Wimbledon Predictions, Picks, Odds for Sinner vs Mochizuki, Hurkacz vs Struff — 7/5

The Round of 16 begins on Sunday, and our experts — Chris Gimino and Tudor Cosma — have targeted three Wimbledon matches with great betting value.

Today, we'll focus on Jannik Sinner vs. Shintaro Mochizuki and Herbert Hurkacz vs. Jan-Lennard Struff.

Continue reading below to find our men's Wimbledon predictions and picks for Sunday, July 5.

Wimbledon Predictions, Picks, Odds — Sunday, July 5

Sinner vs Mochizuki Odds

By Chris Gimino

My model has two great projections for this matchup: a 3.9% edge on the alternate spread and a 3.7% edge on the total.

World No.1 Jannik Sinner has a 96% win probability, but given the market odds on his moneyline, the value is elsewhere.

Both picks are marked with C grades by the model. You can back the Italian at -8.5 on the alternate spread and take the under with the total line at 28.5.

Be sure to also check out box score projections for this matchup.

Pick: Sinner -8.5 Alt Spread (-200), Under 28.5 (-130) – DraftKings

Hurkacz vs Struff Odds

By Tudor Cosma

Hubert Hurkacz is one of the best grass-court players in the world, and here he can beat anyone. He’s the favorite today, but he could also come out on top in a quarterfinal match — likely against Jannik Sinner.

Hubert not only has one of the most consistent serves in the world, but he’s also strong from the baseline because he easily takes control of the point.

Of course, he also hits a lot of aces. He had 15 in a short match against Casper Ruud and 20 against Tommy Paul, over four sets.

Jan-Lennard Struff is coming off a big win, a 3-0 set victory over Medvedev. So, he seems to be in good form. I expect him to win a set and make the match go the distance.

He’s strong on serve, but fairly slow on the return. He faced 41 aces from Brandon Nakashima over five sets.

I therefore believe Hurkacz will hit over 19.5 aces in the match.

Pick: Hurkacz Over 19.5 Aces

How Gimino's Model Works

For every match, three independent signals get blended into a final probability. First, a walk-forward Elo rating for each player (separate for overall and by surface, regressed hard toward a below-average baseline for anyone with a thin sample or a history of playing qualifiers, so a hot streak against weak competition can’t fake elite form).

Second, a point-by-point Monte Carlo simulation built from each player’s real serve/return stats, which gets pulled toward what Elo says whenever the two disagree — Elo acts as a strong check on the simulation, not the other way around.

Third, the devigged market consensus price itself, blended in at the end as a sanity anchor. The result is a single win probability per match that reflects skill history, current form, and what the market already believes, not any one of those alone.

From there, the same win probability is used to grade three markets — Moneyline, Spread, and Total Games — by comparing the model's estimate against what the market is actually offering. The size of that gap, scaled consistently across all three markets on one shared scale, is the “edge” you see, and the letter grade is just that edge bucketed for a quick read.