M. Inglis vs M. Hontama — Prediction & Analysis

TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in M. Inglis vs M. Hontama (Vancouver on 2026-07-31) — the market is efficient, with M. Hontama favoured at 1.75.

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. Hontama leads 2–1 over 3 meetings. Full record.

Recent form

All July 31, 2026 results & picks →

Full analysis

Vancouver SF (hard) — M. Inglis (A) vs M. Hontama (B)

MODELS
  ELO A 0.590 | ML A 0.506 | blend A 0.519
  Betfair ML: A 2.08 (impl 0.481) / B 1.84 (impl 0.543) -> devigged A 0.469
  Book quote A 2.05 drives the brief's 0.058 "value" — a soft book price, not executable. Judge vs Betfair.

RECENT FORM (last 5)
  Inglis (A): W vs Uchijima 1683-str 6-4 7-6 6-3 GRIND (QF, 3 sets); W vs Costoulas 1605 6-3 6-3 DOM;
    W vs Minnen 1684-str 6-1 6-3 DOM; L vs Bronzetti (Wimb QF, grass); L vs Cirstea (grass).
    Path: 3 wins deep at Vancouver, match-sharp. Shape SHARPENING (DOM over Strong Minnen).
  Hontama (B): W vs Sakatsume 1683-str 6-2 6-2 DOM (QF, 2 sets); W vs Lu 1468 6-3 6-3 DOM;
    W vs Day 1692-str 7-6 6-3 6-4 GRIND; L vs Tagger (Prague, clay); W vs Parry (Prague, clay).
    Path: 3 wins deep at Vancouver, match-sharp. Shape SHARPENING (DOM 6-2 6-2 over Strong Sakatsume).
    Transitioned clay->hard before Vancouver but now 3 hard wins in = acclimated.

FATIGUE
  Both played QF yesterday (07-30). Inglis WON A 3-SET match yesterday -> calibrated 3-set-hangover
    haircut -4.5pp on Inglis (age 28 baseline, no age modulation). True A ~0.474 after haircut.
  Hontama won a 2-SET match yesterday (6-2 6-2) -> no extra-set toll; fresher and more dominant in
    the most recent match despite heavier cumulative load (566min/14d = context, not an edge).
  Net: fatigue KILLS the thin A edge rather than confirming it — the tired-side toll is on Inglis.

NARRATIVE
  No first-Final let-down spot active this week for either. Both sharp, both deep runs. No transition
    risk on Inglis (hard->hard). Hontama clay->hard already absorbed over 3 wins.

GATES
  G1 edge-origin: FAIL — A ML edge vs commission-adj Betfair (eff 2.026, 1/2.026=0.494) = 0.519-0.494
    = 2.5%, below the 5% bar BEFORE any fatigue adj. 3-set hangover then pushes A to ~0.47 (negative).
  G2 consensus:   stake-tier only (never blocks) — n/a, no qualifying edge.
  G3 fatal-risk:  n/a (no margin bet staked).

MARKET CHOICE
  ML: A edge 2.5% (<5%) -> PASS. B has no model support (models lean A pre-fatigue).
  Handicap: model A covers -0.5 only 52.5%; line quoted A -1.5 @1.92 => cover < 50%, no edge. Cover
    thesis also can't lean on fatigue. PASS. AH: A -1.5 @ 1.92 / B +1.5 @ 1.98 (both ~coin-flip).
  Total: model over 20.5 = 53.7% -> ~51% at the 21.0 line vs over @2.0 (impl 0.50) = ~1% edge. PASS.

VERDICT: PASS. Best model edge (A ML) is only ~2.5% at the executable Betfair price — below the 5%
  bar — and the 3-set-hangover haircut lands on that same A side, erasing it. Hontama is equally
  match-sharp and objectively fresher (2-set win vs Inglis's 3-setter). No market clears its bar.