[Jeff_Black]

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R2
Rafael Nadal vs Federico Delbonis
Handicap: Rafael Nadal -11, 2.06 on Pinnacle
Stake: 3u play

[Igor_1965]

41 - 44 - 4 (+10.899u)

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R2
Aljaz Bedene vs Ernest Gulbis
Money line: Ernests Gulbis, 2.67 on Pinnacle
Stake: 1u play

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R2
Nikoloz Basilashvili vs Fernando Verdasco
Money line: Nikoloz Basilashvili, 2.40 on Pinnacle
Stake: 1u play

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R1
Taylor Fritz vs Kevin Anderson
Money line: Taylor Fritz, 2.02 on Pinnacle
Stake: 1u play

Great job by Fritz

[Jeff_Black]

Great job by Fritz

Was surprising and frustrating that he could not convert his break points early, liked what I saw in his earlier matches. If I had looked at the odds after when he was a favourite, would have likely passed because I would have felt the odds were correct. Anderson perhaps having not played since Wimbledon lacking match practice probably showed in that match in my opinion at times. There were warning sides against Ivashka, a qualifier who shouldn't really have pushed him as much as he did.

[Jeff_Black]

43 - 48 - 4 (+7.589u)

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R3
Gael Monfils vs Ernests Gulbis
Handicap: Ernests Gulbis +3.5, 2.04 on Pinnacle
Moneyline: Ernests Gulbis, 2.83 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u & 1u play

Haven't been convinced with Monfils' play so far even though he's usually excellent on hard courts and in Australia. Gulbis looks like he's found some motivation and seems to be the people's favourites for upsets. Fair enough that he was the dog against Felix, but against Bedene I think even the books would agree they set the wrong guy as a favourite. Monfils is beatable here, and he's played opponents who are 36 and 41 years old, while not entirely convincingly beating them. He also hurt his hand playing video games which probably hasn't affected in him those matches but the calibre of opposition has stepped up here.
Gulbis has even said he wants to get back in to the top 100 so that he does not have to play Challengers and with the points on offer at the slams it's a good way to go about it.


Australian Open, Mens Singles, R3
Taylor Fritz vs Dominic Thiem
Handicap: Taylor Fritz +4, 1.925 on Pinnacle
Moneyline: Taylor Fritz, 3.07 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u & 1u play

Thiem took 5 sets to put away a Challenger Level player in his previous round and looked a bit shaky doing so, as well as in his first round match. Even with Fritz playing 5 sets against a big server I don't feel the match took a lot out of him. He's improved in his most recent year and he will probably see the run Tiafoe had last year and ask himself why he can't do that.


Australian Open, Mens Singles, R3
Nick Kyrgios vs Karen Khachanov
Handicap: Nick Kyrgios -3.5, 1.847 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u play

Regardless of your opinion on Nick Kyrgios it has hard to argue that he hasn't hit his strides at the right time in the Aus Open. Even with that lapse in concentration against Simon he never looked troubled, and was completely on top of his opponent. Simon didn't really have any answers to any of his shot making, serve or movement. Karen will be a slightly tougher test but not an opponent Nick can't handle.


Australian Open, Mens Singles, R3
Stan Wawrinka vs John Isner
Moneyline: Stan Wawrinka, 1.769 on Pinnacle
Stake: 5u play

An interesting match up and a good test for Stan but I haven't rated Isner's form highly here considering he's played a few Challenger level players in his run here. He hasn't been bothered by his serve, hasn't really had to lift his game a lot, and Stan will provide a threat on both ends here. A lot of people have Stan as a dark horse for this open, rightfully so and I think he will continue that here.


Australian Open, Mens Singles, R3
Rafael Nadal vs Pablo Carreno Busta
Total Games: Under 29 Games, 2.01 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u play

[Goat Milk]

Don't think Gulbis is capable of beating a player like Monfils in this type of tournament

[Conqueror]

Millman almost did it again.

[Jeff_Black]

Millman almost did it again.

Happy to pass on it. Federer didn't really look like he had been pushed his last two matches and Millman was surprisingly impressive against decent opposition. In hindsight the lines and odds were a bit disrespectful towards him considering this match up even taking out of account the home court factor. Federer definately looked his age that match.

Don't think Gulbis is capable of beating a player like Monfils in this type of tournament

Yeah he gave it a good crack in that match, but came up short. Monfils and Thiem is an interesting match up.

[Jeff_Black]

46 - 52 - 4 (+9.148u)

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R4
Tennys Sandgren vs Fabio Fognini
Moneyline: Tennys Sandgren, 2.37 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u play

I think Sandgren can wear down the Italian and get into his serve, like he did with Querrey who has a better serve. Sandgren has come into Melbourne looking well conditioned, and Fognini had a fair bit of luck with the rain against Opelka, while going flaky when things haven't gone his way. I think the matches he's played in five sets will catch up to him a bit at the moment as he hasn't looked great beating average players in five sets. I think the odds at present make him a worthwhile play to win outright.


Australian Open, Mens Singles, R4
Marin Cilic vs Milos Raonic
Moneyline: Marin Cilic, 2.54 on Pinnacle
Handicap: Marin Cilic +2, 2.01 on Pinnacle
Stake: 1u & 2u play

Both players after disappointing 2019 seasons have come in to this tournament with a bit of motivation but I feel the odds make Cilic the better valued play for mine. In his match against Bautista he showed he can grind out a win, and go at it from the baseline. I don't know what he proved beating Paire but Paire had some nice runs of form despite being a bit bipolar dropping sets out of nowhere. In comparison Raonic has played Challenger Level players earlier on bit did have a nice display against Tsitsipas, who beforehand like Raonic probably hadn't been really tested.
Cilic will probably be a tougher serving Challenge for Raonic and if you are relying on returning and moving your opponent around the court, then i'll side with Cilic for that.

[Goat Milk]

Think you make too much about quality of opponents. You can only play who's on the schedule. And a lot of elite players don't step on the gas against challenger players, so you can't really even use that as a factor in capping the majors imo. Rhythm too is way overrated when you're playing best of 5.

That's why you don't see a ton of massive men's underdogs winning in majors, but you see it all the time in women's since it's only best of 3.

GL with the picks.

Hard matches to cap.

Raonic and Cilic seems like an even battle, which give the slight edge to Raonic though. Think his pure force can be a problem for Cilic if he's on his game.

[pabonaparte]

Was Wawrinka a W?

I mean to ask, do you count retirements the way 5Dimes do (1 set completed = action on ML, and push on spread/total)?

[Jeff_Black]

Was Wawrinka a W?
I mean to ask, do you count retirements the way 5Dimes do (1 set completed = action on ML, and push on spread/total)?

Head to Head will count as a win on the book I've selected, yes. I thought I read here that some people said Dimes void everything but I'm not sure.
From my understanding, any other market that isn't First Set Winner will be voided even if you're on Isner.

Think you make too much about quality of opponents. You can only play who's on the schedule. And a lot of elite players don't step on the gas against challenger players, so you can't really even use that as a factor in capping the majors imo. Rhythm too is way overrated when you're playing best of 5.
That's why you don't see a ton of massive men's underdogs winning in majors, but you see it all the time in women's since it's only best of 3.
GL with the picks.
Hard matches to cap.
Raonic and Cilic seems like an even battle, which give the slight edge to Raonic though. Think his pure force can be a problem for Cilic if he's on his game.

Yeah there weren't really any upsets in the Men's yesterday interestingly enough and I think Rublev was the only one that didn't cover the spread. I don't expect that to happen often though which makes it tougher. These later rounds will probably be tougher like you said because there is a bit more information on each player here but that seems to be thrown out of the window when it comes to womens heh.

[Jeff_Black]

Australian Open, Mens Singles, R4
Marton Fuscovics vs Roger Federer
Handicap: Marton Fuscovics +6.5, 1.847 on Pinnacle
Moneyline: Marton Fuscovics, 6.01 on Pinnacle
Stake: 2u & 1u plays

Feel like this is a not a bad spot to grab Fuscovics who has slowly over the past 18 months gotten himself to a point where he is a solid player and someone to look out for in the future. In fact he was that in the juniors but he needed a bit of maturity before being able to be a regular on the ATP Tour. I don't think he will be overrawed by the occasion and in his previous matches against Federer he has shown he is not to be pushed over and is doing the right things to set himself up for a win.

[Conqueror]

I'm glad my wait wasn't in vain. I've been waiting to see someone merge sense with courage and play Fucsovics. I'm tailing. Fucsovics could help Millman finish the cause (lol).

[Jeff_Black]

I'm glad my wait wasn't in vain. I've been waiting to see someone merge sense with courage and play Fucsovics. I'm tailing. Fucsovics could help Millman finish the cause (lol).

Was mainly waiting for the odds to drift out, happy with what I've gotten now. It may drift out more who knows and 7s would have been excellent but that would have been too much considering everything about Federer. Think it's overs anyway. He's kind of been a forgotten player in a way, I think. Happy to take the risk.

[Jeff_Black]

47 - 56 - 4 (+5.888u)

Australian Open, Mens Singles, QF
Novak Djokovic vs Milos Raonic
Total Games: Under 36 Games, 2.01 on Pinnacle
Stake: 5u play

Think Milos' run comes to a half here. Djokovic is far better then any of the returners Raonic has faced and hasn't been deeply troubled since he collapsed in the third set against Struff.
He's also playing a guy who doesn't rely on the power some of his other opponents have, and I have seen the smart players move Raonic around so much to the point where he looks like a turtle.
And his record of 9-0 also clearly indicates that.

[Goat Milk]

Bryant's death will have an impact on Djokovic in this match for sure. Whether he is slightly deflated, or slightly more focused, remains to be seen. That is something that any system or model can't account for. The human element.

[Jeff_Black]

Bryant's death will have an impact on Djokovic in this match for sure. Whether he is slightly deflated, or slightly more focused, remains to be seen. That is something that any system or model can't account for. The human element.

True, and it will be interesting to see what the energy is like these first few games. Raonic just hasn't been able to match it up with him in the past on a variety of surfaces and I think playing at night benefits Djokovic personally.

The footage they're showing of him in the locker room, he seems to be in good spirits.

[Jeff_Black]

Australian Open, Mens Singles, QF
Stan Wawrinka vs Alexander Zverev
Moneyline: Stan Wawrinka, 2.32 on Pinnacle
Stake: 5u play

Enjoyable QF match ups so far. Happy to take Stan here with the odds on present. He hasn't beaten Zverev before but I think that changes on a surface and venue where he has experienced a lot of success. Nice job of Zverev to make the QF without dropping a set beating some good players along the way but I think Stan has the game and has proven this game to be effective against a player of Zverev's stature like he did against Medvedev.
Then there is the element of Zverev being a ticking time bomb mentally if things don't go his way early. That leads to poor serving (in particular)
It's good to see Stan back and he's one to fear this deep in the draw.

[Conqueror]

47 - 56 - 4 (+5.888u)

Australian Open, Mens Singles, QF
Novak Djokovic vs Milos Raonic
Total Games: Under 36 Games, 2.01 on Pinnacle
Stake: 5u play

Think Milos' run comes to a half here. Djokovic is far better then any of the returners Raonic has faced and hasn't been deeply troubled since he collapsed in the third set against Struff.
He's also playing a guy who doesn't rely on the power some of his other opponents have, and I have seen the smart players move Raonic around so much to the point where he looks like a turtle.
And his record of 9-0 also clearly indicates that.

Congrats!
I was a bit afraid for you when the 3rd set headed into a tiebreak. A tiebreak is normally the life-long dteam of the Karlovics, Isners, Raonics, and Opelkas of the evil server's cult of the tennis empire.

[Jeff_Black]

Congrats!
I was a bit afraid for you when the 3rd set headed into a tiebreak. A tiebreak is normally the life-long dteam of the Karlovics, Isners, Raonics, and Opelkas of the evil server's cult of the tennis empire.

Hah yeah...but happening in the third set I think had it’s advantages with a bit of fatigue and mental drain kicking in but I felt he did try and change up a few things.

But really it was whether he could hit enough unreturnable first serves heh

[Conqueror]

BTW, I meant "dream" not "dteam". I typed that from my cell phone in bed with my twilight app on.

[Jeff_Black]

Gotta admit, that was impressive by Zverev...gave Stan little margin for error and every shot Stan got outplayed on or made an error was magnified and more costly towards his chances. He's not the best match up for him but Stan was below his usual standards without a doubt.

[Jeff_Black]

Australian Open, Mens Singles, SF
Roger Federer vs Novak Djokovic
Total Games: Under 33.5, 1.943 on Pinnacle
Stake: 5u play

Not too fussed what Federer is able to bring to the table with various question marks over certain aspects of his body, but I think Novak will use various parts of his game that he knows will exploit Federer's weaknesses and play to his strengths like he has been all tournament.

Mainly, Novak is a master at shrinking the court when he sees fit and from within it forcing the opponent to play against their strengths. He tactically applied it when he needed it to against Federer in Wimbledon last year which reduced his (Novak's) unforced errors but also at times forced Federer to make poor decisions at important points, and then exploit being taken out of their comfort zone. It is absolutely all by design, and only the best players are able to use it consistently and have the patience (mentally most importantly) to use it.
It is not considered a conservative (defensive) approach or a low percentage tennis way of playing because it requires a helluva lot of patience and strategy in to what you want to get out of the application of the tactic but also continuing to make the proper adjustments.

Against Raonic he constantly exploited his weaker backhand side that he can't really hit down the line greatly which even with a shrunk court and was able to open him up and exploit his poor movement around the court while taking advantage of his slower and weaker second serve. And a 14 to 48 UE error count in his favour testifies to that. Against a two dimensional player like Raonic, he can get away with that.

But against Federer, he will probably have to bring out other adjustments which will also work, and has worked in the past against him. Similarly in his matches against Federer in the past both on here and other surfaces he can employ the above strategy but match his backhand with Federer's backhand, both passing and cross court where it becomes more defensive as well as at times struggling to put a racquet on it when used. We saw this in 2016, and 2011 constantly. And those matches in 2015 as well where they played in the slams. But the same logic of forcing Federer to make bad decisions which he can then exploit with the above gets put in to place, then forces him to second guess the decisions he makes which may force him to go into a hitting/rally contest with him, in which with the surface/balls and night conditions would absolutely not favour him and lower his percentage of winning each point significantly lower.
To win, Federer at times has to go for it when he is able to but whether Novak let's him using various minor adjustments to the above will be a different thing. And whether he has the conditioning in his groin area to move around without feeling some form of discomfort will be another.
But the beauty of if he does indeed struggle and the signs are there then for sure, Novak can run him rugged, paint the lines, hit it deep so physically Federer is on the back foot.

Like with Raonic, and against Federer, Novak will continue to place his serves damn near perfectly (I think Raonic had only two break point chances against him), and likely unless he's too loose and sloppy like he was in that set against Struff he will not give Federer many opportunities because Federer (for different reasons) also struggles to return the kick serves against Djokovic the way Nadal does.
On the topic of serving Federer's second serve is going to have to be pretty close to perfect because Novak will exploit those second serves.
Raonic averaged a faster second serve by 20km/h but it was still less effective and efficient then Novaks.

In a nutshell, and TL;DR version...Federer's going to have to play well at the important points.

[Conqueror]

Great analysis.

[Jeff_Black]

Thanks, the only part that didn't go to script was the start of the first set. The rest of that game is a mirror of what I expected from Djokovic to show. And to some extent Federer.
Not a lot of guys play well against Djok on second serve too.

[Conqueror]

Congrats!!!

[Jeff_Black]

Congrats!!!

"In a nutshell, and TL;DR version...Federer's going to have to play well at the important points."

Really was pretty much the case, again in a nutshell lol

Not taking the extra half a point would have gotten me a touch over +100...But I guess that's the way it is sometimes.

[Conqueror]

Djokovic just won the AO. If I owned a sportsbook, I will just go ahead and pay those who bet him to win it.

I could never have picked Muguruza to win this year's AO. The WTA is full of surprises but I just don't see Kenin winning 2 sets against Muguruza.

[Jeff_Black]

It was nice of him to acknowledge Federer's injury from the previous match but didn't think it was necessary. Federer looked anything bit injured at the start of the game, so maybe he aggravated it as the set went on?

I actually thought five years ago a Hard Court Slam would have been Muguruza's first one. But every time I thought that she'd lose in the second or third round.

I think Kvitova is another surprise who hasn't won a slam here in Australia yet either.

[Jeff_Black]

Australian Open, Mens Singles, SF
Alexander Zverev vs Dominic Thiem
Moneyline: Alexander Zverev, 2.81 on Pinnacle
Stake: 3u play

It is firstly worth examining why Sascha has done so well in this tournament which has enabled him to make it this deep in a format that requires a longer level of focus both physically and mentally, something that the young man himself has been accused of lacking in earlier stages of his career.

He firstly didn't beat easy opponents going into this match which is something that impresses me, even if he had to play Nadal tonight you would give him a good shot based off what you saw. Rublev was 12-0 going into their match and serving/returning well as well as Stan was considered by many and most years a dark horse on the hard court slams. The 1-6 first set seems to be the only blip here at the Australian Open and the good far outweights the bad.

His double faulting issues have almost disappeared in this tournament firstly, and while that may not be something worth mentioning in another player in Sascha's case it was a serious problem where mentally it seemed to be a thing where he just lost that concentration for a few games and then was forced to try catch up. From that, he's won both close to 80% of his first serve points but the more important thing is he's been able to also win close to 80% of his first serve points. You notice this more on the tape (rather then seeing these stats after the game) how it gives him the confidence that he can finish off a game, rather then being nervy and not being able to close a game being up 2 sets to 1 or whatever.
I also think match up wise Thiem will in general struggle with Zverev's serve. Especially when he is holding his serve 90% of the time and not complacent enough to let it go to a tiebreak and win the serve battle.

The bit of an unknown part is that Thiem can rally with the best of them in Nadal, Federer and Djokovic having beaten them all on hard court in the last tournament and not just at Mickey Mouse Tournaments. But I do give the edge for Zverev on hardcourts playing ability wise.
I think the value resides in Zverev and was happy to admit I underestimated in matches like the Stan one, and got it completely wrong. But you can make the argument that Sascha can also match it with the best of them having beaten Federer and Djokovic on multiple occasions also not in Mickey Mouse tournaments. With his size and ability he should not be a player that faulters so easily and it's always been mental with him.

The h2h record doesn't bother my decision so much as the data indicates it is only 1-1 on outdoor hards. And secondly because it is a bit of an uncharted territory for both of them. It's exciting that one of them will be in an Australian Open Final, and potentially a first Final for Sascha but with the odds on hand and Sascha being difficult to break down I will go with the underdog here.

[bull24]

Respect your take on the match and no doubt Zverev’s form is far better over past week. My take on this match is pretty different but who knows...Thought Thiem’s performance v Nadal was one of the best I’ve ever seen. Striking missles throughout match despite it being hot & an extremely grueling match. I just don’t see Zverev having a shot here. I like Thiem ml and -3.5. I also think he has a legit shot to beat Djok in his current form. To beat him u better be in top notch condition physically, as well as mentally. Also have to be able to fire back shots from well placedpowerful strikes comin at u 10+ times. Don’t think Zverev can sustain 20+ shot rally’s. I’m guessing Thiem in straights or in 4

[Jeff_Black]

Thanks for your input, always enjoy discussing a match regardless of difference of/similar opinions. The one other thing I didn't touch on mainly because it has to do with both players but because players like Kyrgios and Nadal have taken turns occupying the prime time slot in the evening it leaves guys like Thiem and Zverev playing in the afternoon day. So it will be interesting to see who handles things better on Rod Laver Arena. I mean they have played here for five matches but it wasn't always the same venue or time of day so it's interesting to see how it pans outs. On these conditions I give a slight edge to may be Thiem (it was impressive he beat Nadal with this in mind) like you said but I feel Sascha won't be a pushover as well.

[bull24]

Your take was pretty spot on. I was very impressed with Zverev. I really wanted to splash Thiem ml in the final vs. Djok as I took Djok to win at start. That grueling match vs Zverev I’m now questioning if I should. Thiem is only human and his gas tank is certainly depleted some. He will have to volley and both will be running all match. May still take for minimum assuming he’s a huge dog but just don’t think he will have enough in the tank. Def. think Thiem & Zverev are the next era of major champions.

You like anyone in women’s tonight?

[Jeff_Black]

Your take was pretty spot on. I was very impressed with Zverev. I really wanted to splash Thiem ml in the final vs. Djok as I took Djok to win at start. That grueling match vs Zverev I’m now questioning if I should. Thiem is only human and his gas tank is certainly depleted some. He will have to volley and both will be running all match. May still take for minimum assuming he’s a huge dog but just don’t think he will have enough in the tank. Def. think Thiem & Zverev are the next era of major champions.
You like anyone in women’s tonight?

Sorry for the late response, but passed on womens, didn't really have an opinion on it, mainly because I gave both girls a shot if they were on their game. And a lot depends on how they handle the moment. We got a fun game that wasn't one sided, which was nice.

Think Thiem handled the few moments that halted the game a bit better then Zverev did, first the roof closing and then the power outage. Very strange for that to happen considering it doesn't often. I think Thiem won more of the points after that as well then Zverev got it together after that.

But match up wise, definately didn't think there was much between them as the score suggested. Thiem played better in the tiebreaks.

[Conqueror]

JB,

When are you turning Pro?