liquidglass
-
Posts
487 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by liquidglass
-
-
2 minutes ago, neilovan said:
LOL, both of them so bad it is amazing to see. Edmunds just unrecognizable from yesterday, must have more unforced errors than points won.
With all due respect I really think that you need to take a break to reset considering how badly you started out on Monday and then continuing into today on the same inflated confidence on picks that were totally lifeless. I believe your fundamentals are wrong - referring to how you begin and go through your thought cycle to arrive at conclusions. That is what you will need to reset to become a better tipster. There is only so much I cay say on a public platform. So i will leave it there for you to ponder over.
-
6 hours ago, neilovan said:
No, I disagree with you. The majority of your decision should be based on the experienced professional, who didn't get to be highly ranked by fluke..
A player ranked 175 is there for a reason, and you can't really base the majority of your decision on a rank outsider. The top players should win from these situations ... that's why they are top players. Where exactly are you going to watch #177 Selekhmeteva playing? They don't have ITF and woman's low level on TV here ( or in most other countries as well).
As for "knowing what is going to happen", I am just applying what I believe is a best "guess" based on my knowledge of the game, and looking at stats. If you have a source of 100% accuracy please let me know.
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.
-
This is certainly a case of semantics. The default mode of reasoning should be that trends always precede outcome or rather that trends give birth to outcome. Of course, there will always be a number of trends presumably working at one time to seemingly validate the outcome which could end up being wrong. However there is always an authentic trend or trends running that must validate the outcome. Some trends have a weekly life span, some have monthly or yearly life span and in some cases would have predated the match in question for even more than a year. This clearly supports the notion that "Outcome" is always constant since it has to conform to the trend.
Everything that happens in real time is of no consequence to the outcome which is fixed. It is the reason why my mindset unlike many in this game, is always set on finding the outcome that I already know exists out there. I employ my inner man along with a few other diagnostic tools to reach safe conclusions in most cases. Training your inner man to instinctively know can be a job of so many years of continuous learning. I have brought a whole lot of people to unlearn.....and then relearn under my stewardship opening them to a whole lot of control within their persons. -
Rybakina vs Jabeur
I think both have played confidently well throught this tournament and should come together to provide us the final that we expect. This certainly seems the right surface for Rybakina who has the sort of robust game to put anyone to the sword. I think her whole game found completeness in the last roundwhere she finally employed the ingredient that was always missing - Balls! This is what has stopped Karolina Pliskova from reaching the top - with a laid back game and indifferent attitude during the match. Whether Rybakina has fully overcome that aspect can still be open to question as this is a Wimbledon final. When on song I also feel that there is too much power and control behind the Rybakina shots to afford Jabeur any chance of slicing and dicing for profit. However trust Jabeur to capitalize to good effect if Rybakina slumps in error mode. In summary, considering that ranking points were cut out of Wimbledon and Russian and Belarusian players disqualified for no justifiable reason, I see that decision coming back to sting the organizers in the face with Rybakina skating to victory. For a person that was born and resides in Moscow, I see her putting a fly in the ointment. My verdict However will be Rybakina to win a set @ 4/9 Bet365. That should account for any mood swings within the match. Good luck all!!!
-
Everything about gambling in terms of what will happen during a match is delibrate and has all been comprehensively factored into the odds before the match. We see this when "market moves" transitions into "market forces". Every visual occurence in real time happens the way it does because it can not possibly have happened any other way. In other words everything happens deliberately to line up with an outcome that most certainly precedes the match before the first ball is struck. So I deem it complete rubbish for anyone to suggest that what a player did or did not do affected the outcome. The outcome is an invariable and is independent of whatever is tagged to it. I know that sounds confusingly deep. However it is a fact. It is the main reason why i do not entertain post-game explanations. This indulgence is brutal making no room for second best. You either get it right or wrong. It is that simple. Bookies do not entertain explanations and certainly do not pay out on nearly. I can defend this school of thought all day which is evidence based.
- charliepie and CzechPunter
-
1
-
1
-
2 hours ago, harry_rag said:
Does Djokovic to win and under 31.5 games at 13/10 look a decent bet?
It leapt out at me a bit (for what that’s worth) and seems standout compared to prices elsewhere. Maybe closer to evens than that?
From my experience, it just does not seem the right way to go because that is where they want you to go. The bookies have carefully carved out this cul-de-sac which only offers one choice that will be followed thoughtlessy by many. I am not saying that it cannot happen, it is just that knowing that the bookies never really pay everybody, it will just be more disciplined to avoid the game totally or go over in total games with no particular winner picked. If you are brave enough on medium stakes Norrie to steal a set by gifted or hoodini means would seem reasonable.
-
@ Torque, Firstly I do not understand how this points system works which makes me want to ask how much a point is worth in terms of real money. I constantly see you re-backing pre-tournament favorites or strengthening your position as you would prefer to term it and wonder if you are really staking real money or just playing a private game of confidence boosting.
Secondly with due respect, I just see you to be constantly chasing on a daily basis with no solid belief behind the picks you put out. You just seem to be running a daily feel good blog within this forum where you just put out these recreational picks and then go into the ritual of providing a contigency explanation of why the picks did or did not do well. Left to me, I do not see the importance of the after-game postmortems as every game is different and should not be used to judge the next, unless of course it just aids you in the release of negative energy which consequently can have a domino effect on other readers. In fact, I think the most important requirement for successful tipping is to ensure that a person reboots their memory after viewing a previous match or previous matches to be able to achieve an unbiased analysis of the current matches in focus . When that is adhered to, you come to realise that every player performance no matter how seemingly convincing has limitations, and can only be used for the judgement of future matches to a certain extent.
Finally, I really cannot understand how you would constantly strengthen your position on two favorites that are in no way outstanding either in relation to the surface or the way this tournament has been unfolding and other hard to ignore circumstantial matters. Or is it because that is the only plausible reachable conclusion devoid of hard thinking? I am almost certain that Swiatek will not win this tournament while Djokovic while with major competition running alongside him coupled with the excess mental baggage remains very very iffy.- lelit, CzechPunter and harry_rag
-
1
-
2
-
Keys vs Krejcikova Keys and Krejcikova were both fortunate to walk through injured opponents in the last round. As they say, a win is a win and it matters not how that win was achieved. Since there is no obvious head to head to follow, I have been trying to retrace looking back for clues that might lead me in the right direction. My thinking here is that whoever has the consistent weight of shot-making playing first strike tennis wins. I have a good feeling that this will end in straight sets once I can find the right horse to be on. I believe that Madison's problem over the years has been shot selection and consistency with her accuracy. I think she has gotten this far for a reason and will go on to prove it. She should have the heavier and more penetrating shots which should carry her through in the end. Verdict: Madison keys to win
-
4 hours ago, Torque said:
I'm entirely capable of defining the word 'acceptable'. The only reason McEnroe came to be 'loved' as you put it is because he became a parody. People began to find his behaviour funny and didn't take it seriously and he began to play up to that, but that certainly wasn't the prevailing attitude when he was first doing it and people found it offensive. As for 'jumping in' with my opinion, that's entirely my prerogative just as it was yours to give your opinion. We clearly differ in our thoughts about what constitutes acceptable behaviour and that's fine. But the idea you get to say what you think without anybody else responding with a contrary opinion isn't what this forum is about.
From my perspective, just because something is prevalent doesn't make it acceptable which is what you seem to be suggesting. There are lots of examples of things in society that go on all the time but which nobody would call acceptable. Comparing smashing a racket with removing a football shirt after scoring a goal isn't a fair comparison either. When that happens it's celebrating something positive. I don't think you can say the same about smashing a racket.
Firstly, I need to remind you that we live in an evolving world where some things that were not accepted many years ago are accepted today. Perhaps the grey area here lies with trying to find an appropriate definition for the word "acceptable" which I feel certain that you have misunderstood.
I believe the word "acceptable" is used in today's society interchangeably depending on the point you are trying to make. In the example being discussed smashing your racket can earn you a penalty by law but the act itself is not deemed as offensive as you try to make it sound. Nobody makes the news headlines for smashing their rackets and in most cases the incident is quickly forgotten by everyone. Many years ago boobs hanging out was offensive and degrading to women, now it is mostly out there with pride hanging freely for appreciation. Even so there are people who will still term it as offensive. So we clearly see that the word acceptable is relative. My reason for responding to the original post was that I felt that the point of Zverev smashing his racket was not worthy of being mentioned as it was a normal everyday occurence. I do not know where you have got the idea that I love to say things that I do not want anyone to challenge. Wrong! I am always up for a good debate so long as the challenger can defend whatever they are putting forward. I think your attempt to correct the notion of a player taking off their shirt as different from a person smashing their racket constituted a faux pas reverting to your original comment. You said......(your words) that it was obvious that smashing of the racket was unacceptable which was why it earned the player a caution from the referee, yet in a sudden turnaround you say that the player taking off their jersey is different because it is done in celebration, forgetting that it is still an offence punishable by law. So what is your point? What really is the acid test for determining acceptability? And if you ever come to reason and see it for what it actually is, you would realise that "acceptable" is a word coated in ambiguity and only as relevant as subject being discussed.
-
21 minutes ago, Torque said:
It's not an acceptable part of the game. If it were, players wouldn't be penalised for doing it. And it does set a bad example like @neilovansaid.
Again I beg to differ. I do not know what you classify as acceptable in your opinion. the fact that players get penalised in no way amplifies your point. That is why a person like McEnroe was popular even for his offensive rantings on court. The tennis world came to love him for that and would even get a buzz from it. It is not like you are talking about something entirely despicable here. In football, a player will score a goal and intentionally take of his jersey to purposely collect a yellow card. It is the norm You need to be sure you are quite capable of defining the word "acceptable" in relation to the topic being discussed before jumping in.
-
3 hours ago, neilovan said:
Very surprised by how poorly Zverev played. I didn't bet it, but expected him to win. Didn't like him smashing the racquet to pieces after the 1st game of the 2nd set. It's such a bad example from a 'pro'. Unacceptable behavior! Never seen Nadal break a racquet!
For me Zverev and Tsitsipas are very similar. 2nd tier (when compared to Djoko,Nadal, Medvedev) with some internal issues, and suspect decision making and shot selection.
Just watched the Halep match. To win 16 points in a row and be on such a roll going into the 3rd set ... and then give it away playing meek and mild tennis, with crazy unforced errors. That's Halep. Every ball hit right back down the middle of the court with a reactive instead of proactive style. She deserved what she got. Cornet cost me two bets this Aussie open (beating Muguruza and now Halep), but she did keep it together in that 3rd set.
I think you are overreacting with the Zverev racket smashing episode. Racket smashing is a very acceptable part of the game depicting a release of bad energy which fans love. It is just another game assessory like groaning, a loud short scream at the end of a brutally fought out point or even smashing a ball out of the stadium in annoyance. Players react differently. Then again, we have never even seen Nadal express any outward emotion of any sort. He just gets on with the game in his own way.
-
Halep vs Cornet One of the matches tonight that has caught my interest. I really think the price on Halep to win is ridiculously high. I must admit that Halep wins matches that she is supposed to win and as much as I admire her current 8match run streak, I was not entirely impressed by the opposition. Cornet on the other hand has started the year well with a number of impressive victories. The match against Osaka at Melbourne, and Muguruza and Zidansek in the second and third round respectively is my gauge to know what to expect from her in the next hour or so. Importantly enough her head to head with Halep stands at 3-1 with a game superiority evident in the sets played. I am expecting Cornet to be her usual defiant grinding self and give Halep a good run for her money. I will suggest for parlays Cornet +7.5 @4/11 (Alternative handicaps Paddy Power) Verdict: Over 17.5 games @ Paddy Power 4/7
- CzechPunter and Foo_Fighter
-
2
-
10 minutes ago, U.K. TennisGirl said:
You ‘very much dare’ us to name the winner of the men’s tournament?! Ok then. Medvedev. Obviously. If you used that phrase to ask us to predict the semi-finalists in the women’s tournament, you’d have a point, but the men’s tournament is way more routine, and it’s more than likely going to be Daniil Medvedev who is the last man standing.
As Torque said, describing Shapovalov against Zverev as a ‘pick ‘em’ is completely wide of the mark, and totally ignores what Zverev has achieved over the past six months, and how he has played during that time. You may think that Shapovalov has a better chance than the bookies have given him - and you stand to make a lot of money, depending on to what extent that comes true - but the match is certainly not a ‘pick ‘em.’ Zverev is rightfully a substantial favourite.
@UK Tennis girl. all this banter comes down to opinion. There is nothing official in place stopping me from expressing my opinion in calling that match a pick em. my opinion is my property. Pick em simply means that in my opinion anyone could win the match and the odds did not do justice in trying to reflect the possible outcome. This here is really a case of english language and translation. Once again Zverev is the favorite but from the stats i presented, this is a pick em for all its worth.
-
12 minutes ago, Torque said:
Because there was no need for you take the tone you did in your original reply. If English isn't your first language then that could mean you didn't mean to sound the way you did.
I meant no offence in suggesting English isn't your first language and I certainly wasn't going to assume it wasn't just because of the way you write.
Would you not say that my tone was warranted? Perhaps you need to read over what you initially sent me again. To suggest that english might not be my first language on the back of what you deemed as a misuse of words or rather a handicapped translation of what I was trying to get accross, was a bit naughty, overtly rude and insultive. I deliberately chose to respond in a civil way that was designed to echo how I actually felt about the comment you made. Simple.
-
Azarenka vs Krejcikova This is another match that I would be looking forward to watching to see how their contrasting styles work out. Azarenka has has a very smooth run up to this point and I will be expecting that run to continue. Head to Head is 1-0 Azarenka which in actual fact was a comprehensive victory. I feel Azarenka's game is similar in a way to Ostapenko's where both take the ball early on the rise. This will certainly cause Krejcikova a great deal of difficulty adapting to the Azarenka game and unlike the Ostapenko game, there will be no way back here. Azarenka to win.
- mark22 and CzechPunter
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Torque said:
I'm hoping English is your second language @liquidglass because your reply comes across as quite aggressive which I like to think wasn't your intention.
Interesting even in your deceptive attempt to be passively aggressive. How does my aggression aid you to determine whether or not English is my first or second language? You really should have been able to easily figure that our from my parlance. Should I say I am disappointed?? No. I am not!
-
24 minutes ago, Torque said:
Nice write-up @liquidglassbut I can't agree about a couple of things and forgive me if exactly what you mean has been lost in translation - I'm assuming English isn't your first language. Firstly, that this is a 'pick 'em' match. By definition that means the chances of either player winning is roughly equal, but for me and I would imagine a lot of others Sascha is a definite and worthy favourite. Secondly, that this match is 'on his racket'. If anything, it's on Sascha's racket. If he plays like he can and bearing in mind Shapovalov's sketchy play so far I can only see one winner.
Firstly, I am stupendiously astonished to think that after reading over 3 years worth of my writeups you will even come close to thinking that English may not be my first language? Excuse me sir!! I meant what I meant. Nothing was lost in translation as you have rightfully defined the term "pick em" yourself. The fact that the bookies have made Zverev favorite in no way makes it wrong for for one to have a different view of the matchup. In my opinion Zverev is rightfully favorite by virtue of his world ranking as opposed to the head to head matchup. We saw a similar situation yesterday where the bookies had made Vondrousova (41) favorite over Sabalenka (2) which I wrote about. I had clearly pointed out that they were wrong which it turned out to be. I think it is alright for us to have different views about a match without it having to be assumed as lost in translation. I truly believe that with regards to this match, when putting world rankings aside and taking into consideration the very high quality of tennis that has been played so far, and the head to head between these two as indicated in my writeup, this is certainly a pick em in my opinion.
-
Zverev vs Shapovalov I really cannot begin to tell you how excited I am about the way this tournament has been progressing with all guns blazing from the true contenders for the title. In fact as it stands, there are more than a handful of them with very strong claims to the title. I can categorically tell you now, forget all the hype about Medvedev this or Medvedev that. This tournament is wide open for the fittest to survive. This tournament has now become an intensely run race between the next generation stars and I very much dare you to name the winner come Sunday week.
This matchup right here is anything but predictable and despite Zverev being favorite by virtue of his ranking as the no2 player in the world, I will prefer to see this as a "Pick em" kind of match where i expect gutsy and instinctive shot-making to win the day. The head to head stands at 4-2 Zverev. If I can ignore matches from 2018 where I can say that Shapovalov had not reached full maturity, this match can be said to be on his racket
Head-to-head: 4 - 2
Year Tournament Match S Surface 1 2 3 4 5 Round 2021 ATP Cup Zverev 2 65 6 7 - Shapovalov 1 7 3 64 2020 ATP Cup Shapovalov 2 6 6 - Zverev 0 2 2 2019 Paris - Masters Shapovalov 2 6 5 6 R16 Zverev 1 2 7 2 2018 Madrid - Masters Zverev 2 6 6 SF Shapovalov 0 4 1 2017 Laver Cup Look at the above chart for a minute beginning from the 2019 Paris Masters where Shapovalov won 2 sets to one. observe the scoreline of the first and third sets (6-2 respectively). They meet next at the ATP Cup in 2020, the same similar scoreline resurfices indicating the game superiority of Shapovalov over Zverev at least to a reasonable degree as is evident. In the 2021 ATP Cup it was evident that Zverev had stepped up but certainly not so much as warranting this kind of favoritism a year later. What does this amount to statistically in numbers? Notable takeaways from this head to head is Shapovalov's ability to attack the second serve. Some might argue that he might not get many chances since Zverev's first serve has been consistently above 70% in every match in Melbourne so far. However, Zverev's first-serves-in figure has never been higher than 66% in a match against Shapovalov which goes to show, to some extent, the pressure Shapovalov is able to exert. Shapovalov is already battle-hardened having already had a very profitable workout at the ATP Cup and having come through tough matches with Reilly Opelka and Soon Woo Kwon and I can see that continuing here. As usual I am going to opt for an investment safe option of over 33.5 games alternative handicap @4/7 paddy power. The reason for this choice is that I feel that this total can be surpassed with consistent potent serving from both even inside 3 sets. Good luck! -
2 minutes ago, Giantlife said:
I do not think that match requires thought of any kind. I think the h2h is 1-1 with Kasatkina winning on grass at a time when Swiatek was a complete novice on it. Here Swaitek"s game is well suited to the hard courts with that quick take-back that is bound to pit Kasatkina in deep trouble. I think Kasatkina has two realistic hopes here; Bob Hope and no hope! Borrowing NFL vocabulary, it should be a blitz.
- CzechPunter and lelit
-
2
-
Vondrousova vs Sabalenka At this stage of the tournament which I believe that most of us are now well into, I am not going to bore you with providing reasons why I think any one of these women will win, rather by way of reasonable probality I will want to focus on should be deemed a good bet by the betting option that I have chosen. These two women head to head stand at 2-2. Vondrousova won the first two but it is sabalenka who has won the last two (2018 & 2021 respectively). The last victory in 2021 was a runaway victory 6-1 6-2. The question that allof us must be asking ourselves now that Sabalenka's opposition is now a considerable upgrade from the last two is this; do we now expect Sabalenka to play better or worse considering her problems with the serve in the opening two rounds. I have always been sure of the answer to that question as I have already remarked on this forum. Emphatically yes. The question now is which way do I bet amidst the host of betting options. Firstly, I cannot bring my head round the fact that Vondrousova has been made favorite considering their current rankings of 41 and 2 respectively. In my seach for the ideal bet and expecting a close match I saw on bet 365 Sabalenka total games over 12.5@6/5 and under @4/7. The problem is that there is a chance that this could be a runaway victory for Sabalenka where the under could come in despite the win. That really would be cruel. However I found what I am most certain is the ideal bet for this match on Paddy power. Sabalenka over 11.5 total games at 4/7. This covers a Sabalenka victory of any sort. On the flip side I cannot see how Vondrousova will win this if possible without Sabalenka going over 11.5games. Even making provisions for a bad service day at the office Sabalenka over 11.5games still seems the perfect bet,
- LOVETENNIS and CzechPunter
-
2
-
1 hour ago, U.K. TennisGirl said:
Top tip CzechPunter, thanks!
Elina Svitolina is a brilliant tennis player, so it’s sad to see her seem to be struggling with her game as much as she is at the moment.
I still have hopes that she’ll be a Grand Slam champion one day, but that looked a long way off today, unfortunately.
"I still have hopes that she’ll be a Grand Slam champion one day, but that looked a long way off today, unfortunately". Not in a million years from the way the WTA has evolved in the last couple of years. Svitolina has no major weapons to be of any threat to those that matter and she has recently married indicating her intent to start the next phase of her life which certainly cannot include winning a slam now. I see her retiring very early for some reason.
-
Alcaraz vs Berretini This seems to me to be the right time for Alcaraz to come of age and he has given us a hint of what he can do with how cosily he won that next gen finals last year. Berretini is mostly one dimensional with his serve and big forehand behind it. I do not think he is at the required level to take out Alcaraz. Alcaraz for the win.
Krejcikova vs Ostapenko I really think that Ostapenko has some sort of chance here considering that she leads this opponent 1-3. I think Ostapenko can remain defiant for most of the journey making the verdict of over 18.5 games safe @Paddy power alt handicaps.
Sonego vs Kecmanovic I expect a decent battle from these two today with both already off to a flyer. Sonego leads the h2h 3-1 and I think he can make it 4 today. However as usual I will go safe and take the alternative totals of over 37.5 game. Alternative bet Sonego to win and both to win a set at least 6/4 @ Paddt Power. Good luck!
-
2 hours ago, Torque said:
Hit the post with the acca for the second time this tournament which is frustrating. Really couldn't see Paire winning based on his form during the last year or so. Overall it was a positive day though, as Daniel beat Murray and Wang was close to beating Sabalenka with Sabalenka imploding on serve as predicted. In the end her extra experience and ability got her over the line, that plus the serving yips seemingly becoming catching as Wang served quite a few doubles of her own.
I think Sabalenka has now gone past her vulnerable worst. I believe she is beginning to creep into some steady form despite the sustained yips. This player is certainly capable of finding the necessary accleration to go in and lift the title in a weeks time.
-
Tennis Tips - August 1 - August 7
in Tennis Betting Tips & Predictions
Posted · Edited by liquidglass
Firstly, I want you to know that I did not set out to have a go at you in anyway. Rather my main aim as has always been the case with people that I have mentored over ther years, is to first bring them to realise what this game is about and secondly to make them come to realise what it is that they are supposed to be doing in terms of understanding the working structure of the game. Let me throw this out there by saying that gambling against the bookies is the greatest manipulation of the mind ever known to man and it is totally impossible to come to grips with the modus operandi unless someone opens the door from the inside to let you into the mystery that lies underneath. Let me make it clear by saying that I am not selling or trying to sell anything to you. Rather I always speak most times from the power of the knowledge that i possess stemming from the love that i have for the game. I have been tremendiously blessed to know all that I know about this indulgence. Everyone that has benefitted from me over the years have just run into me by accident from discussions on forums
Your answer to me makes me understand that your fundamentals like many other people is completely wrong as I already knew is the case. This game is based on a translation or the expression of the metaphysical into reality. Two factors control the game, namely market moves and market forces. Market Moves (odds movement) gives birth to Market Force within a cycle that commences from when the odds are first released to the beginning of play. Within the scope of market force is a whole lot of encrypted information that needs to be translated or unscrambled by applied knowledge. Murray carrying a slight injury, or Edmunds being unrecognizable from yesterday were all factored into the odds before play. It is just that you could not see or sense what you have never understood. The same goes for a team that receives a red card or even misses a penalty in the 93rd minute. Everything about the game is deliberate. There is no such thing as luck or an out-of-place occurence. Crazy eh! The idea then will be to unlearn everything that you have ever known with a view to relearning by training your mind to understand most of the underlying workings of the game. In summary I would say that everything that happens in a game is a replay of everything that has already happened in the metaphysical realm. The default reasoning now is that the winner of any given match always manifests even before the first ball is struck. YOUR ABILITY TO FIND THAT WINNER IS HEAVILY RELIANT ON THE RESOURCES AT YOUR DISPOSAL of which "stats" is only a minor contributory factor. Everytime you set out to pick your games or select your winners, you do so by responding to the predominant voices echoing in your head. These voices have a known source. Their key function is to oppose, confuse and bring you deliberately to the loser - This is the key battlepoint of this indulgence. How do you now train your mind to know which voice is authentic and which is not? It takes years of practice and adhering to norms and protocols within the workings of the game to acquire this knowledge. It also takes stubborn will and mind power to be able to navigate within the minefields of this mysterious setup. "Knowing" does not guarantee that you will win everyday, however it will guarantee that you will be able to spot deadspots more frequently from a mile off. It will also guarantee the inner strength to ward of any outside influence aimed at corrupting your thought process and leading you easily and deliberately to losers. Therein lies the power to suceed tremdiously. Crazy but interesting eh!
Now, here is a very important fact that I want you to take away. Most people who are involved in this game are all wired in the same way when it comes to being receptive. These contrary voices or counter productive information that enters the punter's or listener's head can be very contagious and damaging to anyone who even sees or hears it accident. Why? Because however serious or unserious you are about what you put out, your words will always come out coated in power and authority and there is no way to limit the vast damage that you could be causing instinctive followers who dare to listen to you. Personally I would feel very inadequate if i had to produce two comprehensive wrongs in a row. Finally, I always say this; that there is no connection with what happened in the match with the resulting outcome if we can prove that outcome preceeds play itself. Why then go through the wasteful and pointless effort of a post match explanation that only serves to preserve pride and promote further catastrophe?