darko08
-
Posts
763 -
Joined
-
Days Won
30
Posts posted by darko08
-
-
7 hours ago, neilovan said:
Not really sure how Tabener can be a favorite over Harris, giving his last clay court match. He has no really pedigree, and Harris should have too much for him, if he brings 3/4 of his game. Tabener just got slaughtered in his last outing and Harris is showing some of his ability, after a slow start to the year.
Harris suffered a back injury in his match against Ramos. I remember you posted a bet on Harris (vs De Minaur) so I made a post explaining the risks of backing Harris. Harris was bagelled in the first set and then he retired. It's been only 4 days since that and do not forget this is a small tournament.
It seems your only reason to back Harris was that Taberner lost against Zapata. Taberner knew he was going to play as a LL (as it has already been said here). So, why he should deny to his friend a spot into the main draw?
Taberner is a pure claycourter and what he did in Barcelona was impressive. He bagelled Korda and then he was close to beat FAA. I watched a little bit of that and I saw him more solid than ever.When you place a bet you have to consider all the possible factors. You can't place a bet only because of 1 match (especially when it's a qualification match and the player who has lost enters as a LL...). Don't feel offended, I'm just telling you this cause this match had plenty of factors to think that Harris was not going to play or just not win it in case he decided to play. The most fair thing he could do was to let his spot to a LL and take the half of the money. Anyway, I have not seen the match so don't take my last words too seriously.
-
22 hours ago, darko08 said:
Harris suffered a back injury in his match against Ramos but he still managed to win the match (Ramos was awful).
That back injury is the reason why he did not play the doubles match. It's impossible to know how he will be for the match. If he's OK he can beat De Minaur cause he's better. If he's not, he won't play the match or he will do in bad conditions..., and that's the worst scenario for those ones who decide to back him. De Minaur never has had success on this surface cause he doesn't feel good on the dirt.., but he will fight for every point as he always does. I guess this is the perfect situation for those punters who love to take risks.Harris loses the first set 6-0 and then he retires. I know I already have said this before many times... but this is why is really important to watch the matches when you bet on tennis. The injury thing is something you can't find on flashcore, sofascore or any other stats site...
- CzechPunter, raduvlad1995 and rainz
-
3
-
Harris suffered a back injury in his match against Ramos but he still managed to win the match (Ramos was awful).
That back injury is the reason why he did not play the doubles match. It's impossible to know how he will be for the match. If he's OK he can beat De Minaur cause he's better. If he's not, he won't play the match or he will do in bad conditions..., and that's the worst scenario for those ones who decide to back him. De Minaur never has had success on this surface cause he doesn't feel good on the dirt.., but he will fight for every point as he always does. I guess this is the perfect situation for those punters who love to take risks.- rainz, CzechPunter and Grass Cash
-
3
-
11 minutes ago, CzechPunter said:
I think that the point was to point out players that rely on their serves a lot, not that they have the very best serves. To that end, Kvitova and Tauson certainly belong imo, Tauson slightly less so and still with time to develop. But you make some good points as well, thanks for that!
Yes, that's what I believed at first. But then I saw he included players as Sabalenka or Muguruza in the same bracket than Pliskova. I have seen Sabalenka winning matches against good players despite doing almost 20 doubles faults per match. Do you know what does mean? It's like starting every single one of your service games (in 3 set match) with a 0-30. The conclusion that I got from this is that she can win matches despite serving incredibly bad. How? Well, her return stats are impressive and clearly better than Pliskova's (1st rtn pts %, 2nd rtn pts % & and rtn games %), and that allows her to not rely on her serve as much as Pliskova does on hers. I agree on Tauson and Kvitova. They can't afford serving bad at this moment if they want to win matches.
-
2 hours ago, neilovan said:
I think Pliskova is also not a good mover on the court. Her game is backing up a strong serve with a good first strike. It's the problem for woman players who have grown up with a big serve. Most of them move poorly. Average side to side on the baseline, but very poor to the shorter angled ball. As juniors they could just serve people off the court, and this results in a ground stroke game that is lacking in movement and incredible fitness.
4 players that all fall into the same bracket : Kvitova, Pliskova, Rybakina and Tauson. I exclude Sabalenka and Muguruza because they are very strong, and are better movers that the other 4. Someone like Marketa Vondrousova is a way better athlete than those 4 as well, and definitely moves better too.
The big problem is when someone is serving rockets ... games fly by quickly, and you are constantly trying to win your own serve game. The opponent, who is winning serves easily, will take more risks on your serve game, because they know they can win their own easily. So it is a one-two punch. The flip side is when the big serve goes AWOL, the whole game and strategy goes to pieces (Sabalenka). A bad serving day, and they get demolished.
These are the best servers to you? From all the players you mentioned only Pliskova and Rybakina would be in the "Top 20". In normal conditions Sabalenka also would be in that top..., but there's something wrong with her right now. Kvitova also was a good server, but she has lost the fire and I think she will retire soon. All the others players you mentioned (Muguruza, Vondrousova and Tauson) are just too inconsistent on that aspect. I can make a long list of players who serve better than those 3 players (Barty, Serena, Krystina Pliskova, Osaka, Brady, Keys, Krejcikova, Swiatek, Badosa, Samsonova...).
It shocks me how Badosa has improved her serve this year. Definitely, that's one of the reasons that explain her big success. She is the second player with more aces in 2022 (only Keys has did more aces than her), and her % of service games won and points won with 1st serves are also impressive. Both Görges and Bertens were also really good servers, as well as Venus, Lisicki, etc. Konta's serve was also something to be considered, but she has had too many injuries over the last years.
From all the players you mentioned, the player who definitely has a big dependency on her serve is Pliskova. I have seen her losing against really weak players only because her serve didn't work. I wouldn't put her in the same category than Rybakina, Kvitova, Sabalenka, Tauson..., as you did. I have seen Sabalenka winning matches against good players despite doing like 20 double faults (I never have seen Pliskova doing such thing).
Georgina Garcia Perez definitely can be on that list. She's not on the same level than Pliskova (of course), but she depends on her serve in the same way that Pliskova does on hers.
-
1 hour ago, Torque said:
Key point performance is so often the difference at the highest level. Baez didn't face a break point in the first set until he served to stay in it, and so of course that was when he got broken. He did well to take the second set, but then in the third after starting with a break he gives it straight back and then fails to convert 15-40 to go a break ahead again and after that he only won one more game. Carreno Busta saved 9 of 12 break points faced and took 5 of 6 break point opportunities compared to Baez who only saved 1 of 6 break points faced and only took 3 of 12 break point opportunities. As I said at the start, key point performance is so important in tennis.
The only way Baez could win this match was doing it quickly, in straight sets. PBC is better player than Baez, so much better. I don't care about the surface. The problem for Pablo was that it was his first match of the european clay season. I have seen a lot of Pablo and I know him quite well. He always struggle to win matches when he starts a new season. It's not easy for him to acclimate to a new surface... I know all players do but Pablo struggles more than the others players. That's the reason why Baez needed to win it quickly. After losing the first set his chances of winning the match were really low. It meant that he should play 2 more sets to win the match and that was a lot of time for Pablo to acclimate to the surface. In the third set the superiority of PBC over Baez was clear. He played more aggressive and Baez was barely winning points even when he was playing with first serves. I think he even was under 50% of points won with 1st serves, which is not good at all. Pablo was dominating almost every single point and taking the right choice, always. He played so much better with his serve and did more winners. He also gave to Baez a master class of how to drop shot. He was already acclimated!
- raduvlad1995, amity and CzechPunter
-
3
-
51 minutes ago, carina007 said:
Come on... We are here to support and help each other... More opinions, discussons, predictions --> more success
I will keep posting. I just won't post more bets, that's all.
-
On 10/14/2021 at 4:23 PM, darko08 said:
Alexander Zverev to reach the Final of the ATP Indian Wells at 1.72 with bet365
The odds for Sascha to win the ATP Indian Wells have dropped to 2.05 and it has no value at this point... But the odds for him to reach the Final are at 1.72, so I will go with this one. He will play against Fritz in the QFs. Fritz has won all his matches here in straight sets (Nakashima, Berrettini and Sinner), but his form before coming here was really poor. Moreover, neither Berrettini nor Sinner were playing good. I think Fritz is a little bit underrated for this match but I expect Sascha win it in 3 or 2 tight sets. In the SFs, he will play against Basilashvili or Tsitsipas. Tsitsipas is not playing well. He could have lost against Fognini (2-6, 6-3, 6-4) in the 2nd round, and he could have lost against De Miñaur in the 3rd round (6-7, 7-6, 6-2). De Miñaur was in a really, really bad form and that reflects how poor Tsitsipas has been playing recently. It's also hard to forget how he did in the US Open... Having said that, I wouldn't be shocked if he loses against Basilashvili. I saw a big part of Niko against Ramos. Ramos was serving for the match but he lost his opportunity to close it in 2 sets and then he was destroyed by Basilashvili's winners. Since the Olympics, Sascha has lost only 1 match (20-1), and that was a 5 set match against Djokovic (SFs of the USO).
Well, that has been my last bet/prediction. In terms of results, it has been a really good year, but I also have had to be dealing with a lot of punters "crowing" on my lost picks and I just got tired. The most annoying part is that all those punters are not even able to get good results here, so they just wait and appear in the right moment.
Since the Q. of the US Open started I have posted 23 bets and I have won 16 (16-7), That can be checked easily as all the bets are there. Well, in more than half of those lost bets I have seen some punter crowing on them. In relation to the 16 won bets, I haven't seen a single post commenting the match or the bet itself. It seems it doesn't matter how good I am doing that if I lose a bet there will be a punter to crow on it. It doesn't take a genius to realize what's the main purpose of all these comments.
I'm not leaving the forum, I just won't post more bets and I will reduce my contribution here.
GL to Czech, fourleaf, foo fighter, robinho, money and all the rest of the good punters here!
- Foo_Fighter, yogg, CzechPunter and 2 others
-
5
-
Alexander Zverev to reach the Final of the ATP Indian Wells at 1.72 with bet365
The odds for Sascha to win the ATP Indian Wells have dropped to 2.05 and it has no value at this point... But the odds for him to reach the Final are at 1.72, so I will go with this one. He will play against Fritz in the QFs. Fritz has won all his matches here in straight sets (Nakashima, Berrettini and Sinner), but his form before coming here was really poor. Moreover, neither Berrettini nor Sinner were playing good. I think Fritz is a little bit underrated for this match but I expect Sascha win it in 3 or 2 tight sets. In the SFs, he will play against Basilashvili or Tsitsipas. Tsitsipas is not playing well. He could have lost against Fognini (2-6, 6-3, 6-4) in the 2nd round, and he could have lost against De Miñaur in the 3rd round (6-7, 7-6, 6-2). De Miñaur was in a really, really bad form and that reflects how poor Tsitsipas has been playing recently. It's also hard to forget how he did in the US Open... Having said that, I wouldn't be shocked if he loses against Basilashvili. I saw a big part of Niko against Ramos. Ramos was serving for the match but he lost his opportunity to close it in 2 sets and then he was destroyed by Basilashvili's winners. Since the Olympics, Sascha has lost only 1 match (20-1), and that was a 5 set match against Djokovic (SFs of the USO).
- CzechPunter and Simplicity11
-
2
-
Actually, it's the 1st time I talk to you, mate. As I said, let's stop this and let's see how we do in our next bets.
-
@mark22 I completely agree with Czech here, this is getting ridiculous. Let's stop this and let's see how we both do in our next bets, right?
-
2 hours ago, mark22 said:
Azarenka:Pegula 6:4 6:2
as you can see my doubts were on point obviously.. I comment only what I see by myself, Sasnovich was very far from winning the match, no need for you to "analyse" every point of the match. In 1st set Azarenka gifted her 2 or 3 points at 5:2, so she wouldn't even come to BP in that game. In 2nd set she gave up many chances again, so it's luck that she even covered HC. I don't know how she played against Kvitova, but it looks that even Svitolina was awful against Pegula.
I think you missed this part, my friend:
"Moreover, when Azarenka was leading the 2nd set (5-2), Sasnovich held her serve comfortably (to 15) in the next game, and then she broke Azarenka in the first chance she had (to 30) in the next game. In other words, Azarenka was never even close to win neither the 8th game (5-3) nor the 9th game (5-4). With that on mind, it's really, really unfair to say that it could easily have been 6-2".
I repeat, regardless of all the wasted opportunities from Sasnovich before the 5-2, you can't say that she was lucky to end that 2nd set 6-4, cause Azarenka was never even close from winning the 5-3 nor the 5-4. Sasnovich held her serve to 15 in the 8th game (5-3) and then she broke Azarenka to 30 in the next game (5-4). What is so difficult to understand...? In case Sasnovich would have faced BPs on that 8th game or Azarenka had MPs on that 9th game then I would say: "Yeah. It could have been 5-2 or 5-3, but that was not the case. So, the +5.5 line was won deservedly. Break Points converted: Sasnovich 3-8 (5 BPs wasted), Azarenka 6-9 (3 BPs wasted). So, you're also wrong at saying that Azarenka wasted many chances. Sasnovich wasted more.
I don't care about the Pegula match. I'm talking about the bets I posted myself. I know Sasnovich was far from winning that match, I'm talking about the GH and your comment about how lucky was Sasnovich to lose that 2nd set 6-4 and not 6-2.
By the way. You liked Khachanov (-1.5 Sets) and Karatsev. Khachanov has lost in 2 sets and Karatsev only has won 4 games in the entire match. Are you going to make a review on those matches, too? I bet you won't. It's really easy to make these kind of posts once the match is over. I have never done that in my entire life. Sometimes I have made posts telling why I did not like a bet, but I always have done that before the match started, never when it was finished. It's not well seen, mate. Have you ever received a post commenting that your bet was not good after the match was over? I don't think so.
-
5 hours ago, mark22 said:
but it could easily be 6:2 6:3
2 hours ago, mark22 said:Yeah it doesn´t mean much if you are close in every game but you lose it unfortunately..
I forgot about this part.
It's unfair to say that the 2nd set could "easily" have been 6-2. Let me explain why. First of all, Azarenka did not have a single comfortable service game on that set. She held her serve 3 times and she lost it 2 times. The 3 times she held her serve, she had to face a BP in one game and there were Deuces in the other 2 games. As you can see, she did not have a single comfortable service game.
Sasnovich held her serve 2 times and she lost it 3 times. The 2 times she held her serve she did comfortably (there were neither Break Points nor Deuces). In relation to the 3 service games she lost, there were Deuces in 2 of them. Conclusion: unlike Vika, Sasnovich had at least 2 comfortable service games. That's why I said it was not fair to say that it could easily have been 6-2. Moreover, when Azarenka was leading the 2nd set (5-2), Sasnovich held her serve comfortably (to 15) in the next game, and then she broke Azarenka in the first chance she had (to 30) in the next game. In other words, Azarenka was never even close to win neither the 8th game (5-3) nor the 9th game (5-4). With that on mind, it's really, really unfair to say that it could easily have been 6-2.
5 hours ago, mark22 said:What Azarenka showed was pretty good and way different than you commented her previous match
Azarenka did not play well against Kvitova, trust me. That match was horrible. Both players did a lot of errors and served really bad. Kvitova at least had an "excuse", as she had physical problems. At the beginning of the 1st set she received medical treatment on her thigh. After that, Kvitova was forced to play much more aggressive and that led her to do more errors. Imagine how bad was Azarenka, that she struggled to beat an injured Kvitova. I don't understand what are you trying to say with that. You have said that Azarenka played well against Sasnovich, but what that has to do with her previous matches?
-
29 minutes ago, mark22 said:
this was second worse 2nd serve points won in last 50 matches for Sasnovich!
That’s brutal. And the players he faced: Halep, Raducanu, MC Osorio, Rybakina, Keys, Mertens, Tsurenko, Rybakina,… 41-58% of points won with 2nd serve against all those players. 26% of points won with 2nd serve against Azarenka. That was frustrating.
-
2 hours ago, mark22 said:
Took the bet on Sasnovich from you 2 guys and I have to comment now since I´m more in ATP and feeling about bet was good
I watched first set. What Azarenka showed was pretty good and way different than you commented her previous match. Fortunatelly match ended with void bet, but it could easily be 6:2 6:3 and way from HC line.. what I also noticed like you mentioned, Sasnovich serve was very bad and she lost most of points because of it, in rallies she was even with Azarenka or sometimes even better.
Yep, the reason why Sasnovich lost that match was her poor serve. That's unquestionable. The problem was that she did not serve bad in her previous matches here... So, that was something I wasn't expecting when I placed the bets. Just take a look at her serve stats against Halep. She played with a 82% of 1st serves. She won the 63% of points with 1st serve, and the 58% of points with 2nd serve. If I see a player doing something well in 3 straight matches I have to assume that she will do the same in her next game.
I agree with your view, but when you say that it easily could have been a 6-2, 6-3 you are forgetting about all the opportunities that Sasnovich wasted to break Vika's serve, and they were not few. Sasnovich wasted more break points than Vika, but there were also a lot of Deuces in Vika's service games, that she managed to save. That was also a big difference between them, Vika just played better the crucial points. In my case, the games handicap bet it's been won cause I took the +5.5 line, but I lost the other 2, so it was a bad choice anyway.
- CzechPunter and Simplicity11
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Foo_Fighter said:
Lloyd Harris to win a set at 1.8 with bet365
Don't know why Ruud is considered such a heavy favorite against Harris tonight. Both players are at their best, Harris is the better server, Ruud is probably the better retriever. Kind of reminds me of David Ferrer in a way. At these odds, I'm going with the young South African to win at least a set.
Good luck.
First of all, I have to say that I also took that bet, but I did not post it. After seeing Ruud reaching miraculously the TB, I was expecting the worse. It would have been really unfair if Harris had lost that first set! I also did not understand why the market went that strong on Ruud at those odds. I guess people gave too much importance to that big win over Norrie... and they forgot how he struggled to beat Murray and Grigor, plus how good Harris was playing.
-
Sasnovich vs Azarenka - Over 19.5 Games at 1.80 with Pinnacle
Sasnovich (+ 5.5 Games) to beat Azarenka at 1.68 with Pinnacle
Sasnovich to beat Azarenka at 4.01 with PinnacleI said on my last pick that Halep was being overrated. She was not playing good and Sasnovich's last results were suggesting that she would have chances to upset Halep. Well..., I only have seen a short part of that match, but Sasnovich has beat her in 2 sets (7-5, 6-4). She has won all her 3 matches here in straight sets (MC Osorio, Raducanu and Halep). Azarenka's last results are not good. She has not been able to win more than 2 straight matches since she did in Berlin, 4 months ago. In her 1st match here, she benefited from Linette's injury to reach the 2nd round. Now, she has benefited from Kvitova's physical problems to reach the 3rd round (Kvitova needed medical treatment on her thigh in the 1st set). I have seen the whole match and I have to say that it has been really bad. Both players have played really aggressive (as it was expected), but the amount of errors has been excessive. It's also remarkable how bad both players have been with their serve. The first set has been a nightmare. Vika is the best player, but Sasnovich has showed more, much more. These players have never played before.
- four-leaf, CzechPunter, Foo_Fighter and 3 others
-
6
-
On 10/8/2021 at 1:32 PM, darko08 said:
Harris (-2.5 Games) to beat Davidovich Fokina at 1.85 with Unibet
Fokina is in a really bad moment. Since the Olympics he only has won 2 of the 7 matches he has played, and those 2 victories have been against Simon and Steve Johnson... He even lost against Trungelliti in the 1st round of the USO. He has been really lucky to face Johnson in the 1st round here, otherwise he probably would have lost again. Harris is in the best moment of his career. He did not play well in San Diego (he struggled to beat Eubanks and he lost against Schwartzmann, after requiring a MTO). Having said this, Harris is still the better player in this moment.
Dimitrov (-3.5 Games) to beat Altmaier at 1.94 with Unibet
Dimitrov is miles away from the player he was, but the difference between him and Altmaier is still huge. Altmaier beat Querrey (6-2, 6-4) in his 1st match here, but I would like to point 2 things. Firstly, Querrey is in a really bad moment (7 losing streak). Secondly, Altmaier played his 1st match on hard of the year. Just 1 week ago, he was playing a challenger in Peru (on clay), so he has not prepared this tournament at all. As I said, Dimitrov is not at his best, but he won some matches in San Diego (Fucsovics and Karatsev), and he was close to beat Ruud in the SFs (6-4, 4-6, 6-4). If nothing strange happens, Dimitrov should win this match comfortably.
Schwartzmann (2-0) to beat Cressy at 1.90 with Unibet
Cressy has had a lot of problems to reach this round. He even had problems to beat Moriya (6-4, 4-6, 6-3) in his 1st match here, despite being a huge favorite (1.22). He also had problems to beat Coucaud (7-5, 6-7, 6-2) and Djere (6-7, 6-1, 7-5). It seems Cressy's big serve is not as effective as it is in other hard courts. Schwartzmann has not showed his best tennis recently and he was pathetic during the Davis Cup, but I think he should take advantage of these courts slowness to beat Cressy.
If I don't get profits with these 3 I won't place more bets until the Paris Masters, which is played in November. GL to all of you!
I said I would keep placing bets in case of getting profits with these 3 bets. Dimitrov (6-4, 6-2) and Harris (6-3, 6-3) have delivered but Schwartzmann has dropped a set (I did not see that match, but he was really close from losing it). That little man has disappointed me many times. Let me give you some good advice guys, "stubbornness" is a really bad quality for a punter, get rid of it.
Sasnovich vs Halep - Over 19.5 Games at 1.83 with Unibet
I saw the whole 1st set Halep played against Kostyuk and the first games of the 2nd one. She won (7-6, 6-1) but she did not impress me. Kostyuk did not a play a great match. Actually, I saw her a little bit shaky, hitting bad the ball in many occasions. Despite that, she could have won the 1st set.
I haven't seen Sasnovich but she has won her first 2 matches here without problems. She has beat MC Osorio (6-0, 6-4) and Raducanu (6-2, 6-4). I think Halep is a little bit overrated for this match. She's far from her best form and she was disappointing in the USO. She could have lost against an injured Rybakina in the 3rd round. Then, she was destroyed by Svitolina in the 4th round. I like this line cause I think Sasnovich can upset Halep more than the odds suggest. These players have played only 1 time before. It was in Wimbledon (2019). Halep won that match (6-4, 7-5). Then, she won the whole thing.- Foo_Fighter and CzechPunter
-
2
-
Harris (-2.5 Games) to beat Davidovich Fokina at 1.85 with Unibet
Fokina is in a really bad moment. Since the Olympics he only has won 2 of the 7 matches he has played, and those 2 victories have been against Simon and Steve Johnson... He even lost against Trungelliti in the 1st round of the USO. He has been really lucky to face Johnson in the 1st round here, otherwise he probably would have lost again. Harris is in the best moment of his career. He did not play well in San Diego (he struggled to beat Eubanks and he lost against Schwartzmann, after requiring a MTO). Having said this, Harris is still the better player in this moment.
Dimitrov (-3.5 Games) to beat Altmaier at 1.94 with Unibet
Dimitrov is miles away from the player he was, but the difference between him and Altmaier is still huge. Altmaier beat Querrey (6-2, 6-4) in his 1st match here, but I would like to point 2 things. Firstly, Querrey is in a really bad moment (7 losing streak). Secondly, Altmaier played his 1st match on hard of the year. Just 1 week ago, he was playing a challenger in Peru (on clay), so he has not prepared this tournament at all. As I said, Dimitrov is not at his best, but he won some matches in San Diego (Fucsovics and Karatsev), and he was close to beat Ruud in the SFs (6-4, 4-6, 6-4). If nothing strange happens, Dimitrov should win this match comfortably.
Schwartzmann (2-0) to beat Cressy at 1.90 with Unibet
Cressy has had a lot of problems to reach this round. He even had problems to beat Moriya (6-4, 4-6, 6-3) in his 1st match here, despite being a huge favorite (1.22). He also had problems to beat Coucaud (7-5, 6-7, 6-2) and Djere (6-7, 6-1, 7-5). It seems Cressy's big serve is not as effective as it is in other hard courts. Schwartzmann has not showed his best tennis recently and he was pathetic during the Davis Cup, but I think he should take advantage of these courts slowness to beat Cressy.
If I don't get profits with these 3 I won't place more bets until the Paris Masters, which is played in November. GL to all of you!
-
Brantmeier to beat Trevisan at 2.55 with Pinnacle
Trevisan has beat Baptiste in straight sets in her 1st match here. She has been playing on clay tournaments since she lost in the 2nd round of the USO, so this has been her 1st match on hard since then. I saw her in the Final of the BBVA Open International (Valencia). She beat Galfi in 3 sets, but it was a really tough match for her. Prior to that, she also reached the Final in Kalsruhe, but she lost against Sherif in 2 sets (6-2, 6-3). It's obvious that Trevisan is in a good shape right now, but her game is clearly made for clay courts, not hard courts (she's a solid baseliner and she's also a good net player, but she lacks power on her shots and her serve is weak). In fact, she has a negative record on hard (26-28) and she only has won 3 of the 10 matches she has played this year on this surface. Brantmeier has just turned 17, but she has already proved that she can win matches like this one. She was only 1 match away from qualifying for the main draw of the USO. She beat Govortsova and Sramkova, but she finally lost against Schmiedlova (7-6, 6-3). She has beat Boulter (150-92 on hard) in straight sets (7-5, 6-2), in her 1st match here. With her aggressive style and her powerful forehand, Brantmeier should take the lead of the points. She also has a decent serve, better than Trevisan's serve. So, IMO, if she can hold her nerves, she definitely can win this match. I have taken this one at low stakes for 2 reasons. Firstly, Brantmeier lacks experience. Secondly, Trevisan has beat Baptiste easily in her 1st match here (6-2, 6-4).
-
18 hours ago, Torque said:
Rublev still has a long way to go. First serve numbers not good enough - which has been a problem for a long time - and lacking on the mental side as well. I don't see any game intelligence at all it's just see ball, hit ball - which because he has talent is enough to win a lot of tournaments but it's not going to be enough if he wants to make the most of his potential. Severely lacking at the net as well, both in terms of when to come in and also volleying. With all those deficiencies it's incredible he's ranked where he is.
2 ATP Masters Finals (Montecarlo and Cincinnati), 2 ATP 500 Finals (Rotterdam and Halle), 1 ATP Masters SF (Miami), 1 ATP 500 SF (Dubai), 1 ATP 250 SF (Doha), QFs in the AO, etc. That's the answer to your last question. Winning matches and titles is how you get a good ranking, as simple as that.
The reason why he lost yesterday had nothing to do with serve stats. Actually, his serve stats were better than Norrie's stats (more aces, less double faults and a better % on points won with 1st and 2nd serve,...). Rublev destroyed Norrie in the 1st set. Rublev won that set 6-3 but it could have been 6-1 (Rublev wasted 3 BPs when he was already leading the set 4-1). The game that changed it all was the 3rd game of the 2nd set. Rublev had 3 BPs to took the lead of the 2nd set (and most likely, to finish the match), but he wasted all of them. Wasting all those break opportunities provoked 2 things. 1. Rublev lost his mind. 2. Norrie started to believe on himself and he increased his game considerably. It's just incredible how just a single game can change the outcome of a whole match. But that's what happened.
Actually, these completely unexpected twists occur on all kind of sports. I'm not an expert on soccer but I also watch some soccer matches occasionally. Today I have seen Bayern Munich playing against Eintracht Frankfurt. Bayern players were attacking constantly and they took the lead in the 1st half. Well..., they have lost the match (1-2). I guess their victory was at 1.09-1.10 or something like that. Imagine how frustrating had to be that match for all those bettors who had Bayern to win it!
-
Rublev to win the ATP San Diego at 1.83 with bet365
Rublev will play against Norrie in the SFs and then he will play against Ruud or Dimitrov. I haven't much to say. Rublev has destroyed Nakashima (6-2, 6-1) and Schwartzmann (6-1, 7-5). I also have seen Norrie a little bit, and I have to say that I saw him really well. He has beat Koepfer, Evans and Shapo without dropping a single set, but he came here from a 4 losing streak and I think Rublev is just playing too good right now. I'm not worried for that big win over Shapo cause the canadian has been a mess since Wimbledon and now he's free falling. As I said, if Rublev beats Norrie he will face Dimitrov or Ruud. Ruud is the favorite player according to the odds. He has improved a lot on this surface but it's important to remark that his favorite surface is clay and he has never played an ATP final on hard. Regardless of who wins that match Rublev will be the big favorite.
- CzechPunter and four-leaf
-
2
-
Giron to beat Munar at 1.53 with bet365
The main reason for this pick is obvious. Munar is a pure claycourter and his record on indoor hard courts is horrible (9-20). Giron record on indoors is clearly better (43-33), and he beat Rinderknech and De Minaur the last week, in Metz (indoor).
- CzechPunter and four-leaf
-
2
-
Bencic is trying to qualify for the WTA Finals so her commitment is beyond doubt. She said she will play all she can until Indian Wells, then she will see if it is possible or not, and then reevaluate from there. I saw Samsonova's first match here. She wasn't great but her big serve saved her from many dangerous situations. I did not see her against Dodin but it seems she could have lost that match (2 TBs and Dodin wasted a lot of BPs...). I agree with four-leaf, Bencic should win but the odds have dropped and there's no value in betting on her at 1.35, when she was at 1.50-1.55. If I were you I will wait and try to get better odds betting on live.
- Teodore and CzechPunter
-
1
-
1
Tennis Tips - April 25 - May 1
in Tennis Betting Tips & Predictions
Posted
Read the ATP rules for the Lucky Losers cause you don't know how it works. Different rules are applied considering the moment of the vacancy. If it's produced when the last round of the qualifiaction has not finished it will be drawn. If it's produced after the last round of the qualification has finished it will be the better ranked player who will enter as a LL (if he has signed before the main draw matches start).