TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in J. Brooksby vs I. Buse (Wimbledon on 2026-07-01) — the market is efficient, with J. Brooksby favoured at 1.72.
Independent estimates of who wins, each from a different method. The blend is what the bot prices against the market.
| Method | J. Brooksby | I. Buse |
|---|---|---|
| Elo ratings-based, surface-weighted |
63.7% | 36.3% |
| Machine learning 29-feature gradient-boosted model |
56.6% | 43.4% |
| Serve / return point-by-point simulation |
44.4% | 55.6% |
| Blend what the bot actually prices off |
54.5% | 45.5% |
| Market implied de-vigged from the opening odds |
54.4% | 45.6% |
We publish how well these score against the closing market, including where they lose: how accurate are tennis predictions?
| Player | Surface | Elo | Record | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| J. Brooksby | hard | 1729 | 86–55 | 141 |
| I. Buse | clay | 1814 | 133–81 | 214 |
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 31, 2026.
J. Brooksby leads 1–0 over 1 meeting. Full record.
| Date | Event | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| July 1, 2026 | Wimbledon | grass | J. Brooksby | 3 - 0 |
| L | C. Wong | 2 - 0 | July 31, 2026 |
| W | E. Winter | 0 - 2 | July 30, 2026 |
| W | C. Moutet | 2 - 0 | July 29, 2026 |
| L | J. Sinner | 3 - 0 | July 3, 2026 |
| W | I. Buse | 3 - 0 | July 1, 2026 |
| L | T. M. Etcheverry | 2 - 0 | July 23, 2026 |
| W | K. Feldbausch | 1 - 2 | July 22, 2026 |
| W | V. Kopriva | 1 - 2 | July 20, 2026 |
| L | S. Tsitsipas | 2 - 0 | July 14, 2026 |
| L | J. Brooksby | 3 - 0 | July 1, 2026 |
All July 1, 2026 results & picks →
J. Brooksby vs I. Buse — Wimbledon 1/32-finals (grass) MODELS: ELO 63.7% A | ML 56.6% A | blended model 54.5% A | serve/return 44.4% A (favors B). Market: A 1.72 (impl 54.4%) / B 2.05. Value edge ~0.0009 (negligible). FORM (grass, last 90d): - Brooksby: W vs Vukic 7-6 6-1 6-1 (R64, Avg) GRIND-but-routine; L Humbert 3-6 2-6; W Vukic 7-5 6-1 (Avg); L Cerundolo 0-6 4-6; W Damm 6-4 3-6 6-3 (Strong); L Zhang. ~3-3 grass, brittle (got bagelled by Cerundolo). Dreadful clay run preceding. - Buse: W vs Nava 7-6 3-6 7-5 6-0 (R64, Weak, 4 sets); L Kopriva 5-7 1-6; W Tsitsipas 7-6 6-3 (Strong); L Nakashima 2-6 2-6; W Giron 3-6 7-5 7-6 GRIND. ~3-2 grass. Hamburg CLAY champion ~38d ago (beat Paul/Mensik) — higher overall quality but clay-centric. FATIGUE: both 5 matches/14d, B2B 2, played 06-29, 2 days rest (equal). Court time A 428min vs B 520min — Buse heavier (+92min) and just survived a 4-setter; slight freshness edge to Brooksby. NARRATIVE: No let-down (Buse's title 38d old). No venue history. ELO is the lone outlier favoring A (+9pts vs market), partly explained by Buse being a clay specialist with weaker grass ELO. BUT serve/return model favors Buse and Buse owns the better wins vs strong fields (Tsitsipas on grass, Hamburg title). VERDICT: ELO + freshness lean Brooksby; serve/return + Buse's superior class lean Buse. Blended model sits exactly on market (54.5% vs 54.4%) — efficient price. Conflicting signals, edge after shrinkage ~0. Directional lean to Brooksby but no confirmed value. LEAN, no fire.