[matt1216]

So do you back all your picks Matt?

Did you put $1,250 down on Bonis?

Yeah bud, I do. If I could do it over I would have taken over 22.5 for better odds like my original thought. Apparently I like to do thinks the hard way. I almost pulled out the rye and coke after that first set.

[matt1216]

Hence... the odds?

I didn't need odds to figure out this was gonna be close. I did forget Delbonis likes to do things the hard way. Yes I did recieve your point the way.

[Hardcoar]

Congrat's on a big hit!

[DownTheLine]

Tennis gods not giving Lorenzi that title, not with a 20 ft average net clearance during rallies. Right and better player won, congrats!

[matt1216]

thanks guys^ I was a little nervous about Lorenzi never winning a title.

[zec]

Lorenzis body language was horrible after he lost the first game of the 3rd set, kind of sad considering this was his first and probably his last ATP final that he would give up so easily.. This was my largest bet on a single tennis match, but I was late seeing your post so I did live betting at 3-3 in the 1st set at 1.45. It went as high as 2.30 I think early in the second set.. Thanks!!

[druss117]

Great Call Matt! Price was quite decent on betfair @ 1.55 !

My Marco Chiudinelli bet sucked! Do all Challenger games go 3 sets??? This one shouldn't have been over 20 games!!!
Though I put some on Chiudinelli ML after he lost the first set!

[matt1216]

Great Call Matt! Price was quite decent on betfair @ 1.55 !

My Marco Chiudinelli bet sucked! Do all Challenger games go 3 sets??? This one shouldn't have been over 20 games!!!
Though I put some on Chiudinelli ML after he lost the first set!

It all depends. I figured to wager against Chiudinelli here. He was playing against a kid who hasn't won in ages on his home turf. Sekiguchi probably played his ass off. Nothing for sure in challengers

[druss117]

It all depends. I figured to wager against Chiudinelli here. He was playing against a kid who hasn't won in ages on his home turf. Sekiguchi probably played his ass off. Nothing for sure in challengers

does any sportsbook give handicap for Challengers? Pinnacle?
Home turf does really matter I guess. When do you suppose there will be advanced stats in tennis like they have in American Sports?

[fitguy67]

why advanced stats?
, when the most basic of all statistics (total points) is totally ignored...only occasionally even announced by commentators...

i've recently made a point to have a Will Hill live-betting window up at all times on a match I'm watching, as sometimes the score in terms of set/games is very misleading as to who's ACTUALLY been stronger or to quantify more accurately the degree of superiority...

for example, when a match is tied 1-1 in sets, it's VERY useful to know if one player has won substantially more than 50% of the points going into the decider...big gaps are often "masked" due to the nature of tennis-scoring...

another BASIC stat that is often ignored/under-appreciated is total number of break points a player has created...not just the %conversion rate...A is 2 of 3 for an impressive 67% vs. B who is 2 for 7...yes, much less impressive conversion rate of 28% which is always noticed and emphasized...BUT B has obviously been applying much more pressure on A's serve in that he's created many more bp's (7 vs. 2)...two very different ways to interpret the 2/3 vs 2/7 reality...but when it's buried in conversion rates (67% vs. 28%) very important information is lost

anyhow, WillHill (as opposed to Bet365) present these stats (that are more basic=LESS advanced than those usually presented) and i find it helps to give a more complete picture of who's been strong vs. merely the beneficiary of good timing

[JC1186]

Errr why don't you just use the official ATP/WTA live scoreboard?

[druss117]

why advanced stats?
, when the most basic of all statistics (total points) is totally ignored...only occasionally even announced by commentators...

i've recently made a point to have a Will Hill live-betting window up at all times on a match I'm watching, as sometimes the score in terms of set/games is very misleading as to who's ACTUALLY been stronger or to quantify more accurately the degree of superiority...

for example, when a match is tied 1-1 in sets, it's VERY useful to know if one player has won substantially more than 50% of the points going into the decider...big gaps are often "masked" due to the nature of tennis-scoring...

another BASIC stat that is often ignored/under-appreciated is total number of break points a player has created...not just the %conversion rate...A is 2 of 3 for an impressive 67% vs. B who is 2 for 7...yes, much less impressive conversion rate of 28% which is always noticed and emphasized...BUT B has obviously been applying much more pressure on A's serve in that he's created many more bp's (7 vs. 2)...two very different ways to interpret the 2/3 vs 2/7 reality...but when it's buried in conversion rates (67% vs. 28%) very important information is lost

anyhow, WillHill (as opposed to Bet365) present these stats (that are more basic=LESS advanced than those usually presented) and i find it helps to give a more complete picture of who's been strong vs. merely the beneficiary of good timing

Thanks for that . I didn't know William Hill did that! I usually only see the stats on bet365. I would rather have player create break point opportunities with a lower rate of converting them than a player who has a 100% conversion rate but just had 2 break points the whole match!
If a 3 set match goes 3 sets whats usually the total points distribution! How many more points does one player win over the other???

[fitguy67]

winning a match is like winning the US presidency...don't necessarily need to win the overall scoring/vote-getting derby...

i like to look at the total points distribution at any point as a "relative strength" index...and look for mismatches ("divergences" as the financial tech-analysis people say) between who's winning on the tennis scoreboard (which depends on both scoring points + timing-of-those-points) vs. who's stronger in the rawest sense of winning more points (timing ignored)

as with all data, both raw and derived, no hard and fast rule of when and how to use it, but it is something that most are totally unaware of, hence a possible source of edge...

i especially like to look to get the pre-match fave at a discount going into the decider, and feel better about doing so if the total points breakdown indicate that the issue thus far is his timing (including a low bp-CONVERSION rate) and not his overall point-winning ability (including a high bp-CREATION number), both obviously considered relatively vs. his opponent, and not in a vacuum

[charley365]

Damn Alla kudryavtseva is so much prettier than Alison Van Uytvanck

[fitguy67]

VanUyt (and Mona Barthel) and the word pretty never belong in the same sentence...

at birth they both fell out the hospital window, hit the ugly tree and tragically smacked into each and every branch on the way down...

[druss117]

winning a match is like winning the US presidency...don't necessarily need to win the overall scoring/vote-getting derby...

i like to look at the total points distribution at any point as a "relative strength" index...and look for mismatches ("divergences" as the financial tech-analysis people say) between who's winning on the tennis scoreboard (which depends on both scoring points + timing-of-those-points) vs. who's stronger in the rawest sense of winning more points (timing ignored)

as with all data, both raw and derived, no hard and fast rule of when and how to use it, but it is something that most are totally unaware of, hence a possible source of edge...

i especially like to look to get the pre-match fave at a discount going into the decider, and feel better about doing so if the total points breakdown indicate that the issue thus far is his timing (including a low bp-CONVERSION rate) and not his overall point-winning ability (including a high bp-CREATION number), both obviously considered relatively vs. his opponent, and not in a vacuum

Lol great comp with US presidency! Its weird that every vote doesn't really count with all the electoral college stuff!

Yeah I noticed that too that if a pre match fav on a decider set is considerably higher odds wise! I don;t understand that.

Two scenarios if fav wins first and if fav loses first set! when will you get best odds on the fav ? When he loses first set right? So is there a place where I can situational stats like - Hewitt's record in a 3 set match after he loses the first set. So I can compare the odds listed to his record in this situations!

[charley365]

LADIES TENNIS = MADNESS
So many under 1.10, than up to evens in the ladies game with all the second set comebacks
unreal today they all comeback petkovic, jankovic, tomljanovic and ur friend svitolina.
Take the dog in-play

[charley365]

jankovic maybe not so low but other 3 were rock bottom
1.03 1.05 ish