PREDICCIÓN DEL MODELO · 2026-08-13
● HARD

H. Hurkacz vs C. Moutet — predicción

HURKACZPROBABILIDAD DE VICTORIAMOUTET
58%
prob. modelo
@1.51
cuota · 66% impl.
⚔H2H 1–0 Hurkacz⏱Descanso 6d vs 8d◐Hard 33%🎾Saque 72%📈Forma 6/10
CONDICIONES DEL PARTIDO◆ en el modelo◇ contexto
Superficie◆
Dura

Bote regular y velocidad media-alta: condiciones neutras, sin favorecer un estilo.

Temperatura◇
29°C

Ambiente cálido: la bola vuela algo más y el físico cuenta.

Humedad◇
78%

Aire muy húmedo: la bola se hace pesada y los puntos se alargan.

Viento◇
5 km/h

Viento flojo: sin efecto apreciable.

La superficie sí entra en el modelo (la especialización por superficie es uno de sus factores). El clima y la altitud son contexto que publicamos para ti — NO mueven la probabilidad.

EL RAZONAMIENTO DEL MODELO

›Ranking: #72 vs #59

›Cara a cara: 1-0 a favor

›Modelo 58% vs mercado 66% → el modelo lo ve menos probable que la cuota

›Forma reciente: 6/10 en los últimos partidos

›Con ritmo de partido: 3 partidos en las últimas 2 semanas

Probabilidad calibrada del modelo (~65% de precisión fuera de muestra). No es una garantía: el modelo ≈ el mercado de media, así que la cuota ya captura casi toda la ventaja. +18 · juega con responsabilidad.
@1.74
cuota justa
−13.0%
valor esperado
CÓMO IMPORTA CADA FACTOR
Level (Elo/ranking)▸ Hurkacz●●●
Hurkacz (Elo 1972, #72) outranks Moutet (1833, #59) by 139 Elo points. Model assigns 58% to favorite; ranking disparity supports dominance in baseline matchups.
Serve/Return▸ Hurkacz●●●
Hurkacz serves 72% (11 points above baseline 61%), Moutet 61%. Hurkacz returns 35% vs Moutet's 36% (neutral). Hurkacz's serve edge is the primary weapon; hard court amplifies it.
Surface▸ Moutet●●
Moutet wins 50% on hard courts vs his 46% baseline (+4 pts); Hurkacz only 33% vs 51% baseline (−18 pts). Hard surface significantly penalizes Hurkacz; Moutet performs closer to strength.
Form▸ Hurkacz●●
Hurkacz 5/10 last 10 matches with quality wins over Paul (2041) and Ruud (2037); Moutet 3/10 with no quality wins. Hurkacz's recent pedigree and win quality edge out opponent.
Rest▸ Moutet●
Moutet had 8 days since last match vs Hurkacz's 6; Hurkacz played 3 matches in 14 days vs Moutet's 2. Marginal advantage to fresher opponent in a humid, warm condition.
Weather= Igualado●
28°C, 78% humidity, 4 km/h wind. Heat and humidity lengthen rallies and slow ball; neither player's style data clearly penalized. Low wind reduces precision penalty risk.
Head-to-head▸ Hurkacz●
Hurkacz 1–0 vs Moutet (2019). Single meeting on hard court; insufficient sample but historical edge to favorite.
TECHNICAL MISMATCH

Hurkacz enters as the higher-ranked player (72 vs 59) and holds a 139-point Elo advantage (1972 vs 1833), reflecting superior baseline ability. His serve is the defining weapon: 72% on serve points, 11 points above the circuit average and substantially faster than Moutet's 61%. On hard court, where pace and first-strike dominance matter most, this gap is Hurkacz's primary path to victory. Return rates are nearly identical (35% vs 36%), so Moutet cannot exploit a defensive mismatch.

However, the hard court surface itself poses a paradox: Hurkacz posts only 33% win rate on it—18 points below his 51% baseline—suggesting his all-court game struggles with the specific demands of hard-court rhythm or bounce. Moutet, conversely, wins 50% on hard courts, matching or exceeding his baseline (46%), indicating he adapts better to this surface. This tension means Hurkacz's serve advantage may be partially offset by a court environment where Hurkacz underperforms his level.

RECENT FORM & RECOVERY

Hurkacz's last 10 matches show 5 wins and 2 quality defeats—he beat Tommy Paul (Elo 2041) and Casper Ruud (2037), demonstrating the capacity to beat top 25 opposition. Moutet is 3–7 over the same span with zero quality wins, suggesting a dip in consistency and an inability to close tight matches. This form gap favors Hurkacz.

Rest is a minor modifier. Moutet had 8 days since his last match compared to Hurkacz's 6 days, and Hurkacz played 3 matches in 14 days (Moutet 2). At 28°C and 78% humidity, the warm, humid conditions will tax both players, but Moutet's slight freshness advantage is small in an ATP environment. More noteworthy: the data flagged Hurkacz returning from a 41-day layoff risk—likely referring to a prior period—but recent match activity (3 in 14 days) suggests he is not coming cold into Cincinnati.

HEAD-TO-HEAD & CONTEXT

Hurkacz leads 1–0 against Moutet (2019, ATP Singles). A single meeting provides limited predictive weight, but the historical edge is to the favorite. Moutet's recent ranking trend is −23 (declining), while Hurkacz's is +31 (rising), further underlining Hurkacz's momentum and improving status in the tour hierarchy.

VALUE ANALYSIS

The model assigns 58% win probability to Hurkacz; the market (odds 1.5) implies 67%. This 9-percentage-point gap yields a −13.6% expected value on the favorite. In plain terms: the odds are paying less than the model's assessed edge. A 58% proposition at 1.5 odds requires a 67% probability to break even; Hurkacz is overpriced.

Hurkacz is the stronger player on paper and in recent form, but the hard-court surface environment (where he underperforms significantly) and Moutet's better adaptation to the court create genuine variance. The market is correctly bullish on Hurkacz but has priced in too much confidence. Backing the favorite here offers no edge; the opportunity (if any) lies in closer scrutiny of how the serve-surface tension plays out live, or in looking at the opponent at better-than-market odds.

Impacto y análisis a partir de datos reales del partido (Elo, forma, cara a cara, descanso, superficie vs base, clima, altitud). El modelo ≈ el mercado de media; la cuota ya captura casi toda la ventaja. +18 · juega con responsabilidad.

Analizar los partidos de hoy →