TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in D. Merida Aguilar vs D. Medvedev (Wimbledon on 2026-07-01) — the market is efficient, with D. Medvedev favoured at 1.02.
Independent estimates of who wins, each from a different method. The blend is what the bot prices against the market.
| Method | D. Merida Aguilar | D. Medvedev |
|---|---|---|
| Elo ratings-based, surface-weighted |
10.0% | 90.0% |
| Machine learning 29-feature gradient-boosted model |
32.2% | 67.8% |
| Blend what the bot actually prices off |
16.7% | 83.3% |
| Market implied de-vigged from the opening odds |
4.2% | 95.8% |
We publish how well these score against the closing market, including where they lose: how accurate are tennis predictions?
| Player | Surface | Elo | Record | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D. Merida Aguilar | clay | 1776 | 166–102 | 268 |
| D. Medvedev | hard | 1994 | 207–77 | 284 |
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 21, 2026.
D. Medvedev leads 1–0 over 1 meeting. Full record.
| Date | Event | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| July 1, 2026 | Wimbledon | grass | D. Medvedev | 3 - 1 |
| L | K. Jacquet | 1 - 2 | July 21, 2026 |
| W | D. Dzumhur | 2 - 1 | July 18, 2026 |
| W | R. A. Burruchaga | 0 - 2 | July 17, 2026 |
| W | T. Droguet | 2 - 0 | July 16, 2026 |
| W | T. M. Etcheverry | 0 - 2 | July 15, 2026 |
| L | J-L. Struff | 3 - 0 | July 3, 2026 |
| W | D. Merida Aguilar | 1 - 3 | July 1, 2026 |
| W | M. Cilic | 0 - 3 | June 29, 2026 |
| L | D. Altmaier | 2 - 1 | June 19, 2026 |
| W | T. Atmane | 0 - 2 | June 17, 2026 |
All July 1, 2026 results & picks →
MATCH: D. Merida Aguilar (A) vs D. Medvedev (B) | Wimbledon 1/32 | grass MODELS: ELO p(A)=0.100 | ML p(A)=0.322 | model p(A)=0.167 | market implied p(A)=0.042 (A @23.0, B @1.02). Bot flags +12.4% value on A via 0.25-Kelly. This is an ML-driven edge, not an ELO one (ELO essentially agrees with market). FORM A (Merida Aguilar) - CLAY SPECIALIST: - Wimbledon 1/64 'W' vs Ugo Carabelli (1262, Weak): GIFT RETIREMENT - was DOWN 2 sets to 1 (lost 4-6, 3-6, won 6-2) when opp retired at 0-3 in set 4. Not a real win. - London SF (grass): LOST 6-3 6-2 to Damm (1619). Outclassed on grass. - Strong clay results (Madrid/Rome/Bucharest finals) but those are CLAY. Live grass form is poor. FORM B (Medvedev) - GRASS CAPABLE EX-ELITE: - Wimbledon 1/64: DOM vs Cilic (1761, Strong) 6-1 6-2 6-4 on grass. Real edge signal. - Halle: beat Atmane 6-4 6-4, Etcheverry 6-3 6-4; QF loss to Altmaier in 3. - Solid grass body of work; just a deflated ELO in this dataset. FATIGUE: A matches_14d=1, 124min, fresh. B matches_14d=4, 389min court time, back-to-back. Medvedev carries more load - but his R1 was a ~110min straight-set demolition, not draining. Fatigue edge to A is real but minor and nowhere near enough to bridge the surface/quality gap. NARRATIVE: A's recent 'Final' results are all CLAY (Madrid title, Rome title) - live grass form outweighs that historical clay strength. No grass venue momentum for A. No let-down spot for B. VERDICT: PASS. The 23.0 on Merida is correct, not a misprice. A is a clay-courter who has been outclassed on grass and whose Wimbledon advance came via opponent retirement while losing. B just dominated a Strong opponent on grass. The model's 16.7% p(A) is an ML artifact the qualitative read kills. Medvedev's mild fatigue is the only crack and it's insufficient. No validated edge.