TENNISEDGE.GG

N. Hibino vs M. Sawangkaew — Prediction & Analysis

Vancouver · Vancouver - 1/8-finals · July 29, 2026 · 20:00 UTC

TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in N. Hibino vs M. Sawangkaew (Vancouver on 2026-07-29) — the market is efficient, with M. Sawangkaew favoured at 1.47.

Surface hard Odds N. Hibino 2.62 · M. Sawangkaew 1.47

Verdict: no bet

The model found no value at current prices — the market has this one priced about right. That verdict is part of the public record too.
Profiles: N. Hibino · M. Sawangkaew · head-to-head record · Vancouver

Full analysis

N. Hibino (A, 31, #174) vs M. Sawangkaew (B, 24, #175) - Vancouver, hard, 1/8-finals

MODELS (win prob A): ELO 0.315 | ML 0.468 | serve-return SIM 0.398. Market: betfair B 1.45 (~0.70 comm-adj), A 2.96 (~0.349). ELO agrees with market (B ~68-70pct); ML and SIM both put A higher - a 3-way disagreement.

RECENT FORM (last 5):
 A Hibino: Won Vancouver R1 6-1 6-2 DOM (opp 1441 weak); Lost Prague SF clay 3-set grind; Lost Athens-Q 5-7 4-6; Won Athens-Q Final 6-4 6-0; Lost Corroios 0-6 4-6 blowout. Inconsistent, DOMs mixed with heavy losses. Bulk of her 50-match sample is W50/W75 ITF vs 1170-1500 fields -> serve/return stats inflated.
 B Sawangkaew: Won Vancouver R1 6-2 6-4 DOM over Liang 1632 (Strong, HARD - sharp); Evansville 2 rds; earlier grass haul (Newport SF, WTA-Wimbledon-label title, Birmingham title) beating 1694/1698/1761/1672. The more in-form player vs stronger fields.

SHAPE/PATH: B SHARPENING (hard DOM over 1632 yesterday), 4 matches/14d match-sharp. A STABLE-to-FADING, DOM only vs 1441. Both 1 match at Vancouver, both won R1 yesterday.

FATIGUE: Both won a 2-SET match yesterday -> neutral, no 3-set haircut. B load higher (4/14d, b2b 2, 287min) but match-sharp not tired, age 24 baseline. A rested-ish (2/14d). No extreme spot either side. Cumulative minutes = context only.

SURFACE: no transition (both on hard; B just won on hard). B grass streak partly surface-specific but her hard DOM validates the ELO/market read.

SIM VALIDATION (resimulate): baseline SPW A .58/B .589 near-parity -> A win .398, A+3.5 covers .571. Inputs NOT opponent-adjusted: A built on weak W50/W75 fields, B on stronger opposition -> sim underrates B / overrates A. Justified corrections (each within +/-0.05): A spw .58->.55 -> A win .255, A+3.5 covers .414. B spw .589->.619 -> A win .256, A+3.5 covers .433. Both converge to A~0.25, A+3.5 ~0.41-0.43, BELOW market implied 0.498. Corrected picture matches ELO+market consensus (B ~68-72pct).

PRICING:
 - A ML @2.96 (implied 0.349): baseline sim/ML edge rests entirely on field-inflated sim + lone-overrating ML; corrected A win ~0.25 -> NEGATIVE edge.
 - A +3.5 @2.06 (implied 0.498): baseline sim .571 -> +7pct, evaporates to ~0.41-0.43 under correction; A losses include blowouts (0-6, 2-6 2-6) -> self-negating cover risk. No edge.
 - B -3.5 @1.83 (implied 0.559): corrected B covers ~0.57-0.59 -> +1-3pct, below bar.
 - Totals 21.0: sim over ~0.51 vs implied ~0.513 -> no edge.
 - B ML @1.45: correctly priced, short price.

GATES
  G1 edge-origin: FAIL - every apparent numeric edge (A ML, A+3.5) comes from the field-inflated serve/return sim; corrected toward ELO+market+form consensus the edge disappears (A ~0.25). No robust model-vs-market gap survives.
  G2 consensus:   stake-tier only - moot (no bet).
  G3 fatal-risk:  n/a (no margin bet); A+3.5 also carried a self-negating blowout risk.

VERDICT: PASS. Market B ~68-70pct is corroborated by ELO, a bias-corrected sim, and B superior recent form (incl. hard DOM over 1632). The only edges live in an uncorrected sim / overrating ML. Efficient price, nothing to stake.

More from Vancouver