Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner vs Andre Goransson / Evan King prediction for July 1, 2026: Our Monte Carlo simulation ran 10,000 game iterations and projects Andre Goransson / Evan King 0 - Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner 0. Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner is favored with a 53.1% win probability.
Andre Goransson / Evan King
1500
Grass Elo
VS
Grass • ATP
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner
1500
Grass Elo
Match Win Probability
Andre Goransson / Evan KingPetr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner
Grass
Surface
ATP Wimbledon Doubles
Tournament
10,000
Simulations
Calibrated accuracy at this confidence: 54.1% (6,507 games)
Match Context
Tournament
ATP Wimbledon Doubles
Surface
Grass
Format
Best of 5 · ATP
Surface Elo Ratings (Grass)
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner
Andre Goransson / Evan King
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner leads by 0 Elo points on Grass
Serve & Return Analysis
Serve Points Won % (SPW) is the single most predictive metric in tennis. ATP average on Grass: 63.5%
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner SPW
65.6%
Above tour avg
Andre Goransson / Evan King SPW
65.6%
Above tour avg
● Serve statistics are nearly identical — expect a close match
Market Odds & Model Edge
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner ML
-122
Model: 53%
Edge: -1.9%
Andre Goransson / Evan King ML
-101
Model: 47%
Edge: -3.3%
Key Matchup Factors
- Players are closely matched (0-point Elo gap)
- Grass surface amplifies serve advantage — expect fewer breaks, more tiebreaks
- Andre Goransson / Evan King has the stronger serve profile on this surface
Surface Elo v1.0 · Barnett-Clarke serve model · 10,000 simulations · ATP
Edge Analysis
Moneyline
Petr Nouza / Neil Oberleitner 53.1%
--
More Projections Today
How this prediction was generated: This page shows output from the Olympus Bets ATP/WTA Tennis 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. Probabilities are calibrated using Bayesian methods and sized via the Kelly Criterion. Full methodology →