TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in M. Trevisan vs F. Jones (Rome on 2026-07-18) — the market is efficient, with F. Jones favoured at 1.57.
═══ M. Trevisan vs F. Jones — Rome (clay) Semi-finals ═══
MODELS vs MARKET
Market: Trevisan 2.48 (38.8% norm) | Jones 1.57 (61.2% norm, 63.7% raw)
ELO: Jones 68.0% | ML: Jones 85.6% | Blend: Jones 66.7%
Value pick: B (Jones), edge 5.5% (backend) — driven almost entirely by ML outlier
RECENT FORM (last 5 shown; all fetched matches used in classification)
Trevisan (3-0 in Rome this week, 6-10 overall in window):
07-17 Rome QF W vs Yaneva (1610, Avg) 6-4 2-6 2-6 (3-set win)
07-16 Rome 1/8 W vs Zantedeschi (1593, Avg) 1-6 6-7 GRIND (TB)
07-14 Rome 1/16 W vs Grant (1742, Strong) 6-0 6-3 DOM vs Strong
07-09 Aschaffenburg L vs Riera (1500, Weak) 4-6 1-6
07-08 Aschaffenburg W vs Tsygourova (1500, Weak) 6-2 4-6 6-4 GRIND-ish 3-setter
Jones (3-0 in Rome this week, 8-13 overall in window):
07-17 Rome QF W vs Noha Akugue (1606, Avg) 6-3 6-1 DOM vs Avg
07-15 Rome 1/8 W vs Urgesi (1567, Avg) 2-6 6-4 6-1 3-set win
07-13 Rome 1/16 W vs Spiteri (1465, Weak) 1-6 6-1 6-0 3-set win
07-09 Contrexeville L vs Jeanjean (1676, Strong) 6-1 4-6 5-7
07-07 Contrexeville W vs Rame (1481, Weak) 6-2 7-5
FATIGUE (precomputed)
Trevisan: 5 matches/14d, 15 sets, 447 min, back-to-back x2, last 07-17
Jones: 5 matches/14d, 15 sets, 500 min, back-to-back 0, last 07-17
Court-time diff 53 min (Jones heavier), matches diff 0 → Slight edge only; effectively a wash
NARRATIVE
Let-down: none for either (no recent Finals)
Venue: both 3-0 in this Rome event (Trevisan 3-1 incl. May WTA Rome loss) — no differential
Title recency: none in window for either
VERDICT — LEAN (Jones)
ELO (68%) and blend (66.7%) sit on top of the market (63.7%); only ML (85.6%) disagrees.
Own estimate for Jones ~65% → ~2pt edge at 1.57 — below the bet bar.
Qualitative is mixed: Jones's week is cleaner (DOM QF, improving through draw) but her
DOM came vs an Avg opponent and her pre-Rome form was poor (5 L in 7); Trevisan's DOM
came vs the strongest opponent either faced (Grant, 1742). Fatigue near-equal.
Single-model disagreement without clean qualitative validation → no stake. Lean Jones.