[tipsadontlikehim]

allright i had no play on this match so i don't care but Albano Olivetti, he is an horrible baseliner, horrible returner

Davydenko was leading 5/2 in the 3rd and guess what ? Lost 5/7

the icing on the cake was these 2 double faults at 5/4 and 5/6 + 3 UE i think in the last game

Davy at his absolute best

[Cappinpicks]

wow tennis is disgusting

[bababooey13]

pathetic.

#sochiproblems

[beermankirk]

ban him, lifetime, please.

[sbavi]

I have never bet on this clown for this very reason.He should be banned for life.

[matt1216]

not sure man, I watched the entire match, he was just trash all day. Barely holding serve for 3 sets. You can look back it was 40-40 on most Davy's service games. The Becker comeback/fix was a lot more obvious

[HatersGonnaHate]

i love how if anything out of the ordinary ever happens in tennis or any other sport people cry FIX FIX FIX. 99% of the time there is no fix. If davy wanted to fix the match he would have just lost in 2 sets or never went ahead in the 3rd set.

[JD AMBER]

Call me naive but I tend not to buy into fixing conspiracy theories, particularly not at the ATP level. With as many strange things that happen in sports, how is a collapse like Huta-Galung's necessarily a fix? There are insane comebacks all the time in NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. I understand that tennis is much easier to fix given that it's an individual sport, but by the same token, it's individuality makes it a much more pressure-filled sport that is much more likely to produce ridiculous chokes and comebacks. Think about golf...guys explode and melt down all the time in final rounds there. Obviously no one is calling a fix because golf isn't one player versus another, but the individual pressure resulting in fishy-looking collapses is the same.

If Huta-Galung was fixing the match, why did he fight off a break point in the first set that would have resulted in him going down two breaks? Why would he have won the first set in the tiebreaker? Was he intentionally trying to win in exactly three sets? If so, that's an awfully risky fix, especially given that Becker is the superior player and being able to take one set off him out of the first two wasn't a given. Would be much easier to just fix the match so that Huta-Galung loses (regardless of two or three sets)...and if that were the case, again, why did he fight back and win the first set?

Sometimes us gamblers just need to take our lumps and realize it was a shitty beat. They suck, and Huta-Galung backers should be furious, but to call fix every time just because the sport has a history of them (mostly at the lower levels) isn't the way to go.

[matt1216]

Call me naive but I tend not to buy into fixing conspiracy theories, particularly not at the ATP level. With as many strange things that happen in sports, how is a collapse like Huta-Galung's necessarily a fix? There are insane comebacks all the time in NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. I understand that tennis is much easier to fix given that it's an individual sport, but by the same token, it's individuality makes it a much more pressure-filled sport that is much more likely to produce ridiculous chokes and comebacks. Think about golf...guys explode and melt down all the time in final rounds there. Obviously no one is calling a fix because golf isn't one player versus another, but the individual pressure resulting in fishy-looking collapses is the same.

If Huta-Galung was fixing the match, why did he fight off a break point in the first set that would have resulted in him going down two breaks? Why would he have won the first set in the tiebreaker? Was he intentionally trying to win in exactly three sets? If so, that's an awfully risky fix, especially given that Becker is the superior player and being able to take one set off him out of the first two wasn't a given. Would be much easier to just fix the match so that Huta-Galung loses (regardless of two or three sets)...and if that were the case, again, why did he fight back and win the first set?

Sometimes us gamblers just need to take our lumps and realize it was a shitty beat. They suck, and Huta-Galung backers should be furious, but to call fix every time just because the sport has a history of them (mostly at the lower levels) isn't the way to go.

If your wagering between October-November next year, you will understand.,there's fixes in tennis everywhere. Some arnt fixes but most are dry excellent at disguising it.


for Huta Galung, he has to try to make it look legit. A 3 setter as opposed to a 2 setter probably would get questioned. Plus most of the fixes I have seen have gone deep into a 3rd set tiebreak. I've seen Andreozzi, Pella G, a lot of South Americans fixing.

ex) Falla @ home in Colombia dropping a 6-2 6-3 match to a scrub after beating way better opponents. Funny home that works.

[EaglesPhan36]

Guys and girls choke every day. Been on the wrong side multiple times this week. Betting 250s, you will see this Shit almost every tournament. We shouldn't be surprised.

[brodie]

I've been on the wrong side of multiple chalk bets that seemed like fixes... think about how tempting it would be if you could just tell a good friend to put $1000 down on your +550 opponent...

[bababooey13]

Call me naive but I tend not to buy into fixing conspiracy theories, particularly not at the ATP level. With as many strange things that happen in sports, how is a collapse like Huta-Galung's necessarily a fix? There are insane comebacks all the time in NBA, MLB, NFL, etc. I understand that tennis is much easier to fix given that it's an individual sport, but by the same token, it's individuality makes it a much more pressure-filled sport that is much more likely to produce ridiculous chokes and comebacks. Think about golf...guys explode and melt down all the time in final rounds there. Obviously no one is calling a fix because golf isn't one player versus another, but the individual pressure resulting in fishy-looking collapses is the same.

If Huta-Galung was fixing the match, why did he fight off a break point in the first set that would have resulted in him going down two breaks? Why would he have won the first set in the tiebreaker? Was he intentionally trying to win in exactly three sets? If so, that's an awfully risky fix, especially given that Becker is the superior player and being able to take one set off him out of the first two wasn't a given. Would be much easier to just fix the match so that Huta-Galung loses (regardless of two or three sets)...and if that were the case, again, why did he fight back and win the first set?

Sometimes us gamblers just need to take our lumps and realize it was a shitty beat. They suck, and Huta-Galung backers should be furious, but to call fix every time just because the sport has a history of them (mostly at the lower levels) isn't the way to go.

you are naive.

fixes are so utterly rampant in every sport especially atp just google atp match fixing you will find articles for days. ranked players have been suspended and/or banned. take a look at the end of the raps/kings game in the nba last night. sport fixes are real and rampant open your eyes.

[tipsadontlikehim]

I don't think the Huta Galung match was fixed... what if Huta Galung accidently hits a winner (or Becker a UE) on match point ?

Davydenko on the other hand, watch his 2 service games, a shame... 2 double faults, UEs... now imagine the odds of a 7/5 win for Olivetti when down 2-5 (probably over @50 for sure).

[tipsadontlikehim]

If Huta-Galung was fixing the match, why did he fight off a break point in the first set that would have resulted in him going down two breaks? Why would he have won the first set in the tiebreaker? Was he intentionally trying to win in exactly three sets? If so, that's an awfully risky fix, especially given that Becker is the superior player and being able to take one set off him out of the first two wasn't a given. Would be much easier to just fix the match so that Huta-Galung loses (regardless of two or three sets)...and if that were the case, again, why did he fight back and win the first set?

Sometimes us gamblers just need to take our lumps and realize it was a shitty beat. They suck, and Huta-Galung backers should be furious, but to call fix every time just because the sport has a history of them (mostly at the lower levels) isn't the way to go.

I agree with you about the Huta Galung match, no fix the guy had 7 MP I think ? It's way too dangerous to have 7 MP if you want to lose the match. (have'tn watched the match by the way)

[matt1216]

I don't think the Huta Galung match was fixed... what if Huta Galung accidently hits a winner (or Becker a UE) on match point ?

Davydenko on the other hand, watch his 2 service games, a shame... 2 double faults, UEs... now imagine the odds of a 7/5 win for Olivetti when down 2-5 (probably over @50 for sure).

I wonder if the books knew cuz it was only @ 6.00 for ovaletti down 4-2 3rd set

[tipsadontlikehim]

I wonder if the books knew cuz it was only @ 6.00 for ovaletti down 4-2 3rd set

i think bookies are always careful with Davy.
It was the same with Tipsarevic... i remember Tipsy going down 0-2 at the US open against Guillaume Rufin and his odds were still 1.90... obviously he ended up winning 3-2.

[innn]

i think bookies are always careful with Davy.

exactly that's why Davy had to come up wiht something like this.