Sets wagering. Something I've been noticing with some books

[matt1216]

It takes 6-7 games to win a set. Plus a tie break if needed. If you take the match to go under you are basically saying whether or not it will go to 3 sets or under.

Hypothetical Over/Under 21: If the under is at 21 you'll push if three sets are won by a score of 7 games. If one set goes to 6 you'll hit the under as long as the match is decided in three sets. Two sets would guarantee a win. If it goes to 4 sets you lose. Most matches are prolly less than 21. Not sure on that. If you think a particular player will roll over the other the Under would be good to go. Over/unders will vary depending on the players involved.

I'm a bit new to this tennis betting but I'm pretty sure that's how it goes.

Cathawk sir, I respect you a lot, but did you black out when you wrote this? From now on I'll make it clear, lol all good bro

[CatHawk]

Sorry I tried lol

[CatHawk]

I guess I dont get it either

[matt1216]

I guess I dont get it either

It's all good, plays will be understood from now on. Just refer to my other thread for now

[CatHawk]

Uh ya I think I confused myself when I wrote that. Ok so if you take a certain player to have over/under a certain amount of games WON I guess. A player to go Under a certain amount of games won, the player will either have to lose in first two sets or get the game in the first two sets. Otherwise it gets very unlikely to win.

[CatHawk]

So if you take Del Potro to win under 14 you'd need him to win in first two sets but at least one set needs to be at 6 to win OR he would need to lose first two sets. Right?

Or technically he can lose 6-0 or something in the first set and then win the second set and still be able to go under in the third set. So if it does go to third set you have a chance for it to go under but It gets very unlikely, depending on the first two sets. But the idea is, I guess, that Someone like Delpotro will most likely get atleast 4-6 games in a set if he loses that set.

[fitguy67]

if i knew how to post a video, i'd post the classic Abbot and Costello routine "Who's on First?"...it captures the confusion of this thread perfectly.

The key is to realize that this is NOT a thread for plays...it's a thread for record-keeping purposes of what Matt's been deducing from the lines at his book(s)...and how these pre-game deductions have compared to the actual results. Any hard plays that Matt wants to commit to from this project are posted in his tennis-play thread.


BTW, Matt, what do you think of the idea expressed earlier (and "ligntbulbed" by me) to translate "not X in 3 sets" into "X under 12.5 games won" if available (even for US'rs, BOL often offers this line...but 5dimes generally doesn't/for non-US'rs bet365 always offers it even tho pinny generally doesn't). To me, it's a better translation of what the set-betting lines are telling you than a set-bet itself, or an under-over bet or an ml-bet (since with any of those you'd need more than one bet to cover all the alternatives and the payout would suffer greatly, as has been pointed out before).

Someone please go to youtube, and look for the "Who's on First?" scene from the old Abbot & Costello movie...and post it here.

That is all...

[matt1216]

if i knew how to post a video, i'd post the classic Abbot and Costello routine "Who's on First?"...it captures the confusion of this thread perfectly.

The key is to realize that this is NOT a thread for plays...it's a thread for record-keeping purposes of what Matt's been deducing from the lines at his book(s)...and how these pre-game deductions have compared to the actual results. Any hard plays that Matt wants to commit to from this project are posted in his tennis-play thread.


BTW, Matt, what do you think of the idea expressed earlier (and "ligntbulbed" by me) to translate "not X in 3 sets" into "X under 12.5 games won" if available (even for US'rs, BOL often offers this line...but 5dimes generally doesn't/for non-US'rs bet365 always offers it even tho pinny generally doesn't). To me, it's a better translation of what the set-betting lines are telling you than a set-bet itself, or an under-over bet or an ml-bet (since with any of those you'd need more than one bet to cover all the alternatives and the payout would suffer greatly, as has been pointed out before).

Someone please go to youtube, and look for the "Who's on First?" scene from the old Abbot & Costello movie...and post it here.

That is all...

Yes, I would take that approach over set wagering. I just don't see under/over games on players that often

[freshguy222]

Yes, I would take that approach over set wagering. I just don't see under/over games on players that often

Pinnacle has them all the time, switched to Teamtotals, you can lose tiebreaks at 80% rate and still get away with it

[jessetk313]

Matt I finally see what your seeing. The trend on the lines I used is 10-3 so far in the Doha WTA tourney this week for 2-0 sets. Of course Petkovic that I played yesterday would of been a 2-0 play yet she lost 2-0 go frigging figure!

[jessetk313]

If the trend was auto played for 2-0 the last three days in WTA you'd be up probably 8 to over 1000. Smh! That's at 2 units a play assuming a unit is a 100. How long have you noticed this trend now for the year?

[jessetk313]

The trend I see is also 6-2 in buenos aires the two losses were dolgo which won in 3 and and Monaco losing in 3.

[jessetk313]

I narrowed it down to a very specific line range.

[alpinepetey]

I narrowed it down to a very specific line range.

Care to share the trend?

[jessetk313]

The range I noticed was 1.18 to 1.33 favorites winning 2-0 at the clip I referenced above. Now Wozniacki was a straight up loser yesterday bringin Doha to 10-4.

[jessetk313]

Errani, Kerber, and almagronv plus be plays today...but errani literally just started.

[jessetk313]

Errani may lose 2-0 haha.

[jessetk313]

Kerber wins errani goes 2-1 let's see if almagro wins and it turns profit

[SirtySree]

Jessetk313, your method works and I have been doing that for a while now but it only hits regularly in first round matches and qualifiers, especially for womens tennis whereas mens tennis is a bit less regular.

[jessetk313]

Yea I hear you.... Mathis is matts method or at least I think it is if I judged what he was doing correctly. Kvitova won 2-1, halep 2-0, sijsling won 2-0. So on the day players in that range went 6-0 overall straight up.. And in 2-0 sets 3-3