This question is pretty much for anyone, as I've been having fun steadily increasing my knowledge and effectiveness in tennis wagering. Well I suppose I'll call out Matt here because of his love for trends lol. Do any of you use recent history against similar opponents in your research when capping your matches? I haven't looked deep enough into it yet, but it seems (outside of the the top 5 or 10 players) that when player A has defeated player B, who has defeated player C, then player C will of course somehow defeat player A. This may be a dumb question - knowing my luck by looking into this I've somehow happened to find the select few instances where this has occurred and it probably means nothing at all - but how much weight do you put in seeing their recent history against the same opponent? For example, tonight we have Pennetta, who beat Stosur recently, who of course beat Na Li, and now Na Li will beat Pennetta. There have been a few other incident recently where I noticed this trend. I realize it's probably nothing but pure coincidence and luck, but have any of you looked into this or use this kind of information at all in helping to determine your picks? Very interested in what you all have to say!
-
-
It will be funny if Pennetta wins now.Comment -
I was just thinking the same thing!
Like I said, I probably only found a couple instances and it turns out that normally it's the other way around lol. But I seriously do want to know if you guys actually take things like that into consideration, or does it not matter very much how they both played against the same opponent (recently of course)?Comment -
I think factors like play style have much more affect on the outcome than shared opponents. But maybe this has some merit. I'd like to hear others' opinions.Comment -
Hey semper, I actually never really take that into consideration. Some players are just bad match ups for others.
Ex) dolgo vs Fognini dolgo owns a 4-0 record yet Fognini is the higher ranked player.
You have to read between the lines. Some odds give the plays away entirely. You have to think how would u bait the average guy if you had the chance to create a line. See what I'm saying?Comment -
Thanks for the quick response my friend! Of course that makes complete sense - just because Player A defeats Player B, it doesn't mean that Player B will necessarily beat Player C just because C defeated A. Player A could just be a bad matchup for Player B, while a good matchup for player C. I should just do a better job at treating tennis just like basketball and football - it's all about the matchups. Player A may be a very good returner who excels against serve bots, but poor against those who attack the net or good with groundstrokes. It's all about studying and knowing the players enough to figure out what their strengths and weaknesses are. For example, the reason my favorite player (Isner) struggles against good returners like Fed and Joker are because they excel in attacking his 2nd serve, and are very good at rallies even when his first serve is spot-on and they can still get a good return on it. I thought Gulbis was a decent bet tonight because i know that Johnny struggles when his 1st serve isn't as accurate and he's struggling hitting aces.
I mean it's common knowledge of course that's a big part of capping tennis, I guess it just doesn't come as natural to me since I don't follow tennis and know all the players like I do the other sports. Definitely something to think about now, I appreciate it Matt!
Comment
