lelit

Yet again I don't really understand your thinking here? You totally throw out pure hopeful thinking.

By all means @CzechPunter I think you're wrong on Kenin, perhaps you missed out on her raise of level and I noticed she had the same determination as when she won AO20. Kenin could have turned a serious corner this week and Kasatkina you say has been better all year long. Well you can't live on past merits. Now is what matters not how both played last 6 months.

Give it a rest 🙈
I can’t take anything you say seriously since you said there’s no such thing as value 😂

My tip WON. 
I must explain why i rated Feliciana or Feliciano Lopez as an operetta. Well, if you bring back Federer, he will win the half players of the current top 100 ranked. As he is now, without practicing at all, just with his tennis attitude. But he would lose to other fifty percent! Sure thing! Because he is lacking training, fitness, and motivation. Federer is wise enough not to continue to play as just an average player losing to anyone passing from his road. Lopez is just a tennis cheater. He continue to plays for money. He won against Thomson who was bored and unmotivated. I watched about 10 minutes of that match, and i said to my self what a joke is this one. 
I will teach you  a lot about tennis. So, don't rush to criticize me, because i am well equipped with observation tools
Tomorrow i come here with some new tips! . 

@Smiles Tennis As the pool of grass matches is that much smaller than other surfaces I'm wondering how valid your system is for this surface. As an example, Lisicki has historically been very good on grass, but hasn't been a factor at all on the main tour for quite a few years now. I appreciate that backing Lisicki might also have to do more with opposing Garcia and her record on the grass, but at the same time for me this is where systematic betting can fall down as Lisicki's data is surely out of date and not much use when assessing her chances today. Anyway, best of luck with what you're doing and I hope it's successful.

The results seem to be much better when you do a reasoned out write up. Algorithms are not aware that the players are humans.

The value theory is bullshit. Value is when you deal once for ever, for example when you buy a car, a house in auction, or similar. Where is the value on betting? You win and after you lose. You win a 'value' bet and after you lose because you are addicted idiot. Never tell me about your bullshit value theories. Thanks

Yes, okay, but if any sports person, any tennis player thinks that he/she is patriot, then why they don't donate money for the orphans of the Ukraine? Besides, they do NOTHING useful in their lives aside from hitting balls with a racket...What a shameful thing! To hit a ball by a racket and we the idiots pay them tons of money...Or to hit the ball by the foot and the cannibals on stands cheering them..and  they pay them again tons of money...This is unfair and not viable. The end of the world is NEAR, thanks.
I hope Ruud to give the lesson to Djokovic today. I noticed that Djokovic wins his opponents by the mental power and attitude more that any other tennis weapon. For me, Djokovic is not the same player as he was in Australia open. He looks much weaker in my eyes. I hope Ruud not to be scared as Katchanov who lost the tie break second set 7-0!
I think Ruud to win at least a set is stunning, however i have some reasons to compare this final with the 2015 final between Djokovic and Wawrinka.
Let's see...

I mean the colours of the Ukraine flag at her hat is not provoking political action? I am neutral, actually i hate both USA and Russia, why somebody from sports to provoke my ideas? 
Or it was just a random colour selection? Okay if it was a matter of randomness i leave it here, and i go to check the men's final. 

I am sad for Muchova. Bad reactions in crucial moments cost the title to her. The robot opponent from Poland is finally beatable. Muchova proved that. Let's see the coming future for both.
And something i didn't like from the robot, is that she tried to make politics inside the final. Who are you madam robot to make politics? Anyone who only knows to hit the ball by racket is capable to make politics? Of course not. Ridiculous action by the robot. 
 

Alexandrova is very hit and miss in my experience. The kind of player who can beat anyone but also lose to anyone.

Best of luck @Swami but personally I can't have the words Alexandrova and reliable in the same sentence.

And @neilovan and others: What makes you guys bet on accumulators? Why not pick the best odds available for each individual match?

Seems like there's not that much attention focused on today's finals, and I understand why. Swiatek's style and attitude is hardly exciting, though she's one of the top professionals in terms of approach and I think she's going to win today. Would be massive for Africa to see Jabeur win, though.

Maybe we should focus on information regarding visible or potential physical problems as tennis is such a physical sport and performance obviously can decrease dramatically due to injuries. Also, while recent results are available on many websites, such information is not so easy to get, you need to watch matches (does the movement change? what happens during medical timeouts?) or pick it up somewhere else, e.g. internet forums.
And it's not just the player itself but also the opponents in recent matches which are interesting. Here I'm wondering: Is Karan Khachanov the luckiest player ever in a Grand Slam? He was about to be 2-1 behind against Jack Draper until Draper got an injury which made him retire from the match. Then, he won in 5 sets against a physically struggling Carreno Busta who already had a long medical timeout with a physio helping out in the match before. And then he got lucky to play against a Nick Kyrgios who very obviously had a physical problem (movement/calf) and took an early medical timeout.
So, I'm not that impressed by Khachanov's performance, he should not have reached this stage of the tournament. Ruud's level is generally higher, even on hard court and he tends to beat players he should beat.
In terms of Carlos Alcaraz, it seems more of a guessing game how much he might struggle due to fatigue. Maybe he will recover surprisingly well due to being just 19 years old and very fit. But this is not guaranteed and the likelihood of him getting injured within the match should be higher than for other players who don't have such impressive, but also risky movement around the court.

Bencic and Kyrgios with no issues, and I'm backing Bencic to beat Williams at 1.50 with Unibet again, Serena just isn't on the right level anymore. She did well to score a win in the first round, but Bencic actually has some power, unlike NPD, who's a clay courter by trade and who doesn't have any weapons on this surface.

Last year Bonzi won six challengers and five of them were on hardcourt...in this career he played 300+ matches on hard and 200- on clay...I wouldn't necessarily call him a clay court player

I backed [email protected] to win over Raducanu. I saw her yesterday and I have to say she's changed something in her game. I mean she doen't look anymore for a winner whatever shot she takes, which is a good thing if you want to win consistently in the tour. On the other side of the net, Raducanu still struggling to find her way through her matches, the one against Osorio was awful, I don't see how she can be the fvourite in this match-up.

Please can you just stop making up excuses to everything I say?

Common now, I think we should all know enough about this sport to agree that ranking does not necessirily determine outcome. In fact, it does not determine outcome which is why the bookies remain firmly in business. There are a good number of lowly ranked players who are more talented than a number of highly ranked players but just lack consistency. Also some are just lowly ranked because they kind of play the game part-time like Kyrgios who only shows up late in the season. In my opinion ranking only becomes distinctive in the top 10 and around the fringe. Anything outside that bracket referring to 20-100+ might just come down to player match-ups and who is better on the day. Every player is ranked provisionally in the tipsters head and that is why you would not expect an experienced tipster to allow the ranking number influence his judgement. I was quite shocked you made the statement above pertaining to how on earth a player ranked 45 could lose so badly to another ranked 170. Additionally we also know that not all matches end up as competitive as we expect them to. Some players just come disinterested and go ahead to tank. A few of them might cheat in betting influenced games while some might just be moody on the day and not feel like even being there. There are endless reasons which can easily explain why a lower ranked player can beat a higher ranked player in various scenarios.

I've cleaned up the thread somewhat, and I was particularly disappointed by some of @neilovan's word usage, plenty of stuff that doesn't really belong to a discussion, no matter how heated it might be. Let's keep the hatred down, please, and keep the picks coming.
Myself, I fancy Noskova (+1.5 sets) to beat Cornet at 1.73 with Unibet. Big game and Cornet can easily crack. Agree with @yogg.

Ok? So? That makes you a loser in the long run. And you're betting on these small events expecting every big favourite to win and you come with excuses like this and does it make you win more in the end or less? I think you're losing pretty heavily and you don't seem very experienced either and you're not willing to listen to other members and you think people who critizise you are insulting you.

This thread should be called Neil's blog
Thread, where the author lists the names of tennis players who have unexpectedly failed him and there are recently, plenty of them ?

It would take hours of research to figure out the total odds of Torques today's investment, but he is an experienced investor