Loading the page
Tennis
Match-winner probabilities and total-games lines for ATP and WTA matches, qualifying included, from ratings kept separately for hard, clay and grass. Predictions are stored before the match and graded afterwards, and each model is shown beside the simplest rule it has to beat. Where it adds nothing, this page says so.
12+ upcoming matches priced
The engine’s tennis data holds 80,701 finished matches across 2 competitions, 3 Jan 2010 to 15 Oct 2026, for 2,355 players.
17 matches across 5 competitions, 17 stored before the match. Times are UTC. A prediction marked "Stored in advance" was written before the match and counts towards the record below; one marked "Calculated now" is the engine's view today and does not.
| Time | Match | Win chance | Engine backs | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBD . v Shnaider D.hard | 41%59% | Shnaider D. 59%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Right | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Shnaider D.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-024%2-116%0-239% (came in)1-220% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.524%Away +1.576% (came in)Home +1.561%Away -1.539% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes61%No39% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes76% (came in)No24% First setFirst set winner Home43%Away57% (came in) First set total games Over 9.544% (came in)Under 9.556%Over 10.522% (came in)Under 10.578% GamesGame handicap Home -2.532%Away +2.568% (came in)Home +0.548%Away -0.552% (came in)Home +3.564%Away -3.536% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes24%No76% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Svitolina E. v Guo H.hard | 88%12% | Svitolina E. 88%Stored in advance | – | 2–0Right | |
All markets (9)Svitolina E. v Guo H.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-068% (came in)2-120%0-26%1-26% Total sets Over 2.526%Under 2.574% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.568% (came in)Away +1.532%Home +1.594% (came in)Away -1.56% Home player to win at least one set Yes94% (came in)No6% Away player to win at least one set Yes32%No68% (came in) First setFirst set winner Home81% (came in)Away19% First set total games Over 9.537%Under 9.563% (came in)Over 10.518%Under 10.582% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -7.536%Away +7.564% (came in)Home -4.553% (came in)Away +4.548%Home -1.568% (came in)Away +1.532% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes18%No82% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| TBD . v Sakkari M.hard | 49%51% | Sakkari M. 51%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Right | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Sakkari M.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-031%2-119%0-232% (came in)1-219% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.531%Away +1.569% (came in)Home +1.568%Away -1.532% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes68%No32% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes69% (came in)No31% First setFirst set winner Home49%Away51% (came in) First set total games Over 9.546%Under 9.554% (came in)Over 10.523%Under 10.577% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -2.536%Away +2.564% (came in)Home +0.552%Away -0.548% (came in)Home +3.568%Away -3.532% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes25%No75% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| TBD . v Chwalinska M.hard | 69%31% | TBD . 69%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Wrong | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Chwalinska M.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-048%2-121%0-218% (came in)1-213% Total sets Over 2.535%Under 2.565% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.548%Away +1.552% (came in)Home +1.582%Away -1.518% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes82%No18% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes52% (came in)No48% First setFirst set winner Home65%Away36% (came in) First set total games Over 9.542% (came in)Under 9.558%Over 10.521%Under 10.579% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -5.532%Away +5.569% (came in)Home -2.547%Away +2.553% (came in)Home +0.564%Away -0.536% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes22%No78% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Fernandez L. v Ostapenko J.hard | 39%61% | Ostapenko J. 61%Stored in advance | – | 1–2Right | |
All markets (9)Fernandez L. v Ostapenko J.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-023%2-116%0-241%1-221% (came in) Total sets Over 2.536% (came in)Under 2.564% Set handicap Home -1.523%Away +1.577% (came in)Home +1.559% (came in)Away -1.541% Home player to win at least one set Yes59% (came in)No41% Away player to win at least one set Yes77% (came in)No23% First setFirst set winner Home41%Away59% (came in) First set total games Over 9.544%Under 9.556% (came in)Over 10.522%Under 10.578% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -1.536%Away +1.564% (came in)Home +1.552%Away -1.548% (came in)Home +4.568% (came in)Away -4.532% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes24%No76% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| TBD . v Kartal S.hard | 53%47% | TBD . 53%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Wrong | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Kartal S.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-034%2-119%0-229% (came in)1-218% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.534%Away +1.566% (came in)Home +1.571%Away -1.529% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes71%No29% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes66% (came in)No34% First setFirst set winner Home53%Away47% (came in) First set total games Over 9.546%Under 9.554% (came in)Over 10.523%Under 10.577% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -3.533%Away +3.567% (came in)Home -0.549%Away +0.551% (came in)Home +2.565%Away -2.535% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes25%No75% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Krueger A. v Swiatek I.hard | 12%88% | Swiatek I. 88%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Right | |
All markets (9)Krueger A. v Swiatek I.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-06%2-16%0-268% (came in)1-220% Total sets Over 2.526%Under 2.574% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.56%Away +1.594% (came in)Home +1.532%Away -1.568% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes32%No68% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes94% (came in)No6% First setFirst set winner Home19%Away81% (came in) First set total games Over 9.537%Under 9.563% (came in)Over 10.518%Under 10.582% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home +1.532%Away -1.568% (came in)Home +4.548%Away -4.552% (came in)Home +7.564% (came in)Away -7.536% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes18%No82% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Tjen J. v Li A.hard | 45%55% | Li A. 55%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Right | |
All markets (9)Tjen J. v Li A.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-028%2-118%0-235% (came in)1-220% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.528%Away +1.572% (came in)Home +1.565%Away -1.535% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes65%No35% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes72% (came in)No28% First setFirst set winner Home46%Away54% (came in) First set total games Over 9.545%Under 9.555% (came in)Over 10.523%Under 10.578% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -2.534%Away +2.566% (came in)Home +0.550%Away -0.550% (came in)Home +3.566%Away -3.534% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes25% (came in)No75% Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Time | Match | Win chance | Engine backs | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Romero Gormaz L. v TBD . | 37%63% | TBD . 63%Stored in advance | – | 2–0Wrong | |
All markets (9)Romero Gormaz L. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-022% (came in)2-115%0-243%1-221% Total sets Over 2.536%Under 2.564% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.522% (came in)Away +1.579%Home +1.558% (came in)Away -1.543% Home player to win at least one set Yes58% (came in)No43% Away player to win at least one set Yes79%No22% (came in) First setFirst set winner Home40% (came in)Away60% First set total games Over 9.544%Under 9.556% (came in)Over 10.527%Under 10.573% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -1.535% (came in)Away +1.566%Home +1.551% (came in)Away -1.549%Home +4.567% (came in)Away -4.533% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes28%No72% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Jones F. v TBD . | 34%66% | TBD . 66%Stored in advance | – | 2–0Wrong | |
All markets (9)Jones F. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-020% (came in)2-114%0-245%1-221% Total sets Over 2.536%Under 2.565% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.520% (came in)Away +1.580%Home +1.555% (came in)Away -1.545% Home player to win at least one set Yes55% (came in)No45% Away player to win at least one set Yes80%No20% (came in) First setFirst set winner Home38% (came in)Away62% First set total games Over 9.544%Under 9.556% (came in)Over 10.526%Under 10.574% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -1.533% (came in)Away +1.567%Home +1.549% (came in)Away -1.551%Home +4.565% (came in)Away -4.535% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes28%No72% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Burel C. v TBD . | 45%55% | TBD . 55%Stored in advance | – | 2–0Wrong | |
All markets (9)Burel C. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-027% (came in)2-117%0-236%1-220% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.527% (came in)Away +1.573%Home +1.565% (came in)Away -1.536% Home player to win at least one set Yes65% (came in)No36% Away player to win at least one set Yes73%No27% (came in) First setFirst set winner Home46% (came in)Away54% First set total games Over 9.546%Under 9.554% (came in)Over 10.528%Under 10.572% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -2.534% (came in)Away +2.566%Home +0.550% (came in)Away -0.550%Home +3.566% (came in)Away -3.534% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes30%No71% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Time | Match | Win chance | Engine backs | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBD . v Hruncakova V. | 62%38% | TBD . 62%Stored in advance | – | 2–1Right | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Hruncakova V.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-041%2-121% (came in)0-222%1-216% Total sets Over 2.536% (came in)Under 2.564% Set handicap Home -1.541%Away +1.559% (came in)Home +1.578% (came in)Away -1.522% Home player to win at least one set Yes78% (came in)No22% Away player to win at least one set Yes59% (came in)No41% First setFirst set winner Home59%Away41% (came in) First set total games Over 9.545%Under 9.556% (came in)Over 10.527%Under 10.573% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -4.533%Away +4.568% (came in)Home -1.549%Away +1.551% (came in)Home +1.565% (came in)Away -1.535% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes28%No72% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Boskovic L. v TBD . | 43%57% | TBD . 57%Stored in advance | – | No result | |
All markets (9)Boskovic L. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-026%2-117%0-237%1-220% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% Set handicap Home -1.526%Away +1.574%Home +1.563%Away -1.537% Home player to win at least one set Yes63%No37% Away player to win at least one set Yes74%No26% First setFirst set winner Home44%Away56% First set total games Over 9.545%Under 9.555%Over 10.528%Under 10.572% GamesGame handicap Home -2.533%Away +2.567%Home +0.549%Away -0.551%Home +3.565%Away -3.535% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes29%No71% Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| TBD . v Ruzic A. | 61%39% | TBD . 61%Stored in advance | – | 1–2Wrong | |
All markets (9)TBD . v Ruzic A.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-040%2-121%0-223%1-216% (came in) Total sets Over 2.536% (came in)Under 2.564% Set handicap Home -1.540%Away +1.560% (came in)Home +1.577% (came in)Away -1.523% Home player to win at least one set Yes77% (came in)No23% Away player to win at least one set Yes60% (came in)No40% First setFirst set winner Home59%Away42% (came in) First set total games Over 9.545% (came in)Under 9.555%Over 10.527% (came in)Under 10.573% GamesGame handicap Home -4.532%Away +4.568% (came in)Home -1.548%Away +1.552% (came in)Home +1.564% (came in)Away -1.536% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes29%No72% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Time | Match | Win chance | Engine backs | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davidovich Fokina A. v Gea A.hard | 56%44% | Davidovich Fokina A. 56%Stored in advance | – | No result | |
All markets (9)Davidovich Fokina A. v Gea A.SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-036%2-120%0-227%1-217% Total sets Over 2.537%Under 2.563% Set handicap Home -1.536%Away +1.564%Home +1.573%Away -1.527% Home player to win at least one set Yes73%No27% Away player to win at least one set Yes64%No36% First setFirst set winner Home55%Away46% First set total games Over 9.557%Under 9.543%Over 10.532%Under 10.568% GamesGame handicap Home -3.534%Away +3.566%Home -0.550%Away +0.550%Home +2.566%Away -2.534% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes41%No59% Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| De Minaur A. v TBD .hard | 68%32% | De Minaur A. 68%Stored in advance | – | 0–2Wrong | |
All markets (9)De Minaur A. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-047%2-121%0-218% (came in)1-214% Total sets Over 2.535%Under 2.565% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.547%Away +1.553% (came in)Home +1.582%Away -1.518% (came in) Home player to win at least one set Yes82%No18% (came in) Away player to win at least one set Yes53% (came in)No47% First setFirst set winner Home64%Away36% (came in) First set total games Over 9.555% (came in)Under 9.546%Over 10.530%Under 10.570% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -4.536%Away +4.564% (came in)Home -1.553%Away +1.548% (came in)Home +1.568%Away -1.532% (came in) MatchTiebreak in the match Yes38%No62% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
| Time | Match | Win chance | Engine backs | Total | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Samson L. v TBD .grass | 62%38% | Samson L. 62%Stored in advance | – | 2–0Right | |
All markets (9)Samson L. v TBD .SetsCorrect score (sets) 2-042% (came in)2-121%0-222%1-216% Total sets Over 2.536%Under 2.564% (came in) Set handicap Home -1.542% (came in)Away +1.559%Home +1.578% (came in)Away -1.522% Home player to win at least one set Yes78% (came in)No22% Away player to win at least one set Yes59%No42% (came in) First setFirst set winner Home59% (came in)Away41% First set total games Over 9.546%Under 9.554% (came in)Over 10.523%Under 10.577% (came in) GamesGame handicap Home -4.533% (came in)Away +4.567%Home -1.549% (came in)Away +1.551%Home +1.565% (came in)Away -1.535% MatchTiebreak in the match Yes27%No74% (came in) Priced from the competition’s own scoring record around this match’s expectation, not by a model trained for each line. Half points mean no pushes; a tick marks the side of each line that came in. | |||||
Predictions stored before the match and graded against the result. Live and reconstructed are counted separately and never blended.
| Kind | Winner picks | Total games picks |
|---|---|---|
| Stored before the match | 83 of 153 (54.2%) | 32 of 47 (68.1%) |
| Reconstructed afterwards | 1 of 1 (100.0%) | 0 of 1 (0.0%) |
Live picks have been stored since 8 Oct 2026, so the sample is still small. 178 stored in all.
| Market | Stored before the match | Reconstructed |
|---|---|---|
| Correct score (sets) | 31 of 88 (35.2%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Total sets | 54 of 88 (61.4%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Set handicap | 51 of 88 (58.0%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Home player to win at least one set | 56 of 88 (63.6%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Away player to win at least one set | 60 of 88 (68.2%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| First set winner | 51 of 88 (58.0%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| First set total games | 55 of 88 (62.5%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Game handicap | 48 of 88 (54.5%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
| Tiebreak in the match | 63 of 88 (71.6%) | 0 of 0 (–) |
Accuracy on matches each model was not trained on, beside the simple rule it has to beat. A gap smaller than chance can produce is reported as no edge.
| Market | Accuracy | Baseline | Gap | Test matches |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Match winner | 64.8% | 64.5%Always pick the higher-rated side | +0.3 ptsNo measurable edge | 14,562 |
| Total games, over 19.5 | 67.3% | 66.6%Always pick the more common result | +0.7 ptsNo measurable edge | 14,562 |
| Total games, over 21.5 | 59.8% | 55.2%Always pick the more common result | +4.6 ptsClear edge | 14,562 |
| Total games, over 23.5 | 65.1% | 55.8%Always pick the more common result | +9.3 ptsClear edge | 14,562 |
The highest-rated players in each competition among those active in the last year of data. Ratings only compare within one competition, so each is ranked alone.
WTA
ATP
Each player has an Elo-style rating, and a second rating for each surface. Clay ability is not grass ability, so where the overall and surface ratings disagree, the surface rating is the better guide and the engine uses both. Where a tournament's surface is not known the overall rating is used rather than a guessed surface.
On top of the ratings the model reads recent form, the share of matches won on the surface, average games won and lost, head-to-head and the match format, then blends its own estimate with the rating baseline. A player with fewer than five recent matches on record is not priced, because a default rating is not evidence.
Match outcome in tennis is close to fully described by the gap between two ratings, which is why the winner model is measured against a rule that always picks the higher-rated player. The total-games lines are where the model has more to add, because a rating says who is better and nothing about how long the match lasts.
History comes from tennis-data.co.uk (ATP and WTA main-tour results from 2010, with set scores). Fixtures and results for the tournaments in progress come from ESPN's public scoreboard, which is not a licensed data product and could change without notice. Together they cover the ATP and WTA tours, qualifying included. Challenger and ITF events and doubles are not covered.
The match winner model scored 64.8% on 14,562 held-out matches, against 64.5% for the baseline (always pick the higher-rated side): a gap of 0.3 points, which is within what chance alone produces. So on this market the model is no better than the simple rule, and the page says so rather than quote the headline figure. The strongest total is total games, over 23.5, at 65.1% against 55.8%. These are measured on matches the model was not trained on; they are not a record of picks published in advance.
Yes. The board on this page lists every tennis match loaded for the day, grouped by tournament, and you can step back or forward a few days. Each prediction says whether it was stored before the match or calculated afterwards. The newest result in the data is from 15 Oct 2026.
History comes from tennis-data.co.uk (ATP and WTA main-tour results from 2010, with set scores). Fixtures and results for the tournaments in progress come from ESPN's public scoreboard, which is not a licensed data product and could change without notice. Together they cover the ATP and WTA tours, qualifying included. Challenger and ITF events and doubles are not covered.
It has started. Predictions for upcoming matches are stored before they begin and graded against the result, and the record section on this page counts them, apart from anything reconstructed afterwards. It is young, so the sample is small, and it is kept separate from the football record rather than blended with it. Until it is larger, the table of held-out results is the better guide to how each model performs.
No. A prediction is a probability: a side given 70% is expected to lose three times in ten. Nothing on this site is betting advice or a promise of winnings, and it never links to a bookmaker. You must be 18 or over to bet, and you should never stake money you cannot afford to lose.
SARDASPORTS also publishes football predictions every day, the sport with the longest public record of picks stored before kick-off: see the football track record and how the predictions are made. Predictions are probabilities, not promises, and nothing here is betting advice. You must be 18 or over to bet.