Live model · ATP · WTA · Challenger · W125 · ITF

Market intelligence for serious tennis traders.

Live win probability for every professional tennis match, updated as the points are played — plus the moments that matter: who is under pressure, who is about to be broken, and when a scoreline stops meaning what it looks like. ATP · WTA · Challenger · W125 · ITF, every day.

Free through beta — no card. Your email is also your sign-in.

or see today's value board

—

Matches today

Live right now

41,750

Matches in training set

Hard edge floor

Majors — value board

0 matches · 0 priced

📅 TODAY — LIVE & UPCOMING

WTARakhimova K.Volynets K.56%44%Seoul

WTATararudee L.Park S.70%30%Seoul

ATPBaez S.Brooksby J.56%44%Chengdu

ATPBolt A.Santillan A.64%36%ATP - SINGLES: Hangzhou (China) - Qualification, hard

ATPDaniel T.Matsuoka H.61%39%ATP - SINGLES: Hangzhou (China) - Qualification, hard

WTAOliynykova O.Chwalinska M.34%66%WTA - SINGLES: Singapore (Singapore), hard (indoor)

ATPHarris L.Galarneau A.52%48%ATP - SINGLES: Chengdu (China) - Qualification, hard

ATPMuller A.Bar Biryukov P.67%33%ATP - SINGLES: Chengdu (China) - Qualification, hard

WTABack D.Joint M.29%71%Seoul

ATPKopriva V.Hu J.93%7%Chengdu

ATPSvrcina D.Noguchi R.63%37%ATP - SINGLES: Hangzhou (China) - Qualification, hard

ATPTomic B.Sun F.55%45%ATP - SINGLES: Hangzhou (China) - Qualification, hard

WTAMertens E.Krejcikova B.56%44%WTA - SINGLES: Singapore (Singapore), hard (indoor)

ATPBasilashvili N.Cina F.59%41%ATP - SINGLES: Chengdu (China) - Qualification, hard

WTAKorneeva A.Astakhova D.67%33%Seoul

ATPMochizuki S.Kotov P.60%40%ATP - SINGLES: Chengdu (China) - Qualification, hard

ATPVukic A.Jacquet K.56%44%Hangzhou

WTAAndreeva M.Sasnovich A.89%11%WTA - SINGLES: Singapore (Singapore), hard (indoor)

ATPRoyer V.Walton A.52%48%Hangzhou

WTAParks A.Fernandez L.30%70%WTA - SINGLES: Singapore (Singapore), hard (indoor)

CHALLENGERCassone M.Tabur C.41%59%St. Tropez

CHALLENGERZhu E.Searle H.26%74%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERDonald M.Cadenasso G.30%70%Genova 2

CHALLENGERGaray V.Barrena A.24%76%Buenos Aires 3

CHALLENGERZink T.Gomez F. A.41%59%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERRatti L.Coria F.66%34%Buenos Aires 3

CHALLENGERArutiunian E.Svajda T.38%62%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERKennedy J.Draxl L.31%69%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERBoyer T.Johnson S.80%20%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERKrueger M.Gorzny S.69%31%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERLegout T.Milavsky D.32%68%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERTorres J. B.Ficovich J. P.42%58%Buenos Aires 3

CHALLENGERBasavareddy N.Rottgering M.74%26%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERBlanch Dar.Wolf J.J.78%22%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERHance K.Martin A.50%50%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERBrancaccio R.Petkovic M.65%35%Genova 2

CHALLENGERCaniato C. A.Gentzsch T.38%62%Genova 2

CHALLENGERMikrut L.Coppejans K.54%46%Genova 2

CHALLENGERMoeller M.Arnaboldi F.50%50%Genova 2

CHALLENGERNeumayer L.Martin Manzano J. C.72%28%Genova 2

CHALLENGERRoca Batalla O.Hemery C.48%52%Plovdiv 4

CHALLENGERPrizmic D.Jorda Sanchis D.65%35%St. Tropez

CHALLENGERAlcala Gurri M.Sanchez Jover C.60%40%Plovdiv 4

CHALLENGERCompagnucci T.Martin Tiffon P.39%61%Plovdiv 4

CHALLENGERGlinka D.Blanchet U.50%50%St. Tropez

CHALLENGERWiskandt M.Taberner C.20%80%Plovdiv 4

CHALLENGERFaurel T.Lajal M.36%64%St. Tropez

CHALLENGERKicker N.Dellien H.36%64%Buenos Aires 3

CHALLENGERMena F.Justo G. I.42%58%Buenos Aires 3

CHALLENGERDroguet T.Gojo B.59%41%St. Tropez

CHALLENGERShelbayh A.Andrade A.49%51%San Diego 2

CHALLENGERSmith K.Dietrich D.76%24%San Diego 2

ITF MFilar K.Bacaloni A.50%50%M15 Baku

ITF MGretskiy I.Drayton T.50%50%M15 Baku

ITF WBlazkova K.Bertacchi A.50%50%W15 Monastir 27

ITF WMdlulwa W.Katsumi N.50%50%W15 Monastir 27

ITF MGoncalves V.Pinto L.50%50%M15 Curitiba

ITF MSchenekenberg G.Echazu M.50%50%M15 Curitiba

ITF MCazacu D. N.Avram G.50%50%ITF MEN - SINGLES: M15 Columbia, SC (USA), hard

ITF WAlbieri S. O.Moraes M.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WDias S.Nahmias Melo Rodrigues B.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WSartori A. J.Lopez P.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF MCozad R.Chavez T.50%50%ITF MEN - SINGLES: M15 Columbia, SC (USA), hard

ITF MGoode Ga.Braswell M.50%50%ITF MEN - SINGLES: M15 Columbia, SC (USA), hard

ITF WGarcia Vidal L.Citolino M. M.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WGomes Ferreira G.Roberta Bouth Pinheiro B.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WMoron F. B.Reichel A.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WChang H.Evans K.70%30%ITF WOMEN - SINGLES: W50 Berkeley, CA (USA), hard

ITF WRodriguez V.Laskevich E.64%36%ITF WOMEN - SINGLES: W50 Berkeley, CA (USA), hard

ITF WDourado Zimermman J.Rico Sanchez M. J.50%50%W15 Belem

ITF WMaklakova E.Chan J.61%39%ITF WOMEN - SINGLES: W50 Berkeley, CA (USA), hard

ITF WBrengle M.Lutkemeyer A.78%22%ITF WOMEN - SINGLES: W50 Berkeley, CA (USA), hard

ITF MAngelini L.Sciahbasi M.50%50%M25 Santa Margherita di Pula 8

ITF WArakawa H.Abe H.29%71%W50 Nanao

ITF WHan J.Tamura K.50%50%W50 Nanao

ITF WLu J.Cheuk S. Y.68%32%W50 Nanao

ITF WYoshioka K.Sato H.40%60%W50 Nanao

ITF WHou Y.Xu J.50%50%W15 Maanshan 5

ITF WKhomutsianskaya D.Shikhanova M.71%29%W15 Maanshan 5

ITF WSagandykova A.Son H. Y.50%50%W15 Maanshan 5

⚡

Pick a match to see the full analysis

Live win chance, pressure signals, and what the market is charging.

The process

From true probability to a sized, hedged position.

LIVE WIN CHANCE

A number for every match that moves with the score, not a prediction made this morning and left alone. We label it plainly: live, or pre-match.

PRESSURE SIGNALS

Repeated break points, a break in the last game, a set slipping away — the sequences that say a player is in trouble, before the scoreboard shows it.

WE SAY WHEN WE DON'T KNOW

Some positions are too one-sided for us to call honestly. In those, we say so and show nothing, rather than print a confident number we have not earned.

HEDGE

Trend-break, adverse-move and deuce-loss triggers tell you when to hedge a live position — protecting profit beats chasing it.

The toolkit

Three questions, every match, in one place.

Is it mispriced, is it moving, and am I actually any good at this? Everything on the terminal answers one of those.

EDGE

Find the matches the market has mispriced.

Every match gets a win chance that updates as points are played. But a number is only useful if it has been checked against what actually happened, so we grade ours against finished matches and publish the result — including the states where we are not accurate enough to be worth listening to.

EdgeScore = edge ÷ uncertainty, not edge alone
De-vigged two-sided exchange prices, never a stale line
Edges over 20% quarantined as data errors, not bets
Hard 2% edge floor — no edge, no bet

EDGE

Sinner / Alcaraz+9.0%3.1●

Rybakina / Sabalenka+6.2%2.2●

Fritz / Nakashima+9.4%0.8●

Bergs / Sakellaridis+3.1%1.4●

Same 9% edge, opposite verdicts — the difference is confidence.

PULSE

Read the match while it is still moving.

Sets and games are the last thing to change. A live momentum engine tracks serve regression and break pressure point by point, so a break coming is visible before it lands — and so is a lead that has stopped meaning anything.

Break probability on the current service game
Momentum weighted toward the most recent games
Rally profiles: first-strike vs grinder, per player
Hedge triggers on trend-break and adverse moves

PULSE

Break probability · current game72%

returner leads 15–40 on serve

MomentumP1 +0.18

WWLWWWLW

last 8 points on serve

LEDGER

Find out whether the model is actually right.

Every intended and placed trade is one row in a journal that settles itself against the market. The calibration report then bins predicted probability against what actually happened — which is the only thing that can tell a sharp model from a merely confident one.

Auto-settled P&L per bet, per source
Calibration curve: predicted vs actual, per bucket
Brier score against the 0.25 coin-flip line
ROI and drawdown by signal source

LEDGER

PREDICTED vs ACTUAL — by bucket

50–60%

55→53%

60–70%

65→58%

70–80%

75→61%

80–90%

85→62%

Grey = predicted, green = actual. Gaps like these are why staking is scaled down when the numbers behind them are shakier.

Coverage

Every professional tour, not just the ones on TV.

The mispricing is rarely in the Sunday final. It is in the Challenger second round that three people are watching.

ATP

singles

WTA

singles

CHALLENGER

singles

W125

singles

ITF

singles

What this is not

· Not a tipping service. No one hands you a slip to copy. It prices matches and shows you the working.
· Not a guarantee. A positive edge is a claim about the long run, and the long run contains losing months.
· Not a substitute for your own judgement. Every number ships with the uncertainty attached so you can disagree with it.
· Not for money you need. Staking is capped and fractional for a reason. Bet accordingly, or do not bet.

Watch the manual

A live walkthrough of the terminal.

A live walkthrough of the terminal — reading True P, spotting an edge against the book, sizing the stake and timing the hedge.

Prefer to read? The written trading manual covers the same ground in detail.

Interested?

Drop your email for early access, or reach out about a partnership.

or email jessefuture10@gmail.com

Has it actually been right?

The only question worth answering. Here is how we check, what came back, and where we are not good enough to be worth listening to.

2,741

games graded

across 587 matches

1.6 pts

average error

when we say 40%, it happens about 40% of the time

matches held back

graded on matches the model never saw

HOW WE CHECK

We keep every live match we have ever shown. To grade ourselves we replay them point by point, ask the model what it would have said at each moment, and compare that against what actually happened next. Crucially, the matches used to check are not the matches used to build — otherwise a model can score itself on its own homework.

WHERE WE ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH

In lopsided positions — a player two points from an easy hold — our numbers were overconfident by as much as 40 points before we corrected them, and even now we do not trust them at the extremes. So in those situations the terminal says “too one-sided to call reliably” and shows nothing. That is deliberate. A confident number we have not earned is worse than no number.

WHAT THIS IS NOT

Not a tipping service and not a profit claim. We publish probabilities and the evidence behind them. Whether that is worth money to you depends on what you do with it, and on prices we do not control.

Measured 18 September 2026. Worst single bucket 6.5 points off. These figures are re-measured by hand rather than generated live, so what you see is a number a person checked.

Daily published calls start here. Each one goes up before the match and is settled the next day, win or lose.

Frequently asked questions

Methodology, access and the limits of what a model can tell you.

A live win chance for every professional tennis match, updated as the points are played, alongside the moments that decide matches — repeated break points, a player who has just been broken, a set getting away from someone. Where a market exists we show what it is charging, so you can see when the two disagree. It covers ATP, WTA, Challenger, W125 and ITF — men's and women's — every match day.