Forejtek | Moise Kouame miss 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Knoxville | Nicolas Mejia vs Max Hans Rehberg | 50.6% | 41.5% | 37.5% | Max Hans Rehberg | Nicolas Mejia miss 0.5u @ 0.42 → -0.47u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Lautaro Midon vs Miguel Tobon | 58.4% | 61.5% | 64.5% | Miguel Tobon | Miguel Tobon HIT 0.0u @ 0.47 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Tristan Boyer vs Ryo Tabata | 75.2% | 50.0% | 83.5% | Tristan Boyer | Tristan Boyer HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Knoxville | Lui Maxted vs Clement Chidekh | 21.5% | 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 | 20.4% | 50.0% | 9.5% | Max Alcala Gurri | Max Alcala Gurri HIT 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 15:00 | Lima | Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo vs Filip Misolic | 43.3% | 50.5% | 38.5% | Nikolas Sanchez Izquierdo | Filip Misolic miss 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 14:30 | Orleans | Zsombor Piros vs Clement Tabur | 34.6% | 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 | 36.2% | 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 | 26.8% | 31.5% | 33.5% | Ugo Humbert | Ugo Humbert HIT 0.3u @ 0.69 → +0.14u |
| 11-11 12:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Alexander Shevchenko vs Casper Ruud | 17.2% | 50.5% | 18.5% | Alexander Shevchenko | Casper Ruud miss 0.0u @ 0.97 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | Monastir | Eliakim Coulibaly vs Luka Mikrut | 42.3% | 50.0% | 40.5% | Luka Mikrut | Luka Mikrut HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | Monastir | Jay Clarke vs Pedro Vives Marcos | 62.9% | 50.0% | 53.5% | Pedro Vives Marcos | Jay Clarke miss 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 12:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Lorenzo Sonego vs Alejandro Tabilo | 47.6% | 58.5% | 59.5% | Alejandro Tabilo | Alejandro Tabilo HIT 0.5u @ 0.42 → +0.65u |
| 11-11 11:30 | Orleans | Buvaysar Gadamauri vs Daniel Altmaier | 31.0% | 50.0% | 30.5% | Daniel Altmaier | Daniel Altmaier HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 10:00 | BNP Paribas Nordic Open | Taylor Fritz vs Cameron Norrie | 79.6% | 74.5% | 74.5% | Taylor Fritz | Taylor Fritz HIT 0.4u @ 0.75 → +0.15u |
| 11-11 10:00 | Orleans | Benjamin Bonzi vs Tom Gentzsch | 69.3% | 77.5% | 81.5% | Tom Gentzsch | Tom Gentzsch HIT 0.3u @ 0.23 → +0.94u |
| 11-11 09:30 | Hersonissos 3 | Francesco Maestrelli vs Johannus Monday | 63.4% | 50.0% | 61.5% | Francesco Maestrelli | Francesco Maestrelli HIT 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 09:30 | Hersonissos 3 | Felix Gill vs Massimo Giunta | 56.0% | 50.0% | 53.5% | Massimo Giunta | Felix Gill miss 0.0u @ 0.98 → +0.00u |
| 11-11 08:00 | Hersonissos 3 | Robin Bertrand vs Henry Searle | 28.7% | 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 | 35.1% | 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 15:58 UTC, auto-refreshes every 5 min.