Tennis Match winner: arbitrage calculator
- Market
- 2-way
- Typical overround
- 3%–7%
- Sample arbitrage return
- -1.53%
- Profit on every outcome
- -1.53
- Total stake
- 100.00
- Sum of implied probabilities
- 101.55%
| Leg | Odds used | Effective odds | Stake |
|---|---|---|---|
| Back Player A | 1.550 | 1.550 | 63.53 |
| Back Player B | 2.700 | 2.700 | 36.47 |
| If this wins | Legs that pay | Gross return | Commission | Net profit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player A | Player A | 98.47 | 0.00 | -1.53 |
| Player B | Player B | 98.47 | 0.00 | -1.53 |
No arbitrage: -1.53% return
Tennis match winner is a two-way market, but retirement rules differ: some books void if a player retires before the first set is complete, others pay out immediately. Matching rules across books matters for arbitrage.
Market structure
Tennis Match winner has 2 outcomes (
Player A, Player B). Bookmakers typically price it with an overround between 3% and
7%. For an arbitrage you need prices from at least two books whose implied probabilities, taken at the best price per outcome, add up to less than 100%.
Worked example
Two books quote 1.50 / 2.70 and 1.55 / 2.60. Taking the best price for each outcome (1.55 / 2.70) gives an implied sum of 101.55%. Arbitrage: no, return -1.53%. The calculator above is pre-filled with those best prices; the stakes for 100 in total are 63.53 / 36.47.
| Outcome | Book A | Book B | Best | Stake of 100 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Player A | 1.50 | 1.55 | 1.55 | 63.53 |
| Player B | 2.70 | 2.60 | 2.70 | 36.47 |
Two-way specifics
Two-way markets are the simplest to arbitrage: two prices, two stakes, one check that the implied probabilities sum below 100%. Watch for different settlement rules between books (retirements, postponements).
Frequently asked questions
How many legs does a Tennis Match winner arbitrage need?
One per outcome: 2 legs covering Player A, Player B. Every outcome must be backed for the position to profit whatever happens.
How large is the overround in Tennis Match winner?
Typically 3% to 7% at a single book. An arbitrage needs the best prices across books to sum below 100%, so the gap between books has to exceed the margin.
Is the worked example on this page a real arbitrage?
The sample prices give an implied sum of 101.55% at the best price per outcome (arbitrage: no). They are illustrative; live prices change constantly.
What can go wrong with an arbitrage across 2 outcomes?
A leg not being available at the assumed price, a void or push on one leg, different settlement rules between books, and stake limits that stop you placing the full amount.