Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens vs Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase prediction for July 1, 2026: Our Monte Carlo simulation ran 10,000 game iterations and projects Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase 0 - Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens 0. Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase is favored with a 54.4% win probability.
Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase
1500
Grass Elo
VS
Grass • ATP
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens
1500
Grass Elo
Match Win Probability
Constantin Frantzen / Robin HaaseRay Ho / Hendrik Jebens
Grass
Surface
ATP Wimbledon Doubles
Tournament
10,000
Simulations
Calibrated accuracy at this confidence: 54.2% (6,507 games)
Match Context
Tournament
ATP Wimbledon Doubles
Surface
Grass
Format
Best of 5 · ATP
Surface Elo Ratings (Grass)
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens
Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens 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%
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens SPW
65.6%
Above tour avg
Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase SPW
65.6%
Above tour avg
● Serve statistics are nearly identical — expect a close match
Market Odds & Model Edge
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens ML
+162
Model: 46%
Edge: +7.5%
Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase ML
-204
Model: 54%
Edge: -12.7%
Model Projection
Ray Ho / Hendrik Jebens ML +162 · +7.5% edge
Key Matchup Factors
- Players are closely matched (0-point Elo gap)
- Grass surface amplifies serve advantage — expect fewer breaks, more tiebreaks
- Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase has the stronger serve profile on this surface
Surface Elo v1.0 · Barnett-Clarke serve model · 10,000 simulations · ATP
Edge Analysis
Moneyline
Constantin Frantzen / Robin Haase 54.4%
--
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 →