Posts posted by liquidglass
3 minutes ago, owenclass said:
I think that is a good bet as Bertens can actually play on grass where as her opponent always seems to struggle against good players on this surface
What do you think about
Su Wei Hsieh beating Dominka Cibulkova 11/8 paddy power as she beat Halep in the last round. Alright her opponent can play on this surface but Su Wei is playing well
Su Wei certainly is playing well and likes this surface a lot. That is about where it ends for Hsieh who will need to raise her level many notches to cope with the very feisty Cibulkova. Dominica who really is like a stubborn terrier will not go away till she rips Hsieh dress to shreads. Playing the way she has been playing with that level of aggression her opponent should cave in at the end. It would not be easy though, but job will be done in the end!!
1 hour ago, losingpunter said:
kyrgrios is a better player on grass?? what else does he have in his armory other than aces and how much more can he play at this high level just by hitting aces. how many aces does nadal hit?? and how abt novak??
He has played against mediocre players in past 1 month. His real test will come when he plays nadal or federer
I believe most people on here are tennis afficionados and at least know the game of tennis well enough to seperate black from white at the very least. Make no mistake, Kyrgios is definately one of the top 5 players in the world on grass despite his gimmicks. He has good follow-up ground strokes to his serve in addition to the intimidating serve. Your question "What else does he have in his armory other than aces" in reference to his grass play, is similar to me telling you that a man is rich and you asking what more does he have in his pocket other than money.
1 hour ago, JusticePunting said:
No need to publicly berate any player who lets us down. If I did that, they'd be pages and pages of content for people to read through
Kyrgios is ridiculously tough on grass. He's an ace and TB machine. He's no pushover in rallies either. You get the feeling that he bides his time until the TB when he strikes. I also backed Istomin but Istomin was pretty powerless to be honest in those key moments. Kyrgios is operating at top 5 on grass in my opinion, or at worst top 10. He doesn't look like he cares at all, but I think that's deceptive and a bit of a trap!
Very well said. I would have to add importantly, that as far as punters, most punters were concerned Istomin did his job perfectly with helping to take the total games well over. I dont think there can be any valid complaints against him.
NICHOLAS JARRY VS KRAJINOVIC
This on the face of it looks very wide open but not without some pointers. Firstly in my humble opinion 4/9 3/10 & 8/13 all come from the same stock of wigi board craft. Secondly, I would not require any assistance with mathematical probability to help me reach a decision in this sort of seemingly open affair. One man from Chile and the other from Serbia on a grass court speaks volumes. I agree that match practice is invaluable in terms of getting a player ready for a tournament. But I guess that is why we are human and distinct and unique species. Some players just do not conform to those fundamental rules. Take Radwanska for example, she returned from a long break only to continue spanking those who had already benefitted from match practice. Jarry played one match on grass and I do not think it puts him in any point of advantage to be considered the winner of this match. At 7/4 and being the higher seed, I believe Krajinovic looks primed for victory here. I will be quite shocked if this man called Jarry wins this. Good luck all!!!
Just now, four-leaf said:
So what are you saying?
I had not finished when the first part mistakingly posted itself.
21 minutes ago, four-leaf said:
Stefanos Tsitsipas (-2.5 sets) to beat Gregoire Barrere at 2.52 with Pinnaclesports
Ok no answer to my post yet so I post this instead of waiting for answers to come about Greg. He's bad the frenchman really bad, pure awful crap about his way of playing tennis at the very least, no now I'm being mean to Greg. He's acctually pretty decent but he's got 5 matches on grass in his senior career and 8 matches as a junior 2010. He lost in 2016 Wimbledon qualies to Albano Olivetti in 3 and now he's back and has qualified for the first time with victories over Thiago Monteiro in 3 who was in the maindraw last season beating the aussie Andrew Whittington. Attila Balazs in straights bo2 and Stefano Napolitano also in straights bo5. I'm not surprised Greg is in the maindraw since he didn't have the strongest of draws coming into the qualies. Now he's facing a highly motivated Stefanos who will likely break his serve at will sooner or later in the match. I'd be surprised if Greg manage to hold serve to more then 1 tie-break. Greg is not that good with a career high ranking at 187 in july 2016 and now 193.
Stefanos is 3-3 on grass in his career and 3-2 this season. The greek has developed his game this season to being the next best 19 year old guy on tour after Denis Shapovalov. Stefanos is right now at 35 his career high ranking having reached the quarter final of S-Hertogenbosch where he lost in 2 tie-breaks to Richard Gasquet and no shame in that. It feels safe to say that Greg will not hold serve easy enough through the match on more than one occasion and Stefanos is so secure in his serving that it should be safe to pick him to win this in 3.
I tend to always reset my thinking apparatus at the beginning of a slam making room for all possible eventualities and trying to think ahead as far as possible. The first rule to trying to predict a match for me is this; if it looks too easy, then it probably is not. Remember it is not always about a player's stats and ability but also about trying to predict his state of mind and trying to gain a possible insight into the matchup by means that cannot be measured, well...apart from instincts. I can safely safely say from experience that the most reliable way to weigh the outcome of a match is in the odds. Odds never lie if you really spend time following its movement. It is really one mystery that defies explanation. It is the reason why I could just look at certain odds and know that there is a lot more hidden that needs to be uncovered. Since the first time I looked at Gregoire's odds I have for some reason smelt danger, and it is not from thinking that he is a better player than Tsitsipas. I just think Tsitsipas looks suspect going into this slam especially having already had his mini run. Here is the point worthy of note. Gregoire has the feeling of being to fresh to go down 3-0. He has already played more than a handful of games inc qualifiers to prepare him for this. He also beat some useful players like Napolitano and Bolt along the way. The latter, a player that I have high regards for on grass even as much as giving him a slight chance against Edmunds. Also it is not a very wise move to be taking -2.5 sets at the begining of a slam especially when players are fresh and trying to establish a rythym. Just too chancy in my opinion. I will even be extra cautious for win only purposes. All the same, good luck to you!
4 hours ago, losingpunter said:
Wozniaki played well but kerber threw the game she was winning easily
If Wozniaki played well as you say, then Kerber would not have been winning easily. WTA matches can be most times intricate and confusing with players sometimes giving off wrong body languages at different phases of the games. Women play in the WTA the same way the act in relationships, always wanting to pick up a quarrel long after you have calmed down. Where you thought Kerber was winning easily was the man stating his case easily thinking he had won. Woziacki responds to it as the woman and turns matters around. Well.....as you know, women always have the last word most times!!!!!! lol!
2 minutes ago, CzechPunter said:
Then I presume that you'll be backing him?
Not at all. I think there are better matchups to focus on especially on the first two days of a slam. I agree with you that millman is the better player, but certainly not by a street . He also faces a very determined street fighter here who breezed through qualifying. Definately a long match in prospect. Good luck if you back him large!!
4 hours ago, CzechPunter said:
1pt Mihaela Buzarnescu to win the 3rd Quarter at 29.00 with Bet365
Interest stakes for obvious reasons.
E.Gulbis/J.Clarke - Over 3.5 sets at 2.00 with Paddy Power
Gulbis is the better player, there can be no doubts about that, but Clarke plays his heart out in home conditions and he's played decent tennis recently, so I think that it's very likely that we are going to see a tight battle here, either thanks to Clarke fighting hard or thanks to Gulbis fooling around.
Mikhail Kukushkin to beat Vasek Pospisil at 1.66 with Pinnacle
I've already opposed Pospisil once on grass in this season and I'm happy to do so again against Kukushkin, who is just the better player of the two overall. Much better, in fact, and with a much better form book as well.
Lara Arruabarrena-Vecino to beat Ana Bogdan at 1.81 with Marathonbet
The surface should suit Bogdan slightly more, but she hasn't played for so long that I'm not really sure that LAV should be only a minor favourite here. Could be a case of Bogdan just picking up a check honestly. I like the odds regardless.
Paolo Lorenzi to beat Laslo Djere at 1.73 with Paddy Power
Speaking of picking up checks, Djere is currently still playing in a clay court Challenger in Milan, which is about the last thing you'd want to be doing a couple of days ahead of Wimbledon if success is what you want. Lorenzi is an aging force, but I'd have him around the 1.50 mark given all the situational factors. Also, he has at least a somewhat competent serve (unlike Djere).
Petra Martic to beat Ekaterina Makarova at 1.97 with Pinnacle
Makarova is stuck in a really strange spot at the moment, with no victories in sight. She's obviously capable of beating Martic, but I can't have her as the favourite given the losing streak and given that Martic has played a couple of reasonable matches on grass already. 60/40 imo.
Daria Gavrilova to beat Zarina Diyas at 1.80 with Paddy Power
I have to admit that Diyas has dropped from my radar recently, but Gavrilova hasn't and I didn't mind her recent performances - that she didn't win too many matches can be attributed to the fact that she had to face Kvitova and Radwanska pretty much straight away. Diyas will be a solid step down.
John Millman (-1.5 sets) to beat Stefano Travaglia at 1.86 with Unibet
I don't really enjoy opposing qualifiers, but Travaglia looks to be the weakest link from that group of players and the draw hasn't been particularly kind to him either, so I'd say that he's going to find it really hard to get a result. On grass, Millman should win - and perhaps comfortably so.
Lol!! I really do not mind you saying anything in a bid to find qualifying reasons for a pick. However I just could not let you get away with describing Travaglia as the weakest link from the group of qualifying players. He goes into that game with a more than average chance of winning for a guy whose game is well suited to the surface. His record on grass in the last 2years is very good and the odds also reflect that.
19 hours ago, losingpunter said:
Will be a classic. Murray should win in straight sets
Straight sets taking into account his rustiness and his soft outright price of 8/13 has to be just wishful thinking.
Two to watch closely today. Jakupovic and Smyzcek
On 6/17/2018 at 1:38 PM, CzechPunter said:
Filip Horansky to beat Daniel Munoz-De La Nava at 1.99 with Pinnacle
Kevin King to beat Norbert Gombos at 1.90 with Bet365
I don't really fancy any bets from the main ATP tournaments right now, so going for two Challenger picks instead. Filip Horansky has been improving recently and he has enough talent to make it to the main tour at some point, it's just that he's struggling with the mental side of things here and there. He's definitely better skill-wise than Munoz and he's still going up, which - coupled with the home conditions factor - leads me to believe that there's some value in backing him here. Meanwhile, I don't exactly fancy Gombos on grass, King's game seems to be better suited for that surface and he's already played a couple of matches on it as well, so I'd have him as a slightly bigger fav than the bookies.
Petra Kvitova to beat Johanna Konta at 1.66 with Marathonbet
Konta did really well in Nottingham, but Kvitova is likely to be too big of a challenge given how strong she tends to be mentally on surfaces that she likes. Tiredness might play a certain factor on Konta's side and there's also the detail of her not having any real form before Nottingham, so I'm not sure that the fact that she did well in one event should overturn everything so suddenly. I'd have Kvitova at 1.40.
You seem to be expecting too much from Kvitova considering that this would be her first game on grass to a home player that she has already lost to the only time they played on this surface. Moreover Konta would seem to be in some sort of a groove that can only be described as form regardless of how much you want to convince yourself that it is not. Form always starts somewhere and i really think Kvitova will have her hands full. I think considering Kvitova too big of a challenge even without grass play this year is a bit myopic in my opinion. This game is 50/50 from here with a good chance of Kvitova crumbling.
22 minutes ago, CzechPunter said:
And the problem with the statement is...?
Well, I thought it was really difficult trying to Imagine Halep winning wimbledon in any context especially with her brand of tennis.
1 hour ago, CzechPunter said:
Sloane Stephens (+1.5 sets) to beat Simona Halep at 1.75 with Marathonbet
This is more about bet management than about trusting Stephens all that much, but, given how she's played so far in this event, she could certainly do some damage against Halep, especially if the latter is confronted by all her Grand Slam demons at some point of the match. That might certainly happen like it did in the last year's French Open and the Aussie Open finals obviously don't help in this regard either, so let's see. On top of that, I'm afraid that this is also the last serious chance for Halep to win a GS in this season, so this bet is also somewhat of a hedge against my pre-season bet on her. Of course, she could lose this match and then go on to win Wimbledon or the US Open, but that would be so mentally challenging that I just don't see it happening. 2-1 Halep please!
"Of course, she could lose this match and then go on to win Wimbledon or the US Open, but that would be so mentally challenging that I just don't see it happening" Did you really mean it or it was just loose talk that you hoped will go unnoticed?
Muguruza vs Sharapova
After the sudden exit of Serena Williams, comes this matchup perhaps not with the same weight of expectation but interesting enough to be at the top of any major tennis discussion for today. The head to head currently stands at 3-0 in favour of Sharapova. The matches took place in 2013/2014 and on close inspection would seem to tell a very interesting story.
Firstly this is clearly a matcup that sees both players apply a similar approach to the game. Start out with plan A, if it fails, revert to plan A and switch on the "intensity". Keep turning up the intensity till you arrive at "Street fight mode" which should lead to victory. There is no iota of doubt in my mind that Sharapova and Nadal are the best street fighters in the game by a mile.
Just taking a look at the scoreline in the past head to heads between them, one can quickly reach a precise conclusion about what happened in those matches. Rome WTA 2013 Sharapova wins 6-2 6-2. Muguruza playing Sharapova for the first time was blown away by Sharapova's brute aggression and had a first feel of this opponent whose game was predicated on a similar style albeit better endurance and tenacity. The matchup came back again in the French Open 2014. This time Muguruza was better prepared and hyped up ready for a good brawl. She wins the first set 6-1. Sharapova goes back to the drawing room and turns on the "Intensity" switch. Muguruza resists but still gets subdued and loses 7-5 in the second set. By the third set they were already in street fight mode. Muguruza implodes. The third set ends 6-1. The margin of victory almost similar to the first meeting aside the fact they played 3 sets.
Third meeting happens in the same year of 2014 in Montreal. Muguruza by now would have in preparation played out a number of possible strategies in her head to deal with this enormous and ruthless obstacle called Sharapova. The first set was well fought out ending 6-4 in favour of Muguruza. Again Sharapova goes back to the drawing room, turns up the intensity and switches to "Reckless anger and confidence mode"(Having been the victor of past street fights) and wins going away...6-3 6-1. That same 6-1 scoreline rears it ugly head again.
Anyone trying to convince themselves that Muguruza has improved can only do that on the back of deceptive reasoning.(The kind of reasoning that one makes to try to summon up the confidence to backup a premeditated choice) How has she improved? By hitting the ball harder? I would not consider Stosur and a wilting Kuznetsova as decent heavy weights to be reckoned with, Both with one leg already out of the door. The current Muguruza form can only be measured with her match on the 16/05 against Gavrilova where she was outfoxed and prior to that on the 9/05 outdone by Kasatkina. She has played in patches all through the year and now flatters to deceive with this uncoordinated hype form.
In summary I would say that this is the exact same matchup problem that Sharapova has with Serena where she has been subdued in19 out of 21 street fights. Sharapova here is tried and tested and now has the valuable benefit of a days rest. I think she would require serious muzzling to restrain her in this form. If sharapova is going to win then the handicap line is a must take. Verdict: Sharapova wins again cosily.
1 hour ago, hzertin said:
well since mihaiv93 has so far got 2 out of his only 2 wrong and he is going for Sloane then I think I will go for kasatkina lol
Thats the old spirit of the game...always diverting the minds attention to an area of hopelessness in crunch times.
3 hours ago, Sm0k3rZ said:
Did anyone get to see Sloane's match against Anett? Was she playing remarkably well or did Anett just crumble?
I saw the Kasatkina match, she broke very first game and then when on her game gave three BPs by 3 consecutive Dfs.Tthat was put down to her playing for the first time on that particular court. Through out the match anypowerful returner could have smashed the first & second serves being put up by Kasatkina. While the young russian has all the talent in the world, this will be uncharted territory for her. All remaining players will be highly motivated as this title is there for anyone to win.
Really feel value lies with Sloane.
I saw the Sloane/Anett match and to be honest looked like any other regular match except for the hard to identify match up problem. I would say Anett crumbled double fast. She just was never comfortable out there and sulked throughout. Sloane always seemed to have this ability to change the dynamics of a rally in the twink of an eye by this laid back style of sweet timing and effortless hitting. And guess what? It is that same one ingridient that makes me love the Kasatkina game - full of variety and that colourful blend of shot-making. The real question is how will those short bouncing Kasatkina spins match up to the Stephens more penetrating replies? Anyones guess really. The head to head will suggest that they know themselves enough to produce a thriller. Stephens is a very inconsistent player as we all know but conversely a very big match player. Always a handful at this sort of stage. Kasatkina is also a rugged tough customer, gamically stubborn and mentally sound. This will be a real test for her. I am slightly on the Stephens train even as I witness a further price drop. Good luck!
6 hours ago, mihaiv93 said:
Thanks for one of the most consistent replies. Your judgement is sound and it does make sense when you look at it from the angle you presented. It is obvious you have more in depth knowledge about Serena´s game and her way of performing.
I can only say that it´s a strange retirement at this stage and if the injury is the real motive here, I hope she gets better soon. The sport would benefit from her return at 100%.
Thanks. You are a perfect gentleman. Good luck!
2 hours ago, mihaiv93 said:
I think that me saying she does not have respect for the game seemed a bit too rough for you. I believe she is the greatest champion of all time n this sport and it is why I am so surprised that retired just one hour before the game and the way she did it was certainly a very odd one for a slam. A champion like her should respect this game by performing when you have to perform and making sure you are able to perform at your highest level. I am saying that on this occasion she did not respect the game. She entered the tournament not physically fit, she also played doubles which is a choice I don´t really understand giving her situatuion but I do admire her determination. However, to put the blame of an injury caused by the doubles match is a bit ridiculous. She has way too much experience to know how to manage Grand Slam tournaments in terms of injuries and effort. Remember when she was sick before the RG final so she was prescribed medication that was not normall approved in the circuit and she played and won it. All credit to her, but I remember Sharapova not being 100% and always starting the matches against big rivals if she entered a tournament. See Halep´s run at the AO with an injury since the eearly stages.
Quoting the american champion "I will not lose again to that b***h".
When you feel you are not 100%, 90%, 80%, 70, 60 or whatever, you do not compete. You just can´t be 60% fit and only play the early rounds so you can win some games and then retire once the big games come along. For me it´s a strategic / tactical retirement.
I respect your point of view for all you have said. Firstly I do not see anything wrong in retiring one hour before a slam . Infact it would tend to suggest that she probably had spent time weighing up her options before finally realising that she had no other option. Your point would be more tenable if she claims to get injured during the match and retires. The right and humble thing then will be to complete the match injured as would be expected of a player of her calibre. It would be utterly prepostrous and silly for her to play a match when she knows that she is truly injured and handicapped all in the name of political correctness.
We all saw her serve limply in the third set of that doubles match where they lost that set 6-0, a scoreline unprecedented. If all that was an act to avoid an opponent who has always been your whipping boy, then I think too much credit is given to the person of Sharapova. It is certainly not worth managing an injury to give the chance of such a monumental victory to a bitter rival such as Sharapova.
The statement of performing when you have to perform and making sure you are able to perform at your highest level can only be considered loose talk with the aim of butressing your point when we consider that that itself is dependent on so many other factors. You might similarly want to argue that in the Champions League Salah's case was different. However according to your statement he should have made sure he was able to perform at the highest level regardless of injury.
Serena entered the tournament not physically fit which is why she played doubles - to gain some more fitness and practice time. Any arguments to the contrary can only be deemed negligible. In the end we can call it whatever we like based on opinion. A tactical retirement as you have called it does not bring the game into disrepute unless the requirement of a slam is different.
When you are on a mission of chasing breaking and setting records like she is, you do everything possible to compete unless it is absolutely beyond you. Afterall, she entered the tournament on the strength of her confidence and self-belief knowing that with fitness at 70% and above she could beat the rest of the field.
1 hour ago, mihaiv93 said:
I can´t believe she did this. It is not fair to the other players on circuit and it is a shame that such a champion does not have the proper respect for the game. You cannot say you are not able to serve when you played single/doubles every day at the french open. Personally, I believe she lied and she know she´s not ready to compete against Maria at this level. I hope to see her back so she can get a taste of the cirucit´s strength at the moment.
I am finding it difficult to digest the point you are trying to make. How have you arrived at the conclusion that Serena does not have the respect for the game? Did you watch the Serena/Venus doubles match and see how Serena could not even serve at all? Or was that part of the plan to fool the public? a grand slam is not a normal event that people default from everyday, and I would want to believe that she had more to gain from chasing the slam than from defaulting from a player that she currently had a record of 19-2 against. Serena has nothing to fear from Maria whose game will never match up to hers, certainly not in the dying embers of her career. Finally there is nothing spectacular about the current strength of the circuit as already proven by Serena in the first couple of rounds. unless Halep Wozniaci and a waning muguruza possibly embody this current strength being referred to. Let us call a spade a spade. Sharapova now or in the past has never, and will never be regarded as the kind of danger that will cause the Most successful tennis player that has ever existed to default a Grand Slam. It should be more a case of people having respect for the game and giving credit where credit is due.
Thiem VS Sasha Zverev
The fundamentals of tennis knowledge lies in the knowing about who these two guys are and the sort of future that lies ahead of them - Top two slot in Mens tennis. Both have played a lot of games, in fact too many games. Thiem although did some energy wasting in playing some back to back 3 setters just before this tournament begun, would seem to be in a better physical shape than Zverev who has played 15 sets in the last three matches. Thiem is the better player on this surface even without the fatigue factor brought into reckoning. the demolition job of Nishikori would just seem the right springboard for Thiem to pay Zverev back for the last defeat in Madrid where I thought Thiem had his mind in other place. I have no doubt in my mind on the result of this one. A typical case of "Boys to Men" for Zverev - End of The Road. Verdict: Thiem progresses comfortably!
HALEP VS MERTENS
No 1 vs No 16 with the latter having the better record this year on clay at 14-1 compared to 11-3. The H2H record stands at 1-0 which Halap won this year in Madrid in a much awaited match that never came to fruition which saw Mertens lose in two easy sets of 6-0 6-3. I definately feel it would be much more competitive this time around considering that Mertens is fitter and on a dangerous healthy run. Both are mentally tough so I expect a good battle that should run over 19.5 games total into possibly a 3 set battle. Verdict: Over 19.5 games 8/11
22 minutes ago, yogg said:
Well, I probably would not have replied to it if you were right because I would have been in a state of shock. As I said, I just could not comprehend how you would have arrived at Zverev 3-0 even after Mr Khachanov demolished the very competent Pouile 3-0 and had only dropped one set in three matches, plus the fatigue factor? I would like to believe that tipsters most times apply similar statistical and cognitive methodologies to their reasoning.
2 hours ago, yogg said:
sorry Owen but with either Thiem or Nishikori up next for Zverev I get the feeling that the penny will drop today for Sascha and a straight set win will be crucial to him today to send out a message to his next opponent.
I personally don't think that Khachanov is in the same league as Dzumhur or Lajovic (Sascha's previous two opponents) so I'm going for Zverev to win 3-0 @ 2.65 with Unibet.
good luck all
Hmmm! I was begining to doubt my pick after you made that comment making my huge stake and everything I had strongly believed somewhat irrelevant. lol! I really do not mind you saying that Zverev will win 3-0 with whatever supporting statement that you might want to make. But saying that Khachanov is not in the same league is definately far off and totally misleading considering that he is still young and players develop at different stages. Moreover Khachanov has not been playing consistent tennis since his emergence. Finally to think or say that Zverev would win 3-0 to send out a message to others considering his physical handicap was a bit baffling. You might have well said Khachanov was rubbish!
in Tennis Betting Tips & Predictions
Posted · Edited by liquidglass
Well well well, I guess that is why this is called manic monday. It certainly is confusing too. I have a system put in place to guide me over market moves especially in overnight situations like these and it is 80% accurate most times. With Monfils and Ostapenko both taking overnight two step walks in the market, it is almost guaranteed for one of them to lose. Anderson is due a win on a surface like this especially with a tailor-made game to go with it and Sasnovic looks the kind of decoy to surprisingly take money away from punters. hahaha!. my verdict? Anderson wins!!! Ostapenko loses!! Crazy innit??