liquidglass
-
Posts
487 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by liquidglass
-
-
21 hours ago, mdlp said:
the issue w Kerber is that she hasn't played since the AO and Tomlianovic has actually gotten some recent matches in. Otherwise would be on kerber too.
I think the real issue is not about about Kerber's lack of match practice. Some players can come back from a long break and just continue where they left of. Some cant. The real problem is that Tomljanovic may not be able to beat whatever version of kerber shows up.
-
2 hours ago, vvararu said:
Anything but a clear win of Mertens over Pegula would surprise me. Pegula played 2 more matches in quallies so Mertens will be fresher. The quality is on her side as well. I think that odds on Mertens should be lower than 1.4 @unibet
I disagree with you on the right odds being lower than 1.4. Mertens may well win but she is not worth being carried away for. There is currently no marker to really test where Merten's game is currently at considering that the Kudermentova and Mladenovich matches were kind of suspect. Oo the other hand, it is Pegula who has really been tested in a variety of tough matches on hard court this year, not to add the home advantage even if we call it an empty arena. Fatigue also should not be a problem. Anyone who beats the Current Brady and Sabalenka en route to any final should be respected.
-
2 hours ago, Jbcoys said:
Any thoughts as to a bet on Klizan to beat Elias Ymer later? Even money. I'm thinking of going quite big... Just feels like Klizan will be fresh and motivated after months away, and will have too much for Ymer... But what fo y'all think?
The odds on the match have been quite stable, even more so for Ymer who has not wavered. Ymer is the one with the form going into the match and I cannot see any reason why you will go with Klizan even to the extent of thinking big. If some unknown force is not just calling on you for contributions then there are safer games out there to get involved in. Most betting websites provide different extended betting markets for tennis. I use what i consider the best two (Paddy & 365) to ensure that I can always take the right kind of bet depending on the situation. Currently Paddy Power is the most flexible on tennis so you can almost customize your bet the way you want it. For example if you really love Klizan and intend to play big, you can take him to either win a set at 4/11 or even give him whatever handicap you like. Those who know their tennis well, can adjust the various matchbets to suit them. I took Ymer to win a set @2/7 which i included in a 4 accumulator huge stake. Remember the aim of the game is to first protect your investment before thinking about profits. Good luck.
-
On 8/16/2020 at 7:57 AM, CzechPunter said:
Marco Trungelliti to beat Juan Pablo Ficovich at 1.66 with Pinnacle
Jiri Lehecka to beat Blaz Rola at 2.00 with Pinnacle
Trungelliti and Lehecka have been keeping themselves busy during the break and both have shown more promise than their opponents before that as well, so I like the odds. Rola has been on a downward curve for a while now, while Ficovich has been doing nothing in recent times no matter how you look at it. Of course, Trungelliti is no world beater, but he's on a roll and he's played tennis, so there's that. Meanwhile, Lehecka is a legitimate talent that has the potential for the top 100 and well beyond.
I took Lehecka and Trugelliti in a 5 fold accumulator 2 days ago. I never knew Trugelliti will be carried over or I would never have included it. I never win carry-over matches. My offer has seriously reduced overnight with Trungelliti going very weak in the market. I am still deciding what to do as I have already lost a sizeable chunk of the original offer. Experience tells me that something is wrong. He is either going to go out there to lose or withdraw.
- CzechPunter and Valentine
-
2
-
I still cannot imagine that no Italian will come up victorious. We are now left with Giorgi or Errani. I think Errani has a better chance of beating Ferro on clay.
-
2 hours ago, vvararu said:
Cocciaretto reminds me of Andreescu. Same powerful “beefy” constitution. Same trials to catch her losing because she played against better ranked players but she continued and continued....
In my opinion this time the opponent is powerful as well. And more precise. So, I am with Kontaveit as well.
I like your very apt description "beefy constitution". It kind of gives a hint of what to expect. Cocciaretto will not go down without actually getting beat down. She is a young aggressive fighter. Kontaveit definitely is more aggressive. The question is will she have the necessary precision to back it up? Does she also have a stomach for a good ol pillow fight? One other thing that is quite certain is that one of the home girls either Cocciaretto or Giorgi is expected to play very well even to the point of winning. Or are the bookies just going to gift us 2 favorites? Your guess is probably as good as mine!!!
-
Arcangioli vs Zavatska
Both from the same pool as the previous selection. Zavatska seems to have fallen off her mini winning streak and Arcangioli looks poised to win this one. Market forces are positive. I should really be going the +3.5 Arcangioli route but nah! Big win here for Arcangioli @ 13/8
-
Caroline Monnet vs Leolia Jeanjean
If the truth must be told, as much as we are all delighted to have tennis back in play, that delight was not so very much so for me because I never really took that long a break from my favorite pass time. I have been very much in the thick of things with all the exhibition matches played over the last few months and would want to believe that i am still in very good form as I have been over the last few months. This match comes from a group of women in the french pro tour who have continuously and interchangeably played themselves over the last few months. Talk about forcasting or tipping and I will tell you that it does not get any harder than trying to pick a match like this. Caroline Monnet is in sublime form winning her last 8 matches without dropping a set. She is also ranked about 570+ places better than her opponent who she also beat just over a month enroute to the winning streak. However I feel that Jeanjean may slowly be finding her form now and looks good enough to spring a surprise. It was nice reading yesterday where Czech had said that he had opted out of any careless picks to try and maintain his clean record. Oh how i love the thrill of trying to keep a clean sheet! I am strongly believing Jeanjean to win this @11/4. However I have opted for the choice of a safer bet to try and stay out of trouble. Leolia jeanjean to win with +4.5 games handicap. Good luck all.
-
Donna Veckic vs E. Cocciaretto
With the season just restarting after the long Corona break, it is difficult to find value anywhere on the board with most big names screaming out of the draw with undue favoritism. Vekic looks, smells and shapes up like the real deal on paper, however I strongly feel that caution should be applied as she still looks very under cooked. Cocciaretto has the ability on clay to get something out of this match against a very suspect Vekic who is continuously going shorter in the market. With the market forces already positive on Cocciaretto and considering home advantage that most folks may think does not amount to much, I will go with Cocciaretto with a 5.5 game start which is really huge in the context of things.
- freeyourself84 and Grass Cash
-
1
-
1
-
@Darkness It is not surprising that in defence of yourself you have suddenly resorted to making spurious statements in a bid to acquire a face lift. (I have been commenting on lots of your posts?) Really? On second thoughts, I do not think I can rely on the definition of the word stupid from someone whose name aptly embodies the yolk of stupidity.
It has been said severally on this forum that there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone else”s opinion as long as it is done in a nice and respectable way. I also do not think that I would have unreasonably committed any of those allegations you have made without being flagged down appropriately by the moderator who for most of the time has always been eagle-eyed on comments made here. I believe you just have a “complex” problem which you need to address. You can start by getting some light.Lol)
Just to let you know, I have now being on this forum for years equivalent to the total number of posts that you have written in your short time here. In that time, we have all come to realise that every tipster here has a peculiar style of writing which we have all gotten used to over the years. It is just simply recognised as a trademark signature of the individual tipster. You could rightfully associate my style of writing with arrogance if you want to, however it is only a way of spicing things up by throwing in a bit of humour every now and then. In my opinion as a tipster, you should only post tips that you are very positive about, as opposed to posting as a substitute for boredom or having nothing better in life to do. So when I say I am 100% sure of my tips, it is simply a figure of speech articulated by my somewhat aggressive style of writing to show passion for what I do. I never really imagined that you would be stupid enough to take me up on that point. That is why I call myself “Minty Punter”. You really do not need wisdom to know that mints will always provide you with a twist of pepperiness.
-
To remain undoubtedly within the rules of this forum I am not going to address anyone by quotes So whoever this pertains to, consider it a reply. Am I stupid or something? No. Because I am confident that I know what I am doing. Stupidity is doing the same thing every day and expecting a different result or rather a varied mixture of results. I can boldly defend any statement I make by the consistency in my results. I am not looking to be popular or loved, In fact, I get my buzz from the one that is bold enough to rise me to a challenge. This seeming bitterness has being ongoing. I would rather you proved yourself with your pen. It is just a pity that I take delight in what I do and I make no apologies.
- four-leaf, CzechPunter, freeyourself84 and 1 other
-
2
-
2
-
Yafan Wang vs Astra Sharma
Somehow in these difficult times, it is quite important to ensure that dinner is properly cooked before delivering to the meal table. I really hate the nearly syndrome especially being a firm believer that there is no such thing as a near miss, especially believing this indulgence being more spiritual than mathematical. Sometimes it can really be energy sapping fighting against these forces unknown, which is why tipsters most times just withdraw from the madness of constantly having to look silly. Lol!
Wang in truth is a progressive youngster good enough to ply her trade among the elite of the sport as can be seen from her record. She has not really found any sort of form yet this season especially with her failure to defend Acapulco. I still feel that she is like a pedigree horse still searching for good ground to make her final assault as she enters the final furlong. She just will not find racing room, which brings me to Sharma. Sharma is good enough to take advantage of the opportunity especially as she has played enough warm up matches to get into some kind of groove. No no no. I never said Sharma will win. You all know me and how meticulously circumspect I can be with releasing the final verdict. Hahaha. Verdict: Sharma +5.5 games handicap (Alternative handicap) paddy power 1/2. Good luck all.
-
Sorry. Odds are Jaqueline 4/6 Paddy Power. My advice is to search for better odds around as Paddy can be quite stingy.
-
Hon Priscilla vs Cristian Jaqueline
Always very important to tread carefully on the Monday matches or one could easily set up himself for a series of losses going into the week proper. Jaqueline is progressive and already 12-2 indoors this season. Moreover she has already played two qualifiers here backed up by resounding victories. Incidentally I was discussing Jaqueline with Chanda Rubin in a somewhat of a side talk last week and she had a few good things to say about her... hmm! My week starts here on hopefully a positive step forward.
-
K. Pliskova vs O. Jabeur
Since winning Brisbane at the beginning of the year Pliskova’s form has been a bit sketchy but not as bad as to say that she has not been playing well. In fact, I feel she is just about ready to commence another upward phase in form perhaps beginning here. She faces Ons Jabeur, one of the most improved WTA players of the year. Ons posses a very big and robust game and can be extra dangerous when she plays in confident mode. I really think she has the belief that she is way up there with the elite of the game and I will be the first to agree with her. I feel her chances here of taking Pliskova out are certainly over 40%. Knowing fully well that this is going to be a serve oriented clash, I will play extra safe and go for the alternative totals market (Paddy Power) over 20.5 games 8/10.
-
9 hours ago, darko08 said:
Jan-Lennard Struff to beat Roberto Bautista at 3.80 with 888
I'm not agree with WinningTispter in this one. I don't like at all how Bautista has played in his last 2 tournaments. In the AO he was dominated by Cilic and in Rotterdam he lost against Carreño in the second round. I saw him very vulnerable in these 2 matches and I think all the value is on Struff. Struff and Thiem were the only 2 players who took a set from Djokovic in the AO. In Rotterdam he also lost in the first round but he played against Felix Auger who did an amazing tournament (reaching the Final) and he took a set from him (6-1).
Alison Van Uytvanck to beat Elena Rybakina at 3.00 with bet365
Rybakina has played 11 matches in the last 2 weeks. She's one of the most in form players but she has played too many matches in the last days. She dropped a set against Cirstea in her first match here and now she will have a hard match in her second round here. Van Uytvanck has destroyed Hercog in her first match here (6-2, 6-2) and she did not concede any BP in the whole match. I'm still impressed with how she played against Kvitova in St. Petersburg (she could have won that match).
Anett Kontaveit to beat Aryna Sabalenka at 2.50 with bet365
I have nothing much to say in this one. Kontaveit did very well in the AO, reaching the QF's. In Dubai she won against Cirstea and Pavlycuhenkova and she finally lost against Martic. She has won against Sevastova in straight sets in her first match here. Sabalenka lost in the first round against Carla Suarez in the AO but she won a couple of matches in Dubai against very good players (Sakkari and Mertens). I think Kontaveit is a little bit underrated in this one.
Ajla Tomljanovic to beat Garbiñe Muguruza at 3.00 with bet365
Muguruza is suffering in every single match since her big disappointment in the Final of the AO. In Dubai she could have lost a set against Clijsters. She could have lost against Kudermetova in the second round and she finally lost against Brady in the third round. In her first round here she could have lost against Kasatkina (the russian player had 28 BP). As I said, she looks very vulnerable and I have the feelings that she can lose against any decent player. Tomljanovic lost in the second round of the AO against Muguruza in a 3 set match. In St. Petersburg she lost in the second round against Potapova (she reached the Final) after winning against Vondrousova. In Dubai she lost in the first round against Mattek-Sands in a 3 set match but in her first match here she has destroyed Hon (6-2, 6-4).
Sabalenka seems to have everything bar a champions mentality. For her, delivery is imminent. She just needs to work a bit more on her temperament to pave the way for success. Judging from last week, it looks almost certain that she is destined for another deep run here. I feel that the destructive fore hand coupled with the aggressive style will keep Kontaveit well and truly contained.
Rybakina really should be ripe for a loss after the exertions of the past week. However I am not a fan of trying to predict outcomes based on how we think a player might feel. In most cases such predictions always turn out wrong. Somehow I just feel this Rybakina girl cherishes her long winning streak and really draws energy from it. My prediction here is another Rybakina win or a retirement. I don’t see her stumbling to defeat.
- teodorppv and CzechPunter
-
2
-
@Betfun, In my opinion, tennis is all about how a player matches up against another which will most times have nothing to do with form or talent. Trust me Medvedev was trying very hard. I think Simons game is somewhat of a downgraded version of Murray’s brick wall tennis when he is firing on all cylinders. One of the main hindrances to Aliassime’s game is court craft especially with his inconsistent ball placement during rallies. He can sometimes lose the advantage when he is on top in a rally by some real bad shot selections. Simon will like a young feisty opponent like him and should hopefully outfox the young Canadian and be in the final tomorrow. Simon to win here for me.
-
On 2/3/2020 at 3:24 PM, darko08 said:
Corentin Moutet to beat Thiago Monteiro at 1.72 with 888
The reasons are similar for why I picked Londero against Cecchinato. Monteiro has played 6 matches in the last 5 days (including a 3 hours match against Cecchinato). Both are claycourters but Moutet has spent the last days training in Cordoba while Monteiro was playing in Uruguay so I expect the French young player to win against a tired Monteiro.
I just cannot see how you can justify both tips based on the reasoning that you have provided. Firstly this is just the beginning of the season, so to throw tiredness in as a possible factor why two in-form players should both lose is ludicrous. The point of Cecchinato having a title to defend next week is just speculative and empty. Only Cecchinato knows his plans for next week.
Furthermore if you are a student of the Odds Movement Academy you will know that a very swift move of odds resulting in the unjustified favouritism of a player is a case of what is known in betting circles as “Sharp Money” . I will find it somewhat strange for Moutet and Londero to both win following those generic market moves. So confident of both not winning as a double that I recommend a 10/10 likelihood. However, I will separate them by taking Monteiro to beat Moutet in what I expect to be a decisive victory. He was the original favourite. He is also the better and most in form player.
-
Djokovic vs Thiem
On the whole I feel that it has really been a superb tournament considering the dramatic build up to the final. An unprecedented sequence of events that just could not have worked out better.
It has to be noted that before the appearance of Tsitsipas and Medvedev, Thiem and Zverev have always been the bonafied heirs of the number 1 & 2 positions in men’s tennis and thanks in part to Zverev that he somehow was able to rediscover his game to play his part in the build up to What can only feel as the crowning of the new prince. And why would there be any reason to think differently?
Thiem was arguably on form the best player of last year as he finished the season with a bang and has just seamlessly continued from where he left off. In the semi-finals, with Thiem and Zverev at 9/2 and 17/2 respectively, I advised my students on one of the tennis online forums to snap up those prices of whichever of the two guys they preferred as I had a gut feeling that this first tournament of the new decade had the propensity to give birth to something really special. Form or no form, I feel there should only be one option for any punter betwise. The mentality should really be that in most cases we always end up losing anyway and taking Thiem here is a justifiable mistake if it turns out that way. 2020? You just cannot afford to put new wine in old skins.
Thiem is also a confident strong, determined and fearless who has bested Djokovic in 3 of their last 4 meetings. There is no reason not to win no4 despite playing more hours on court. This is a man who is drastically raise the bar on the tennis front this year. Interestingly enough when Djokovic finished his semi-final against Federer he was 1/6 awaiting the winner of Thiem/Zverev. He would have stayed that way had Zverev won. He is now 2/9 against Thiem. I have always been an advocate of positive price moves speaking ahead of form. This should really be a thriller with only one expected outcome. Welcome to the new tennis era.
- CzechPunter and delfino
-
2
-
2 hours ago, Senking said:
In my humble opinion, they are right not to pay you on the 2 sets to 1 win for Kalinina. For them to pay you out, the match has to be completed and Kalinina has to win or else it'll be termed void. Although, your bet was in a strong position for a win, the result has not been determined yet and there is still uncertainty. Primarily, the result is not confirmed, hence void is right.
Thank you Senking. I very much appreciate your input. This was the position that Paddy Power was holding until I decided to test it against their own interpretion of the law. Now let us revisit their rule and see what it says. First it says that for match betting market, if a player retires in a WTA or ATP match as described there, the player progressing to the next round or winning the tournament(if that was a final) will be deemed the winner unless the player retires before the conclusion of the first set in which circumstance match betting shall be void. Now here is the crunch bit that affects my bet; the rule continues like this; "Bets on all other tournaments or matches and bets on other markets i.e other than match betting markets (that this bet is a part of) will be voided where a player retires(regardless of whether the retirement occurs during or following the first set UNLESS, in the case of other markets the outcome of the bet had been unequivocally determined prior to the time of the retirement. My bet clearly falls into the red zone above. Firstly, what does the statement in red imply? It implies in lame man's terms that there is still a possibility of my bet being a winning bet despite the retirement of one player if it can be proven that my player(Kalinina) could have won the match 2-1 as set out in the terms of my bet slip.
The word "unequivocal" means beyond doubt. Now this portion in red would not have been invented by Paddy Power if it was not possible to win a bet like mine despite retirement. So I put it to the Manager to give me any example off the back of his head where there can be a possibility of paying out a selection like mine as a winner despite retirement. If they have it in their rule then it automatically follows that the practical possibility must exist. The manager said he could not think of one.So I proceeded to explain what the rule clearly meant.
Before the match started there existed 4 possible result as outcomes namely 2-0 0-2 2-1 1-2. Before Von Deichman withdrew the score was 1-1 so ther were only two possibilities left. When she withdrew, she forefeited her right to win the third set or puting it bluntly, she lost the third set by default by giving up. The left only one possibilty of a result, 2-1 Kalinina. If say the score was 1-0 to either player at the time of retirement, then it would have been right to void the selection as there were still other possibilities of a result like 2-0 0-2 or 2-1 1-2. The manager later tried to argue from embarrassment that at the time of retirement it was still possible for Von Deichman to come back from 2-5 down and so the result was not unequivocal. I told him that that line of thought was inadmissible in this case. When a player retires, there is a consequence. They lose either the set or the match depending on which is most applicable. If therefore Von Deichmann lost the set as a result of the default, then Kalinina wins the match 2-1.
Let us look back and apply this school of thought to the match betting rule. When a player retires after one set has been completed, the other player is considered the winner. Or were they not aware that the defaulting player can still come back in that case? I will conclude my case with what I deem the cruncher as I highlight on the portion of the bet rules that explains what happens when a player defaults which is covered in rule 2. It states that When a player retires, the one who wins for all intents and purposes will be deemed to have won all points/games/sets which would have followed the disqualification. So the surviving player of a disqualification does so by inherting games, sets and match depending on how applicable. Hence Kalinina wins 2-1.
-
9 minutes ago, losingpunter said:
As per rule 1 you are absolutely correct because she retired in 3rd set but remember that rule is for the winner of a game. your bet is on total games. had your bet being on she is the winner they would have awarded you. Pls note this rule does not state anywhere that all bets for that match will be awarded
Thanks Losing Punter for your contribution. The selection on total games had no problem as the total by the time of retirement was already over 21.5games. They were forced to remove the void and paid me. The real problem is whether they were right not to pay for Kalinina to win 2 sets to 1 considering that Kalinina was already up 5-2 in the third set. Rule 1 covers that particular situation and clearly states what should happen. My question is does everybody see it the way I see it?
-
Dear Fellow Members,
I am in an ongoing dispute with Paddy Power Bookies over an accumulator bet that I took some days ago with them. they paid me half of the bet and voided 2 selections relating to the bet causing a drastic decrease in my winnings. My arguement has gone on with them for over three days now where it has now been escalated to the highest level management with no fruitful result. I told the last supervisor after today's phone call that I was going to tender this case on a tennis forum for the members to be the judge. If a great number of you guys agree with me after I have tendered my case before you, then I will certainly go on to the ombudsman to continue fighting for justice. here is a summary of what happened. I played
Heather watson to beat Makarova 6/4 - loser
Heather watson to win a set vs Makarova 4/7 - Win
Vania King +4.5 games over vikhlyantseva 8/11-Win
Anhelina Kalinina to beat Kathinka Von deichmann by 2sets to one 3/1 Void
Anhelina vs Kathinka Von Deichmann over 21.5 total games 8/11 Void
Ryan Harrison vs Kevin Anderson over 36.5 games 4/5 Win
Camila Giorgi Vs Whitney Osuigwe +7.5 handicap 2/9 Win
five fold x 4 bets @£15 = £60 staked
The problem begins when Von Deichmann withdraws at 2-5 down third set (6-1 6-7 2-5) resulting in paddy power voiding those 2 lines and making me almost £160 out of pocket. First I argued that they had no right to void the over 21.5games total as I had already gone past 21.5 before the default. They tried to hold on to a flimsy point before realising that they were stuck and agreed to pay out. Let me point out that I have called them over 15 times in the past to correct this same problem where they have always paid out over this same issue after similar long and hard verbal exchanges. However over the years they have never fully updated their systems to recognize and payout whenever this situation occurs which in my opinion is criminal. So for those customers who do not know better, they simply lose their money in ignorance. Here is where I need the opinion of our humble members and tipsters. Paddy Power has refused to payout fully on the bet on the grounds that the selection in question remains void according to their rules displayed at the link that I will paste below.. I really would appreciate opinions from anyone who would be kind enough to read the rule 1 and 2 and see whether or not it applies to my bet and whether Paddy Power is right in their translation of the rule. The big question is what does the word unequivocal mean in the way that they have used it. I will state my case to you once I have heard enough opinions. thanks everyone!
https://support.paddypower.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/73/~/tennis-rules
-
Zvonareva Vs Sabalenka
Sabalenka clearly running on reserves should not be able to give the veteran Zvonareva a 5.5 start. I see Zvonareva pushing her well enough to go over the total 19.5 games barrier as well. Verdict over 19.5 games
-
Borna Coric vs Carballes Baena
Coric 15/7 on hard courts this year and 2/4 recently would seem way way overpriced against a claycourter like Baena who is really no mug on hard courts. He is 3/4 this year and most importantly 3/4 in current form. Coric has no major weapons and thrives on consistency during rallies. I really think Baena can hold his own comfortably against him. Coric 1/14 is a clear depiction of a piss-take. And just like they heard me, a price slash happens this minute, now Coric 1/12. This match really has the potential to drag for some considerable length considering that their only meeting many years ago ended in a tight 3 setter on clay. Verdict. over 30games in total 10/10
US Open 2020
in Tennis Betting Tips & Predictions
Posted · Edited by liquidglass
I am very surprised that people are getting carried away with Krajinovics form when he is far from a world beater. Even if M. Ymer has no current form, his pedigree still speaks volumes. To go under 35.5 after the exertions of Krajinovic last week is almost suicidal to say the least unless one sees Ymer as the surprise victor in 3 quick sets. If Krajinovic is to win this, this will certainly go beyond 3 sets and possibly into a brawl. We are talking about a next generation star here.!