TENNISEDGE.GG

C. Naef vs J. Garland — Prediction & Analysis

Wimbledon · WTA Wimbledon - Quarter-finals · June 23, 2026 · 12:00 UTC

TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in C. Naef vs J. Garland (Wimbledon on 2026-06-23) — the market is efficient, with C. Naef favoured at 1.28.

Surface grass Odds C. Naef 1.28 · J. Garland 3.00

Verdict: no bet

The model found no value at current prices — the market has this one priced about right. That verdict is part of the public record too.
Profiles: C. Naef · J. Garland · head-to-head record · Wimbledon

Model probabilities

Independent estimates of who wins, each from a different method. The blend is what the bot prices against the market.

Method C. Naef J. Garland
Elo
ratings-based, surface-weighted
66.1% 33.9%
Machine learning
29-feature gradient-boosted model
71.1% 28.9%
Serve / return
point-by-point simulation
73.4% 26.6%
Blend
what the bot actually prices off
66.1% 33.9%
Market implied
de-vigged from the opening odds
70.1% 29.9%

We publish how well these score against the closing market, including where they lose: how accurate are tennis predictions?

Elo ratings

PlayerSurfaceEloRecordMatches
C. Naef hard1674 103–42145
J. Garland hard1677 143–69212

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 May 13, 2026.

Head to head

J. Garland leads 2–1 over 3 meetings. Full record.

DateEventSurfaceWinnerScore
June 23, 2026WimbledongrassJ. Garland2 - 1
May 19, 2025French OpenclayJ. Garland2 - 0
March 26, 2024W75 Croissy-BeaubourghardC. Naef2 - 0

Recent form

C. Naef

L J. Garland 1 - 2 June 23, 2026
L A. Krueger 2 - 0 June 14, 2026
W M. Stoiana 1 - 2 June 13, 2026
W H. Tan 2 - 0 June 12, 2026
W A. Urhobo 2 - 0 June 12, 2026

J. Garland

L T. C. Grant 0 - 2 June 24, 2026
W C. Naef 1 - 2 June 23, 2026
L R. Montgomery 2 - 0 June 7, 2026
W B. Du Pree 0 - 2 June 6, 2026
L G. Knutson 2 - 0 June 2, 2026

All June 23, 2026 results & picks →

Full analysis

Math-only prediction: no LLM calls used