In more practical terms, is the player who wins the second to last set in a tennis match more likely to win the last set than the pre-match fair odds would project? Suppose you have a 5-set tennis match. Player A is -140/Player B +140 before the match. Player A wins the first, B wins the second, A wins the third, and B wins the fourth set. What would be the fair line on the 5th set/live betting to win? Would it change if player A won the first two sets and B won the 3rd and 4th?
-
-
I don't know what the fair line would be, but I can tell you that there is no question that momentum plays a role in tennis. More often than the pre-game odds would indicate, the winner of the second-to-last set (tying the match) goes on to win.Comment -
5 set tennis is a marathon. if you lose set 4, you could be out of steam...and you opponent winning set 4, seeing you out of steam but still having energy left, he'll crush you in set 5 often.Comment -
Intuitively, I would expect that the winner of the second to last set is going to perform better in the final set than he would in the first set - but does anyone know what quantitative effect it has (i.e. what % does it add to your win probability)?Comment -
What does the data show?Comment -
Anyone here have soccer data?Comment -
In what sports, do the players "play to the score"?
If I had the data, I wouldn't need to ask now would I? Nah, just being lazy. I don't even bet on tennis. The thought came to me while re-reading the "playing to the score" chapter in THE BOOK (Tango et al) this afternoon. Their thesis, which they statistically "prove" is that pitchers can be expected to perform to their average (adjusted for the opposing lineup of course) whether the score is 0-0 or 12-3 and the same most likely goes for hitters. They used the same machinery and data to study whether there was such a thing as "clutch" and just removed the late-innings criteria to test the "playing to the score" theory. So it seems baseball players don't have any ability to "play to the score" but what about tennis players? Do they perform better after just tying the match and heading into the final set?Comment -
Every sport I know of has momentum swings. Does negative momentum count for you? There is no question that tennis players may give up on a set, especially if they start serving in the next set. When you see this unfolding, is it already reflected in the live odds? In baseball I have observed negative momentum as well. If a team is up big, say 9-0, with a couple of innings left, batters may quickly go through the motions to get it over with.
If I were to study this in tennis, I would prefer to see the game live, rather than rely on stats. Momentum, motivation, and body language are intertwined. I love it when, during a NBA game with live betting, a player starts smiling because things are going his way.Comment -
One of the best examples you could find of momentum in tennis comes from a game yesterday: the Clijsters - Sharapova championship match. Watch what happens before and after the rain delay, which came when Sharapova was up a set and two points away from winning the match.Comment -
I'd prefer data to seeing a player smile, but my thought is that there is momentum in tennis but that it is usually priced in to the in-play odds (look at the Federer vs Falla prices for an example - When Federer broke Falla in the fourth he became a massive favourite despite being behind still)Comment -
one can invoke Bayesian here
i would just follow the live lines at betfair and use that as the marketComment -
I've just recently read an article about that....but only for 3 set games
And it seems the one who wins 2nd set has some advantage...........Comment -
Yes there is momentum, only not in a set winning way, rather in a set losing way. Once you get frustrated, it becomes really hard to focus on the play...Comment
