TT Lossbeater/TT Cup
TT CupMatch #13081562
Played Sep 5Finished
Jiri Vanous
Home
1.62
At publish
Won last 2Form at publish
6–4Last 10Won last 2
Final
3 – 1
Set by set
1181113115116––
Radomir Benesz
Away
2.20
At publish
Won last 1Form at publish
5–5Last 10Won last 1
The read, and what happenedsealed at 08:18 and never touched — 56.2% is still 56.2%
Graded at full timeJiri Vanous to win
56.2%
56.2%
Sealed before the first serve and never touched. The record is only checkable because of that.
Read
Rightno pick shipped
«Right» is not «we won». No pick was shipped, so this is a read that turned out correct — not a call that won.
How it is goingJiri Vanous above · Radomir Benesz below
Set 1 · 11-8
Set 2 · 11-13
Set 3 · 11-5
Set 4 · 11-6
Point 76 set 4, 11-6 — our read held Jiri Vanous at 56.2%
76 points played in total.
H2H Jiri Vanous 22–15 Radomir Benesz Radomir Benesz has won 15 of their 37 meetings.
The pickNo pick published
Sealed 08:18What took a side4 for · 0 against · 2 silent
SignalWhat it readSideVerdictWhy it voted that way
Market
1.61 (58%)
Vanous
Correct
no bar to clear — a priced side always votes
H2H
22-15 in 37
Vanous
Correct
gap of 7 in 37, over the gap of 2
Rating (G2)
Vanous 1440 vs Benesz 1354
Vanous
Correct
both rated, 86 points apart — no bar to clear
Form (L5)
Vanous 80% vs Benesz 40%
Vanous
Correct
40pp gap, over the 15pp bar
Form (L10)
Vanous 60% vs Benesz 50%
—
Too close
10pp gap, under the 15pp bar
Streak
Vanous +2 · Benesz +1
—
Too close
neither holds a run of 3 on their own
Not whether we were right, but which read failed. One match proves nothing — the calibration is the aggregate of rows like these, and that aggregate does not exist yet.
This table lists the interface catalogue — the one you already see in ALIGN / CONFLICT. The engine weighs its own subset, and they are not the same set. It says so here instead of hiding it.
4 for, 2 silent — and still no pick. The gate cuts it all the same.
Signal confidence: 58% — Slight lean (leans Vanous) · live re-read · sealed at 56% before the first serve
Decision Summary
Why this prediction
- Vanous form (80%) outperforms what odds imply (62%)
Market vs Signals
Market oddsVanous 1.61 / Benesz 2.20
Signal prob.58% / 42%
Edge (Vanous)+0.4pp
TT Cup · #13081562
Vanous1.61
60%won 6 of 10 · last 10
Won last 2
oldest → newest70%takes the first set · 7 of 10
As favourite54% won 27 of 50
Up 2–0, closes it94% 16 of 17
Up 1–0, closes it73% 22 of 30
Benesz2.20
50%won 5 of 10 · last 10
oldest → newest
50%takes the first set · 5 of 10
As underdog36% won 28 of 77
Down 0–1, comes back18% 7 of 38
Down 0–2, comes back10% 3 of 30
Head to head
H2H window
The recordacross 10 meetings
HomeVanous7wins
AwayBenesz3wins
4 of 10 to a deciderVanous leads 7–3, and 4 of those 10 went to a fifth set.
First set to match win · in this matchup
HomeVanous85.7%6 of 7
AwayBenesz66.7%2 of 3
Set by set, in these 10 meetingsevery set carries its own n — a fifth set only exists when the match reaches one
S1Vanous7Benesz3n = 10Vanous took 7 of 10
S2Vanous5Benesz5n = 10split evenly
S3Vanous8Benesz2n = 10Vanous took 8 of 10
S4Vanous4Benesz3n = 7Vanous took 4 of 7
S5Vanous2Benesz2n = 4split evenly
How those 10 finishedcounts, and the six add up to 10 — a scoreline is a name, not a code
3–0Straight, home330%
3–1Four sets, home220%
3–2Decider, home220%
2–3Decider, away220%
1–3Four sets, away110%
0–3Straight, away00%
These 10 meetings
MetricVanousBeneszV − BBasisWins73+4in 10 meetingsFirst set73+4of 10Avg pointsper match40.835.9+4.9per matchSweeps30+33–0 or 0–3
Career, not this matchup
MetricVanousBeneszBasisWin rate · lifetime126 / 285 vs 75 / 20144.2%37.3%126 / 285 vs 75 / 201Avg sets wonper match1.91.7per matchAvg pointsper match36.137.3per match
Deep Dive by Market
Each market builds on the overview aboveForecast
History
Forecastthe model predicts this marketHistorythis is what the H2H did — no prediction
Match Winner
VanousVanous 1.61/Benesz 2.20
Read onlywould have hit
What we said
58.1%
Vanous · sealed before the serve
What happened
3–1
Vanous won
Recent Results
H2H · no odds on record10
WSep 5 · 20:10J. Vanous—111111113R. Benesz—813561
WJun 18 · 19:10J. Vanous—111339113R. Benesz—711111192
WJun 16 · 19:15J. Vanous—1111113R. Benesz—7430
LJun 12 · 18:40J. Vanous—138111282R. Benesz—1111814113
LJun 3 · 19:10J. Vanous—108111182R. Benesz—121177113
WMay 27 · 18:45J. Vanous—11114113R. Benesz—691151
LMay 17 · 21:25J. Vanous—6711101R. Benesz—11117123
WMay 17 · 17:45J. Vanous—771111113R. Benesz—11115672
WMay 11 · 19:15J. Vanous—1111113R. Benesz—8790
WMay 5 · 20:40J. Vanous—1111113R. Benesz—9970
J. Vanous10
LSep 5 · 21:10J. Vanous1.73721113112I. Jemelka1.911111911133WSep 5 · 18:40I. Jemelka2.38811961J. Vanous1.5311711113WSep 5 · 18:10D. Stefek2.006490J. Vanous1.731111113LSep 2 · 21:10J. Vanous1.8011910101M. Janik1.9131112123WSep 2 · 20:10O. Skvor1.537690J. Vanous2.381111113WSep 2 · 19:10J. Vanous2.10611119113M. Janik1.6711891152LSep 2 · 17:40V. Molin1.5391111113J. Vanous2.38119851LSep 1 · 20:40J. Vanous2.0067171182K. Przeczek1.731111157113WSep 1 · 20:10K. Przeczek1.617580J. Vanous2.201111113LSep 1 · 19:10J. Vanous2.205650K. Zeman1.611111113
R. Benesz10
LSep 5 · 20:40R. Benesz1.773880D. Stefek1.871111113WSep 5 · 19:10R. Benesz1.911111113D. Stefek1.806990LSep 5 · 17:40I. Jemelka2.101812113R. Benesz1.67161070LJun 29 · 20:45R. Benesz1.44811891I. Jemelka2.6311611113WJun 29 · 20:10R. Benesz1.67111110113I. Jemelka2.10921281LJun 29 · 18:40K. Zeman1.571111113R. Benesz2.258940LJun 29 · 18:10P. Jokiel1.911111113R. Benesz1.809370WJun 28 · 21:10R. Jancak1.6138110R. Benesz2.201111133WJun 28 · 19:40P. Jokiel1.677560R. Benesz2.101111113LJun 28 · 19:10R. Jancak1.8311114123R. Benesz1.839711101
Event Chatroom
This room is closed. Messages clear 24 hours after they are sent.