TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in B. Krejcikova vs G. Ruse (Hertogenbosch on 2026-06-12) — the market is efficient, with B. Krejcikova favoured at 1.43.
Independent estimates of who wins, each from a different method. The blend is what the bot prices against the market.
| Method | B. Krejcikova | G. Ruse |
|---|---|---|
| Elo ratings-based, surface-weighted |
67.0% | 33.0% |
| Machine learning 29-feature gradient-boosted model |
85.5% | 14.5% |
| Serve / return point-by-point simulation |
70.5% | 29.5% |
| Blend what the bot actually prices off |
74.3% | 25.7% |
| Market implied de-vigged from the opening odds |
63.9% | 36.1% |
We publish how well these score against the closing market, including where they lose: how accurate are tennis predictions?
| Player | Surface | Elo | Record | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B. Krejcikova | hard | 1893 | 82–51 | 133 |
| G. Ruse | hard | 1766 | 83–58 | 141 |
Our own ratings, computed from match results since 2018. Players with fewer than 5 rated matches are omitted rather than shown at a provisional starting value. Last updated July 14, 2026.
B. Krejcikova leads 3–1 over 4 meetings. Full record.
| Date | Event | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 12, 2026 | Hertogenbosch | grass | B. Krejcikova | 2 - 0 |
| Aug. 28, 2024 | WTA US Open | hard | G. Ruse | 2 - 0 |
| Feb. 7, 2023 | Abu Dhabi | hard | B. Krejcikova | 2 - 0 |
| July 16, 2019 | Bucharest | clay | B. Krejcikova | 2 - 1 |
| L | L. Tagger | 2 - 1 | July 25, 2026 |
| W | D. Salkova | 0 - 2 | July 24, 2026 |
| W | L. Havlickova | 0 - 2 | July 23, 2026 |
| W | L. Fruhvirtova | 0 - 2 | July 21, 2026 |
| W | M. Sakkari | 2 - 0 | July 19, 2026 |
| W | P. Stearns | 2 - 0 | Aug. 3, 2026 |
| L | K. Quevedo | 2 - 0 | July 14, 2026 |
| L | C. McNally | 0 - 2 | June 30, 2026 |
| L | K. Muchova | 0 - 2 | June 26, 2026 |
| W | E. Navarro | 0 - 2 | June 25, 2026 |
All June 12, 2026 results & picks →
Krejcikova's elite grass pedigree (Wimbledon champion) and dominant serve stats (74.7% hold) create a significant structural mismatch against Ruse, justifying the model's 9.1% edge over the market.