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.
Comesana F
Cobolli F
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 21.9% / 78.1%
Market 1 / 2: 21.3% / 78.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Sweeny D
Moutet, Corentin
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 30.5% / 69.5%
Market 1 / 2: 29.7% / 70.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Cerundolo J M
Ruud C
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 38.0% / 62.0%
Market 1 / 2: 37.4% / 62.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 44%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Basavareddy, Nishesh
Schoolkate T
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 67.5% / 32.5%
Market 1 / 2: 68.2% / 31.8%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 3 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Bergs Z
Taberner C
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 90.9% / 9.1%
Market 1 / 2: 92.1% / 7.9%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Ugo Carabelli C
Struff J-L
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 35.8% / 64.2%
Market 1 / 2: 35.3% / 64.8%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Fery A
Musetti L
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 24.0% / 76.0%
Market 1 / 2: 23.1% / 76.9%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: ATP - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Misolich F. (Avt)
Cerundolo F
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 10.2% / 89.8%
Market 1 / 2: 8.8% / 91.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Men. Qualifying Wild Card Challenge
Bellucci M
Piros Z
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 65.1% / 34.9%
Market 1 / 2: 65.8% / 34.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Men. Qualifying Wild Card Challenge
Basavareddi N
Schoolkate T
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 71.8% / 28.2%
Market 1 / 2: 72.2% / 27.8%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Men. Qualifying Wild Card Challenge
Frodin, Thea
Rybakina, Elena
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 68.1% / 31.9%
Market 1 / 2: 69.0% / 31.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Putintseva Y
Benchich B. (Shva)
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 21.0% / 79.0%
Market 1 / 2: 20.3% / 79.7%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Starodubtseva Y
Seidel E
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 69.2% / 30.8%
Market 1 / 2: 69.5% / 30.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Sakkari M
Montgomery R
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 58.7% / 41.3%
Market 1 / 2: 59.0% / 41.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Keys M
Korneeva A
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 70.1% / 29.9%
Market 1 / 2: 70.5% / 29.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Kasatkina D
Badosa Kh.-P. (Isp)
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 44.7% / 55.3%
Market 1 / 2: 44.9% / 55.1%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 24%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: WTA - Singles: Open Championship USA (USA), Hard
Frodin T
Rybakina E
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 8.9% / 91.1%
Market 1 / 2: 8.0% / 92.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Women
Knutson G A
Lys E
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 40.2% / 59.8%
Market 1 / 2: 39.5% / 60.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Women
Kasatkina D
Badosa P
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 46.5% / 53.5%
Market 1 / 2: 46.6% / 53.4%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 7 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Women
Havlickova L
Bondar A
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 39.6% / 60.4%
Market 1 / 2: 38.9% / 61.1%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 5 · total 0
Tournament: International US Open. Women
Alkala Gurri M./Roka Batalia O.
Martos Gornes S / Walkow S
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 39.3% / 60.7%
Market 1 / 2: 38.9% / 61.1%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 33%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Doubles: Porto 2 (Portugal), Clay
Kosinski F./Shairikh Ia.
Hallquist Lithen J./Lagerbohm L.
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 44.6% / 55.4%
Market 1 / 2: 15.7% / 84.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 18%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 1 · total 0
Tournament: ITF Men - Doubles: M15 Szczawno (Poland), Clay
Nesterov, Pyotr
Milev, Yanaki
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 76.2% / 23.8%
Market 1 / 2: 76.7% / 23.3%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Plovdiv 3 (Bulgaria), Clay
Brunclik P
Sorger S
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 45.9% / 54.1%
Market 1 / 2: 45.9% / 54.2%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 4 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Plovdiv 3 (Bulgaria), Clay
Rocha F
Pereira, Tiago
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 27.0% / 73.0%
Market 1 / 2: 26.5% / 73.5%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: Challenger Men - Singles: Porto 2 (Portugal), Clay
Vives Marcos P
Ribeiro E
All stats and model conclusions
Model vs market
Glicko 1 / 2: 48.5% / 51.5%
Market 1 / 2: 48.0% / 52.0%
Favourite trap: no
Data completeness: 39%
Match context
Bookmaker coverage: 1×2 6 · total 0
Tournament: International ATP Challenger. Portu
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.





