M. Giron vs P. Llamas Ruiz — Prediction & Analysis

TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in M. Giron vs P. Llamas Ruiz (Montreal on 2026-08-01) — the market is efficient, with M. Giron favoured at 1.36.

Model probabilities

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

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

Elo ratings

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 Aug. 1, 2026.

Head to head

M. Giron leads 1–0 over 1 meeting. Full record.

Recent form

All Aug. 1, 2026 results & picks →

Full analysis

═══ M. Giron (A) vs P. Llamas Ruiz (B) — Montreal, hard, FINAL ═══

MODELS vs MARKET
  ELO:    A 78.4%  |  ML: A 58.1%  |  market (devig): A 68.8%
  Odds:   A 1.36 (book)  |  B 3.00 (book)  |  alt_markets: none at analysis time
  Models straddle the market — ELO above, ML below — a classic split that reads efficient.

RECENT FORM (most-recent 5)
  Giron (A, 33, rank 77): L Hewitt(1520) 3-6 4-6 | W Ilagan(1580) 6-3 7-6 [Washington title]
    | W Shah(1408) 7-5 6-4 | L Zverev(1880) grass | W Halys(1617) grass.
    Hard-court specialist, just won Washington title (6d ago, hard). STABLE on hard.
  Llamas Ruiz (B, 23, rank 139): L Rice(1438) 6-4 3-6 6-4 | L Lajal(1697) grind
    | W Kuzuhara(1386) | L Svajda(1757) 1-6 2-6 grass | multiple clay wins vs ~1700 ELO.
    Fundamentally a CLAY grinder; recent HARD/grass form is weak (losing to sub-1450).
    FADING on hard.

SHAPE / PATH
  Neither player's Montreal matches appear in the fetched history (data gap) — path/venue
  read unavailable for both; treat both as neutral-path. Surface: B's edge is clay, this is
  hard — his ML number is likely clay-inflated (opponent-unadjusted serve/return built on
  clay fields vs ~1700 ELO). Giron is the hard-court player.

FATIGUE (Step 2 calibration)
  A: 3 matches/14d, 283 min, last 07-28 (~4d rest). B: 3/14d, 374 min, last 07-29 (~3d rest).
  No extreme spot (no 150min+ match yesterday, no 3-in-3). Cumulative-minutes gap = context
  only, not an edge. Neither side won a 3-set match yesterday → no hangover haircut. Roughly
  equal for betting purposes.

ELO/RANK SANITY
  A: ELO 78% ≈ rank 77 (hard specialist) — credible. B: rank 139, ELO gives 21.6%; ML's 41.9%
  is the outlier, judged clay-contaminated. Lean ELO/surface read over ML here.

PRICING
  Giron ML @ 1.36: min_odds = 1.05/0.735 = 1.43 > 1.36 → FAILS min-odds outright. Even at
  ELO 78%, edge vs book only ~4.9%, below the 8% book-priced bar (no exchange price).
  Llamas Ruiz ML @ 3.00: edge exists ONLY on ML's 41.9% (8.6% vs book) — but that number is
  the contaminated clay-inflated one; ELO 21.6% + surface + poor hard form say B is fairly-to-
  over-priced already at 33.3%. Backing B = manufacturing an edge from a model I distrust.

GATES
  G1 edge-origin: FAIL — favourite fails min-odds (1.36<1.43) & 8% book bar; dog's only edge
    comes from the ML number judged clay-contaminated. No clean pre-narrative numeric edge.
  G2 consensus:   PASS — stake-tier only (moot on a pass).
  G3 fatal-risk:  n/a — ML market, never blocks.

VERDICT: PASS. No exchange market, favourite priced through its min-odds, and the only nominal
underdog edge rests on a surface-contaminated ML reading against a hard specialist who just won
a title. Nothing to stake.