Lee, Min Woo vs Scott, Adam prediction for May 5, 2026: Our Monte Carlo simulation ran 10,000 game iterations and projects Scott, Adam 34 - Lee, Min Woo 28. Lee, Min Woo is favored with a 54.9% win probability. The spread is -0.15.
Scott, Adam
+1.26
Strokes Gained / Round
VS
H2H • Truist Championship
Lee, Min Woo
+1.12
Strokes Gained / Round
Head-to-Head Win Probability
Scott, AdamLee, Min Woo
+103
Best Odds
+11.4%
Edge
1.0u HIGH
Sizing
Projected Points Range 10th – 90th percentile
Lee, Min Woo
212835
Scott, Adam
273441
Tournament Context
Event
Truist Championship
Course
Quail Hollow Club
Field
72 players
Wind
11 mph
Temp
76°F
Conditions
harder (+0.5)
Player Profile — Lee, Min Woo
Strokes Gained
+1.12/round
Tour Elite
Course Fit
excellent
+0.359 SG adj
Expected Finish
28th / 72
Matchup Analysis
Lee, Min Woo
+1.12 SG
EF 28th
Skill Gap
-0.15 SG/round
tight edge for Scott, Adam
Scott, Adam
+1.26 SG
EF 34th · Tour Elite
Edge Breakdown
Our Model
54.9%
Books Say
49.3%
Edge
+11.4%
Lee, Min Woo vs Scott, Adam: Model gives Lee, Min Woo 54.9% win probability vs 49.3% implied (+11.4% edge). Skill advantage: -0.15 SG/round. Expected finish: 28.
AI Intelligence Analysis
NEUTRAL +0
Lee 54.8% h2h vs 51.7% implied = +6.0% edge; Lee's solid +1.12 SG total + modest +0.361 course fit cannot overcome -0.151 SG skill disadvantage; marginal edge.
Key Factors
- Lee SG +1.116 (solid mid-tier, EF 28.4)
- Course fit +0.361 SG (modest venue help)
- Skill diff -0.151 SG (Lee slightly weaker)
- Pinnacle -107 (51.7% implied) vs 54.8% model = +6.0% edge
Risk Factors
- Marginal edge (6.0%) at skill disadvantage (-0.151 SG)
- Scott is likely stronger player overall
- Insufficient edge-to-variance ratio
Edge Analysis
Moneyline
Lee, Min Woo 54.9%
+11.4 pts
Spread
-0.1
+11.4 pts
How this prediction was generated: This page shows output from the Olympus Bets PGA Tour Golf Monte Carlo engine. Each game is simulated 10,000 times using real-time team data, injury reports, and current odds. Probabilities are calibrated using Bayesian methods and sized via the Kelly Criterion. Full methodology →