TENNISEDGE.GG

P. Carreno-Busta vs V. Royer — Prediction & Analysis

Montreal · ATP Montreal - 1/64-finals · Aug. 3, 2026 · 14:00 UTC

TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in P. Carreno-Busta vs V. Royer (Montreal on 2026-08-03) — the market is efficient, with P. Carreno-Busta favoured at 1.44.

Surface hard Odds P. Carreno-Busta 1.44 · V. Royer 2.75

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: P. Carreno-Busta · V. Royer · head-to-head record · Montreal

Model probabilities

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

Method P. Carreno-Busta V. Royer
Elo
ratings-based, surface-weighted
65.7% 34.3%
Machine learning
29-feature gradient-boosted model
56.4% 43.6%
Serve / return
point-by-point simulation
55.9% 44.1%
Blend
what the bot actually prices off
65.7% 34.3%
Market implied
de-vigged from the opening odds
65.6% 34.4%

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

Elo ratings

PlayerSurfaceEloRecordMatches
P. Carreno-Busta hard1742 81–51132
V. Royer clay1705 144–71215

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 Feb. 25, 2026.

Recent form

P. Carreno-Busta

L L. van Assche 2 - 1 July 23, 2026
W V. Gaubas 0 - 2 July 21, 2026
L C. Ugo Carabelli 1 - 2 July 15, 2026
W M. Dodig 0 - 2 July 14, 2026
L R. Jodar 3 - 2 July 2, 2026

V. Royer

L A. Molcan 2 - 0 July 14, 2026
L T. Droguet 0 - 2 July 11, 2026
W T. Daniel 2 - 1 July 10, 2026
W O. Wallin 2 - 1 July 9, 2026
W M. Neuchrist 2 - 0 July 7, 2026

All Aug. 3, 2026 results & picks →

Full analysis

P. Carreno-Busta (A) vs V. Royer (B) — Montreal, HARD, 1/64-finals

MODELS vs MARKET
  Market: A 1.44 (impl 65.6%) / B 2.75. value_edge ~0.08% (nil).
  ELO A 65.7% == market (efficient). ML A 56.4% (lone dissenter, favors B).
  ELO/rank sanity: CB ELO-fav yet ranked 91; Royer higher-ranked (71) but ELO dog.
  CB's ELO leans on historical hard-court pedigree (ex-top10) — but he is 35 and
  declining; his recent clay results are ordinary. Do not over-trust either extreme.

RECENT FORM (last 5, all clay/grass — NEITHER has a recent hard-court match)
  CB (A): L van Assche(1706) 6-3 4-6 6-2 clay; W Gaubas(1635) DOM clay;
    L Ugo Carabelli(1809) 6-3 5-7 5-7 clay; W Dodig(1640) DOM clay;
    L Jodar(1666) 5-set grass. Shape FADING — ugly losses to mid-ELO clay fields.
  Royer (B): L Molcan(1786) 6-4 7-5 clay; L Droguet(1783) 3-6 4-6 clay;
    W Daniel(1725) GRIND clay; W Wallin(1554) GRIND clay; W Neuchrist(1448) DOM clay.

PATH / SHAPE / SURFACE
  BOTH players are transitioning clay -> hard (Step 3 TRANSITION on both sides):
  depressed level + wider margin variance for each — no directional edge either way.
  CB last match 2026-07-23 (~10d gap); Royer last match 2026-07-14 (~19d layoff =
  rust risk). Neither in an extreme fatigue spot (Step 2): cumulative load is context
  only, not an edge here.

FATIGUE
  No extreme spot. CB matches_14d 2, last 07-23. Royer well_rested, long layoff.
  No 3-set-hangover (no next-day win-and-play). Roughly equal, no haircut applied.

EDGE MATH (Pricing Discipline — no exchange market)
  Back CB @ 1.44: implied 69.4% vs ELO 65.7% -> edge -3.7%. FAIL (market > model).
  Back Royer @ 2.75: implied 36.4% vs ML B 43.6% -> +7.2% BUT book-priced only
    (alt_markets null, no betfair_ml) -> bar is >=8%; 7.2% < 8%. And this rests on
    ML alone, contradicting ELO+market, with NO independent qualitative validation
    (CB hard-court pedigree + Royer rust/transition argue the other way). FAIL.

GATES
  G1 edge-origin: FAIL — no side clears the numeric bar at the executable price
    (CB negative; Royer 7.2% < 8% book-priced bar, lone-ML, unvalidated).
  G2 consensus:   PASS (stake-tier only; moot — no bet).
  G3 fatal-risk:  n/a (ML market; no margin bet).

MARKET CHOICE
  alt_markets: none at analysis time
  AH: not quoted
  ML only available; no side clears its bar.

VERDICT: PASS. ELO agrees with market (efficient), ML is a lone dissenter with no
qualitative backing, no exchange liquidity, edge below the book-priced bar. Both
players cold onto a surface transition. No priced opinion worth staking.