[Michael_Flieger]

I guess we disagree about Gulbis being a more difficult opponent than Wawrinka at this point. If they played tomorrow there's no doubt in my mind that Wawrinka would be favored.

Yeah, we disagree. Gulbis can blow up, but he is mentally tougher in the clutch than Wawrinka. Gulbis has shown more clutch ability in the last two tournaments than Wawrinka has shown in his entire career.

[Sharp Snake]

Yeah, we disagree. Gulbis can blow up, but he is mentally tougher in the clutch than Wawrinka. Gulbis has shown more clutch ability in the last two tournaments than Wawrinka has shown in his entire career.

Yet inherently, Wawrinka is an overall better, more consistent, more skilled player to me. Agree to disagree I suppose. BOL

[Michael_Flieger]

Yet inherently, Wawrinka is an overall better, more consistent, more skilled player to me. Agree to disagree I suppose. BOL

Has Wawrinka ever upset anyone serious? No. He doesn't have the head for it. That's why he can't beat Federer, and that's why he will never join the very highest ranks. Gulbis won't either, but for a different reason. He's not consistent, because of his background and temperament. But when he decides to play, he does have top-ten talent both physical and -- more important -- mental. That's why he very nearly beat Nadal whereas even Wawrinka's superior Federer couldn't come close.

[swissbank007]

Michael you are bit tough i think on Wawrinka!!! yes he cant beat Federer often but except Nadal and Djoko almost nobody can beat federer on a regular basis....ask Murray, Ferrer and Davydenko!!!.....Wawrinka beat berdych a few times, same for Almagro, Tsonga, Melzer,Raonic, Tpisarevic etc, etc...you cant be a "weak" person to beat all those guys.....and often he lost against Federer, Nadal or Djoko he was almost never a blow out and often pretty close!!!

[Hardcoar]

That, and the fact that telling your wife to FK off because you want to go play some tennis is the coolest thing you can do.

[Michael_Flieger]

Michael you are bit tough i think on Wawrinka!!! yes he cant beat Federer often but except Nadal and Djoko almost nobody can beat federer on a regular basis....ask Murray, Ferrer and Davydenko!!!.....Wawrinka beat berdych a few times, same for Almagro, Tsonga, Melzer,Raonic, Tpisarevic etc, etc...you cant be a "weak" person to beat all those guys.....and often he lost against Federer, Nadal or Djoko he was almost never a blow out and often pretty close!!!

He can beat them where there's little pressure, in minor tournaments. Way I read it, he's still looking for his first big win. There's no technical (skill) reason he lost to Federer the other day. I've watched him very closely and my conclusion is he's a guy who beats the players he's supposed to beat, usually. More than that he's not capable of, or hasn't shown it yet. And he should have by now.

[Michael_Flieger]

[into FRI: +14.78 units]

Peya/Soares -245 (Huey/Janowicz): 2.45/1.00 loss

14.78 + -2.45 = 12.33 units

[Sharp Snake]

He can beat them where there's little pressure, in minor tournaments. Way I read it, he's still looking for his first big win. There's no technical (skill) reason he lost to Federer the other day. I've watched him very closely and my conclusion is he's a guy who beats the players he's supposed to beat, usually. More than that he's not capable of, or hasn't shown it yet. And he should have by now.

I hear what you're saying but you're still giving Gulbis too much credit. He has yet to beat anyone significantly good like Federer or any top level guys nor has he beaten any of the players that Swiss mentioned either, whether its a grand slam, 1000 or 250.

[Michael_Flieger]

I hear what you're saying but you're still giving Gulbis too much credit. He has yet to beat anyone significantly good like Federer or any top level guys nor has he beaten any of the players that Swiss mentioned either, whether its a grand slam, 1000 or 250.

That may be, but he can do it. I really don't think Wawrinka can. All I care about is money, and I've made a bunch off Gulbis during this streak. Wawrinka - every time I've counted on him to beat someone on his level or higher he has failed. He's not a pressure guy. I just don't think he has the head. He has the skills for top 15, but I truly doubt he will ever get any higher than that.

[Michael_Flieger]

Djokovic -5 +130 (Tsonga): 1.00/1.30 win

12.33 + 1.30 = 13.63 units

like clubbing baby seals.

[ohumad]

Djokovic -5 +130 (Tsonga): 1.00/1.30

Looking good, why'd you take this bet?

[Michael_Flieger]

Looking good, why'd you take this bet?

more for action, honestly. i'm trying to get good at games betting, but i'm not there yet. i'm good at ML betting. what i have noticed is the games line, unlike in football, your bias should be toward the favorite, not the dog. in this case, i know djok is better than tsonga. i expected a 64 63 win by djok, which would be a push. so at +130, that's a little value. i almost always bet on the mentally stronger man, and that is djok almost always against anyone, and always against tsonga.

the match i'm waiting for is nadal berdych tomorrow, that's where im going to go heavy - on nadal.

[Hardcoar]

I agree with your sentiment on games spread betting, but I wouldn't really bother getting into it as payouts are significantly worse than on ML and set betting.

Lines have opened on a wide array of bookies by the way. : )

[Sharp Snake]

That may be, but he can do it. I really don't think Wawrinka can. All I care about is money, and I've made a bunch off Gulbis during this streak. Wawrinka - every time I've counted on him to beat someone on his level or higher he has failed. He's not a pressure guy. I just don't think he has the head. He has the skills for top 15, but I truly doubt he will ever get any higher than that.

Last point then I'll relent...

Why are you counting on him to beat better players? That sounds like a losing proposition. Wawrinka has been in the top 10 previously and I would list him right up there with Cilic, Tipsarevic, Gasquet, Raonic, etc... You simply cannot put Gulbis up there based off of 2 or 3 good weeks.

[Michael_Flieger]

I agree with your sentiment on games spread betting, but I wouldn't really bother getting into it as payouts are significantly worse than on ML and set betting.

i'm talking for favorites, not dogs. dogs, you want to play the ML, and the games for insurance. even then, most of the time you lose them both if you're wrong. then there are some few times where you really can sort of pre-tell that the one guy is going to come very close and lose - and you just bet him on games. example would be delpo today +4 or 4' if you could get it. but you cant. only 2 or 2'.

Lines have opened on a wide array of bookies by the way. : )

What does that mean? 5d has the most lines for AMERICANS. As far as I know. And I'd be happy to be wrong. It's entirely different if you're outside the US. We get very few doubles lines and very little live wagering.

[Hardcoar]

I think you misunderstood me: I agree with your sentiment.

Bookmaker payouts are significantly lower on spread betting. It means the lines are generally going to be less value.

It means you can bet on Nadal on almost every bookie in the book at this point. Even 5Dimes has odds up.

[Michael_Flieger]

Last point then I'll relent...

Hey, say what you want. Lets just keep it non-hostile, even if we don't agree.

Why are you counting on him to beat better players? That sounds like a losing proposition. Wawrinka has been in the top 10 previously and I would list him right up there with Cilic, Tipsarevic, Gasquet, Raonic, etc... You simply cannot put Gulbis up there based off of 2 or 3 good weeks.

That may be true. Understand - I'm trying to make money. I don't care about rankings. Yeah - Gulbis is kind of a penetrate-around, but that is known. The point is when he really is committed and trying hard, he can beat almost anyone. He doesn't beat himself. And you get a good return on him because of the many months where he doesn't really do antyhing. But yeah...I remember a match two years ago he was leading someone, maybe Matisse, and he hit one shot into the tape, and got pissed off at himself, and just quit the match. Ridiculous. But when he fully tries, he is very, very tough and able.

My point is, I'm not concerned with rankings, just who will win some particular match. Of the ones you listed, yeah, I would class Wawrinka with Tipsarevic - very skilled players who don't have the mental strength to hang with the Nadals. Put Gulbis' head on Wawrinka's body and he would have beaten Federer the other day, that's what I'm asserting. Gulbis could be ranked 5 or 50, it doesn't make a difference. Raonic I'm not sure about. His head is an open question. So far I like him, but reading his tweets, he's not nearly as intelligent as I thought. Cilic - he's good enough until he meets someone really good, then he goes down pretty easily. Gasquet - you just can't tell with him. I find him harder to read than most.

Gulbis is top ten if he's at the top of his game, as recently. Can he sustain that over time? History says no. But we're only betting on one match at a time, so when he's hot, you get good value because he's lower ranked than his skill level. As for Wawrinka, I'm not counting on him to beat better players, I'm looking for underdogs who can produce big profit. Like if he'd been able to beat Federer. But he has not shown this ability. Maybe one day he will, but it will surprise me, after watching him closely for a couple years. He's a good guy to take in the first few rounds of clay tournaments. But the minute you think he can beat someone truly good, you're going to pay for it. I have many times. I'm a little disappointed in him, is the truth. I thought he was a little stronger mentally than he actually is.

[Michael_Flieger]

I think you misunderstood me: I agree with your sentiment.

Bookmaker payouts are significantly lower on spread betting. It means the lines are generally going to be less value.

Well what can you do with a -900? Not much. Use it in parlay. Who wants to lay 10:1 that tsonga will lose, even to djokovic? It's not attractive.

It means you can bet on Nadal on almost every bookie in the book at this point. Even 5Dimes has odds up.

Yeah, I know. But I'd rather see how today unfolds, even if have to pay more by waiting. As we can see, many like Berdych. So it's open question which way line is pushed.

[Michael_Flieger]

Del Potro +2 +120 (Murray): 2.81/3.37

if murray slags off a set this wins. if delpo wins this wins. if a condor swoops down and carries off the scotsman...this doesn't lose. in fact, the only way this loses is if murray wins by more than two games! 3 out of 4 possible outcomes are in my favor! aristotle would approve my selection, i feel confident.

eh...i get a guy who's playing well + a couple games + odds on. three little advantages, just might win. but i have not seen murray play, so this is more a bet ON del Potro and blind on the other side.

[Michael_Flieger]

LIVE: Murray -215 (Del Potro): 3.23/1.50

[made at 34 break, on serve]

17.00 + -3.23 = 13.77 units

[Michael_Flieger]

Murray looking pretty darn good, i'm thinking he wins this, still hanging at -215 while they're on serve.

[Michael_Flieger]

LIVE Murray -215 (Del Potro): 10.75/5.00

[murray 65 break, on serve]

13.77 + -10.75 = 3.02 units

[Michael_Flieger]

Impressed by what Lendl has done: turned Murray into a man.

[Michael_Flieger]

LIVE: Murray +1400 (Del Potro): 1.00/14.00

[14 break, third set]

3.02 + -1.00 = 2.02 units

[Michael_Flieger]

tough loss. thought i read something live, and appeared to be confirmed when murray took first set. then he went away. appeared divided in his mind whether to beat delpo on long rallies from baseline or get aggressive and beat him charging net. i think either could have worked. but he seemed to do a little of both and lost concentration on serve and started making a lot more errors. none of this was under pressure. tells me the old murray is still there to some extent, altho lendl has at least capped it. old days murray would have been screaming at himself. delpo left plenty of chances to win this, but murray became irregular. tough one.

[Michael_Flieger]

Wozniacki -135 (Kerber): 5.40/4.00 win
Wozniacki-Kerber 21 over -125: 5.00/4.00 win

2.02 + 8 = 10.02 units

[Hardcoar]

You may well have read something, but that doesn't mean it'll last the match throughout.

[Michael_Flieger]

You may well have read something, but that doesn't mean it'll last the match throughout.

Usually it does.

[Hardcoar]

Things change in this game. Frequently and suddenly.

[Michael_Flieger]

Nadal -200 (Berdych): 10.00/5.00 win

berdych left lots of break chances to anderson. he didn't take one. nadal will take several.

10.02 + 5.00 = 15.02 units

[Michael_Flieger]

[UFC Ellenberger -160 (Marquardt): 8.00/5.00]

[reposted and counted below]

[Michael_Flieger]

Nadal 2-0 +130 (Berdych): 2.00/2.60 win
Nadal-Berdych 23 under -110: 2.20/2.00 win
Kudla +130 (Petzschner): 1.00/1.30 win
Melzer -170 (Marchenko): 1.70/1.00 win

15.02 + 6.90 = 21.92 units

[Michael_Flieger]

Djokovic -4 -140 (Del Potro): 1.40/1.00 loss
Huey/Janowicz +434 (Bryan/Bryan): .50/2.17 loss
Petrovic/Srebotnik -200 (Makarova/Vesnina): 2.00/1.00 loss

21.92 + -3.90 = 18.02 units

[Michael_Flieger]

LIVE: Djokovic to win second set -400 (Del Potro): 4.00/1.00 loss

[made at 54 break]

18.02 + -4.00 = 14.02 units

[Michael_Flieger]

UFC Tamura +500 (Dillashaw): .56/2.80 loss

14.02 + -0.56 = 13.46 units