Matchboard
AI tennis predictions: professional match breakdown
The page gathers the upcoming matches of the selected sport, model probabilities, odds, results and AI breakdowns in a single match center.
Live win probability (market-implied) — how often it wins, not a profit forecast.
Shandarov R./Shandarov V.
Iannakkone F./Kravchenko G.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 9.5% / 90.5%
Market 1 / 2: 8.5% / 91.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 3 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Doubles: Plovdiv 3 (Bulgaria), Clay
Shikov K./Spasov D.
Milev Y./Popovich S.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 20.5% / 79.5%
Market 1 / 2: 19.7% / 80.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 18%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 3 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Doubles: Plovdiv 3 (Bulgaria), Clay
Dzevetski K./Matushevski P.
Bass F./Soto M.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 59.4% / 40.6%
Market 1 / 2: 59.5% / 40.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 18%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 2 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Doubles: Komo (Italy), Clay
Morisaki K./Odzeki M.
Kalyakina M./Zhu C.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 38.1% / 61.9%
Market 1 / 2: 37.7% / 62.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 18%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 2 · total 0
Tournament: ITF Women - Doubles: W15 Yeongwol (South Korea), Hard
Martin Tiffon P. (Isp)
Ovcharenko, Oleksandr
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 70.0% / 30.0%
Market 1 / 2: 70.8% / 29.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Plovdiv 3 (Bulgaria), Clay
Heide G
Pereira T
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 75.8% / 24.2%
Market 1 / 2: 76.9% / 23.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Portu
Drzewiecki K / Matuszewski P
Bass F./Soto M.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 59.2% / 40.8%
Market 1 / 2: 59.4% / 40.6%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 2 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Como. Doubles
Barrentos N./Mena F.
Kolar Z / Poljak D
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 55.9% / 44.1%
Market 1 / 2: 56.0% / 44.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Portu. Pary
Mansilla Diez M / Ribeiro E
Jans J / Visker N
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 23.9% / 76.1%
Market 1 / 2: 23.2% / 76.8%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Portu. Pary
Pereira T / Pujol Navarro B
Aieni A./Pokorny L.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 61.2% / 38.8%
Market 1 / 2: 61.5% / 38.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Portu. Pary
Moller, Elmer
Kasnikowski M
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 40.7% / 59.3%
Market 1 / 2: 40.5% / 59.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Mayorka (Spain), Hard
Sesko, Ziga
Muller A
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 32.0% / 68.0%
Market 1 / 2: 31.2% / 68.8%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Mayorka (Spain), Hard
Pucinelli de Almeida M
Friend, Jay
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 47.8% / 52.2%
Market 1 / 2: 47.3% / 52.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Mayorka (Spain), Hard
Lajal M
Budkov Kjaer N
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 56.0% / 44.0%
Market 1 / 2: 55.9% / 44.1%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Gueymard Wayenburg S
Ribecai M
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 47.5% / 52.5%
Market 1 / 2: 47.7% / 52.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Ivanov Ivan
Dzhons Maksimus
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 47.1% / 52.9%
Market 1 / 2: 47.1% / 53.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Montes-De la Torre I
Erhard M
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 59.6% / 40.4%
Market 1 / 2: 59.7% / 40.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Potenza L
Jorda Sanchis D
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 44.0% / 56.0%
Market 1 / 2: 43.6% / 56.4%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Pucinelli de Almeida M
Hara Friend J D
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 41.0% / 59.0%
Market 1 / 2: 40.7% / 59.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: International Manakor
Petkovic M
Monteiro T
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 29.1% / 70.9%
Market 1 / 2: 28.7% / 71.4%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Porto 2 (Portugal), Clay
Seyboth Wild T
Gombos N
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 61.9% / 38.1%
Market 1 / 2: 62.3% / 37.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: International Komo
Uaild T. (Bra)
Gombos N
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 62.2% / 37.8%
Market 1 / 2: 62.4% / 37.6%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 2 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Komo (Italy), Clay
Shikov K./Spasov D.
Milev Ia / Popovich S
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 56.4% / 43.6%
Market 1 / 2: 19.5% / 80.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 1 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Plovdiv 3. Pary
Photiades P
Stefanini L
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 60.5% / 39.5%
Market 1 / 2: 67.8% / 32.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 1 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Pliskova, Karolina
Shnaider D
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 24.3% / 75.7%
Market 1 / 2: 23.8% / 76.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Townsend T
Preston T
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 76.4% / 23.6%
Market 1 / 2: 77.4% / 22.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Munar J
Rinderknech A
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 39.8% / 60.2%
Market 1 / 2: 39.6% / 60.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Medvedev D
Gorzny, Sebastian
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 57.1% / 42.9%
Market 1 / 2: 85.8% / 14.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 1 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Merida Aguilar D
Rublev A
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 37.7% / 62.3%
Market 1 / 2: 37.5% / 62.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 2 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Pegula J
Kenin S
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 89.2% / 10.8%
Market 1 / 2: 90.0% / 10.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Women
Analytics
Why are PropickAI tennis predictions effective?
Tennis is a sport of individual matchups, so the model considers more than just player ranking. It factors in court surface, form in recent tournaments, head-to-head records, serve and return quality, draw density and possible fatigue. AI tennis predictions help you see where ATP and WTA statistics match the market line and where there is a discrepancy.


