TennisEdge's AI model finds no betting value in V. Erjavec vs L. Jeanjean (Wimbledon on 2026-06-29) — the market is efficient, with L. Jeanjean favoured at 1.57.
Independent estimates of who wins, each from a different method. The blend is what the bot prices against the market.
| Method | V. Erjavec | L. Jeanjean |
|---|---|---|
| Elo ratings-based, surface-weighted |
50.7% | 49.3% |
| Machine learning 29-feature gradient-boosted model |
53.9% | 46.1% |
| Blend what the bot actually prices off |
48.6% | 51.4% |
| Market implied de-vigged from the opening odds |
39.8% | 60.2% |
We publish how well these score against the closing market, including where they lose: how accurate are tennis predictions?
| Player | Surface | Elo | Record | Matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V. Erjavec | clay | 1662 | 143–85 | 228 |
| L. Jeanjean | clay | 1691 | 111–70 | 181 |
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 July 13, 2026.
L. Jeanjean leads 2–1 over 3 meetings. Full record.
| Date | Event | Surface | Winner | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| June 30, 2026 | Wimbledon | grass | L. Jeanjean | 2 - 1 |
| Dec. 5, 2025 | Quito | clay | L. Jeanjean | 2 - 0 |
| June 24, 2025 | Wimbledon | grass | V. Erjavec | 2 - 1 |
| L | L. Romero Gormaz | 2 - 0 | July 21, 2026 |
| L | J. Grabher | 0 - 2 | July 18, 2026 |
| W | G. Feistel | 2 - 0 | July 17, 2026 |
| W | M. Barthel | 2 - 0 | July 15, 2026 |
| W | V. Bosio | 2 - 1 | July 13, 2026 |
| L | M. Frech | 2 - 0 | Aug. 3, 2026 |
| W | L. Zhu | 2 - 1 | Aug. 1, 2026 |
| L | M. Sherif | 2 - 0 | July 11, 2026 |
| W | A. Tubello | 2 - 1 | July 10, 2026 |
| W | F. Jones | 1 - 2 | July 9, 2026 |
All June 29, 2026 results & picks →
V. Erjavec (A) vs L. Jeanjean (B) — Wimbledon 1/64, grass. MODELS: ELO 0.507 | ML 0.539 | blended/shrunk model_prob_a 0.486 | confidence LOW (0.046). Market: A 2.37 (impl 39.8%) / B 1.57 (impl 60.2%). Value pick A, edge +8.8% (ML edge +14%). FORM — ERJAVEC (A): Eastbourne FINAL 06-21 LOST to Tomljanovic (1728) 1-6 5-7; GRIND W vs Tararudee (1513, Avg); Nottingham SF LOST to Golubic (1596). Consistent finalist (Rome/Huzhou/Eastbourne) but loses finals. Grass level is real (made a final). FORM — JEANJEAN (B): WON grass warm-up TITLE 06-25 — DOM Volynets (1659, Strong) 6-3 6-4, DOM Gorgodze (1500) 6-3 6-2, GRIND You (1373). Earlier: Madrid title, Rome final. Hot on grass. FATIGUE: A matches_14d 3, last match 06-21 (9d rest, well rested), court 276min. B matches_14d 3, last 06-25 (5d rest), back-to-back 2, court 202min. Roughly equal; A slightly fresher. NARRATIVE: B let-down — won Final 06-25 (5d) = WEAK signal only. B venue momentum at Wimbledon 3-0 (amplifies her edge). TITLE: Jeanjean Wimbledon-warmup 5d ago (grass). A no Wimbledon venue record in window. VERDICT: ML/ELO sit near coin-flip while market leans hard to Jeanjean, generating paper value on Erjavec. But the qualitative read points the OTHER way: Jeanjean owns superior live grass form (fresh title, two DOM wins incl. a Strong opp, venue momentum), while Erjavec's grass wins were grindy and she lost her final. Model edge is not validated by form -> not a commit. Erjavec is the value side but thin; LEAN only.