liquidglass

I think this can be a time for discussion and some deep reasoning just before the Monday matches kick off. I like your pick here and it must be pointed out that there is sufficient reason available to back and promote the chances of any of these ladies. If we look at Samonova vs Pliskova objectively we will find a few pointers that could help lead us to safety but certainly with no certainty. Both women have potent serves and I feel that it is Samsonova who has the more stability in her game when it comes to the groundstrokes department. She definitely will be the more consistent from the back of the court no doubt. Then again, I wish this was the only criteria needed to try and figure out the outcome of this match. After all has been said, I just feel that Samsonova has peaked a shade too early leaving her exposed in the same way that Ostapenko was. Pliskova is quite fresh with light miles on the clock from her constant losses and may just be entering the kind of form that wins tournaments. In a couple of strides with those long legs she can hit the front turning for home just like Mr Bolt. Tennis afficionados will look at Pliskova and say "And she still has not dropped a set". If you are still watching Samsonova closely, it is certainly becoming increasingly difficult for her with two three-setters in her last 2 matches. She had to labour to victory against Stephens. It is mostly only after a match that we tend to see all these things. Sensibly, the bet should be Pliskova or no bet. If we all did not know anything about what has happened in the WTA season so far and we were just given the list of the women left with a chance to win wimbledon from here in, it will be a big mistake not to put Pliskova's name on that list. So I am really not looking for the better player form-wise at this point, I think all that goes through the window as the knock out rounds start. I really think Rybakina, Jabeur and Pliskova hold live chances. Rybakina more so who only needs to tweak her attitude a bit to arrive at a winners mentality.

I think this can be a time for discussion and some deep reasoning just before the Monday matches kick off. I like your pick here and it must be pointed out that there is sufficient reason available to back and promote the chances of any of these ladies. If we look at Samonova vs Pliskova objectively we will find a few pointers that could help lead us to safety but certainly with no certainty. Both women have potent serves and I feel that it is Samsonova who has the more stability in her game when it comes to the groundstrokes department. She definitely will be the more consistent from the back of the court no doubt. Then again, I wish this was the only criteria needed to try and figure out the outcome of this match. After all has been said, I just feel that Samsonova has peaked a shade too early leaving her exposed in the same way that Ostapenko was. Pliskova is quite fresh with light miles on the clock from her constant losses and may just be entering the kind of form that wins tournaments. In a couple of strides with those long legs she can hit the front turning for home just like Mr Bolt. Tennis afficionados will look at Pliskova and say "And she still has not dropped a set". If you are still watching Samsonova closely, it is certainly becoming increasingly difficult for her with two three-setters in her last 2 matches. She had to labour to victory against Stephens. It is mostly only after a match that we tend to see all these things. Sensibly, the bet should be Pliskova or no bet. If we all did not know anything about what has happened in the WTA season so far and we were just given the list of the women left with a chance to win wimbledon from here in, it will be a big mistake not to put Pliskova's name on that list. So I am really not looking for the better player form-wise at this point, I think all that goes through the window as the knock out rounds start. I really think Rybakina, Jabeur and Pliskova hold live chances. Rybakina more so who only needs to tweak her attitude a bit to arrive at a winners mentality.

I think this can be a time for discussion and some deep reasoning just before the Monday matches kick off. I like your pick here and it must be pointed out that there is sufficient reason available to back and promote the chances of any of these ladies. If we look at Samonova vs Pliskova objectively we will find a few pointers that could help lead us to safety but certainly with no certainty. Both women have potent serves and I feel that it is Samsonova who has the more stability in her game when it comes to the groundstrokes department. She definitely will be the more consistent from the back of the court no doubt. Then again, I wish this was the only criteria needed to try and figure out the outcome of this match. After all has been said, I just feel that Samsonova has peaked a shade too early leaving her exposed in the same way that Ostapenko was. Pliskova is quite fresh with light miles on the clock from her constant losses and may just be entering the kind of form that wins tournaments. In a couple of strides with those long legs she can hit the front turning for home just like Mr Bolt. Tennis afficionados will look at Pliskova and say "And she still has not dropped a set". If you are still watching Samsonova closely, it is certainly becoming increasingly difficult for her with two three-setters in her last 2 matches. She had to labour to victory against Stephens. It is mostly only after a match that we tend to see all these things. Sensibly, the bet should be Pliskova or no bet. If we all did not know anything about what has happened in the WTA season so far and we were just given the list of the women left with a chance to win wimbledon from here in, it will be a big mistake not to put Pliskova's name on that list. So I am really not looking for the better player form-wise at this point, I think all that goes through the window as the knock out rounds start. I really think Rybakina, Jabeur and Pliskova hold live chances. Rybakina more so who only needs to tweak her attitude a bit to arrive at a winners mentality.

I was not looking for the reason for the market move as market moves are normal. I was more interested in the "erratic nature" of the market move which was going to most certainly bring market forces into play. the market will normally move one point forward or backwards to indicate a normal trend. When it moves erratically as it has done in this case, there is a cause to investigate. The odd setters never make faux pas's in most cases. They most certainly must have been aware of Golubic's 40-12 record before the initial odd of 1/2 was set. That odd should really not go past 1/3 for any reason except there are serious influences on the market which can most times be artificial. I was very aware of their last head to head, it was just that I forgot to mention it. In fact that last head to head was the strongest evidence that led me to conclude that Brengle will certainly make this a contest. Aside that last set where she collapsed, she was very competitive and I do not expect any worse from her now on her favored surface in such a short space of time, plus having form on her side. I will be surprised if anything different happens.

Golubic vs Brengle
Market opened at Golubic 1/2  Brengle 6/4 and has now moved to 1/4    3/1 respectively. There can only be two valid reasons responsible. You are always a winner when such as situation is diagnosed correctly because as I always say, it is the precise translation of odds rather than form that determines outcome. first thing we do is check the head to head between the two players. It stands at 0-1 brengle played way back in 2014. I strongly believe that this stat has no relevance although it can act as a tie-breaker when it becomes close to separate them. The question now is whether we can find justification for this sort of erratic market move. Brengle might not be your regular top flight player but she certainly has days when her unorthodox game can shine out. It has to be pointed out that she is now on her best surface and on decent grass form 3/5 the two lost were to Kostyuk and kozlova where she took them both to 3 sets swinging in the process. Here already two sound wins against Mchale and Kenin. This is not normally the story of a player who should drop in price just like that. The most likely reason is the entry of sharp money on Golubic which I feel certain is the case 9/10. In this case one has to make sure that only bets that support the input of Brengle is taken; like to win, to win a set, or +handicaps. Totals are quite dangerous as Golubic can be made to go to sleep without warning. Verdict Brengle to win a set @5/6 and much much more, trust me. Brengle +5.5 a real steal. "I have already my boots filled" employing the English proverbial saying. lol!!!

Raducanu to win a set @5/6 and possibly much more. Momentum and home advantage very much ahead of form here.

I would have preferred the win in both cases regardless of odds. Yes both are very good grass-courters who are by no means untouchables. Ebden normally relies on his very powerful serve and I do not think that the serve is really in top working order at this moment, plus he withdrew recently while losing at Nottingham. His price has been fluctuating between 1/5 -2/9 in the last 24hours. Worrying. I think he could drop a set to Baez who is one talent that might just be able to adapt to grass. Some of these clay-courters really do these days as things have really changed a bit with how players respond to surfaces.

You are absolutely right with all you have said. Out of interest I watched Draper/Boblik from beginning to end. I wanted to really see what kind of player that he was. I saw the way he completely pulverized Boblik once ball was in play. He has this very sweet timing on his shots that immediately puts him in charge after two plus hits.. Boblik was never ever able to find his balance to stay in the rallies and always had to revert to lobbing to recover his court positioning. I am not too sure how his game will work out against Norrie as they are both lefties. Norrie is clutch and has a fair amount of grit. Having said that and having considered their only match up in 2020 (7-6 7-6 Draper) it is draper that really looks the value by many miles in terms of the handicap and winning a set. Norrie has already had a superb season even by his own expectations. This Draper will seem another good British prospect in the making for certain. Remember how we suddenly woke up to Norrie after he beat Bautista on clay in a Davis cup tie? Enough said here. 

Yeah. And this is the only outcome that could have given Tsitsipas a chance.

I am even more tempted to go with Krejikova after reading a comment like this. Losing money in style is the natural default state of a gambler so one will not be doing anything really different going with a favorite like Sakkaraki as you have preferred to call her. Sakkari has always looked like this female Lion that you have described. It certainly did not come into view after her victory over Iga. And by the way Iga had been long overdue for a heavy defeat as players were now beginning to catch up with her game. This is something that every player has to go through till they rediscover themselves a second time, We saw that with players with Muguruza, and recently with Kenin, Vekic, Kerber . Some players never quite make it back like Bouchard. In what has certainly been a very erratic and strange tournament I almost feel the best way forward is to only play with what you can afford to lose then aim to lose it in style to have a chance of winning. I strongly feel that Krejikova is the best on the field left especially with her very convincing 2-0 h2h over Sakkari. the set score in both cases will clearly suggest that Krej is master. Nothing would have changed much. I feel the bookies much have had some balls to make Sakkari favorite. Anyone who beats the tournament favorite should be favorite in their opinion. After all What do they care if such thinking has the potential to drown a few unsuspecting punters.

Well, I'd definitely rather be on Zverev than on Djokovic if I had to go for an underdog. Nadal honestly has everything on his side and I think that it's very realistic that he'll have more trouble in the finals than today.

oh no, chances are slim that Zverev cleans up his second serve issues and that will cost him when Tsitsi goes for the shots. The fresher one doesn't always win as you might have learned by now. Sascha has treated his problem with second serve but not cured it.

I am even more tempted to go with Krejikova after reading a comment like this. Losing money in style is the natural default state of a gambler so one will not be doing anything really different going with a favorite like Sakkaraki as you have preferred to call her. Sakkari has always looked like this female Lion that you have described. It certainly did not come into view after her victory over Iga. And by the way Iga had been long overdue for a heavy defeat as players were now beginning to catch up with her game. This is something that every player has to go through till they rediscover themselves a second time, We saw that with players with Muguruza, and recently with Kenin, Vekic, Kerber . Some players never quite make it back like Bouchard. In what has certainly been a very erratic and strange tournament I almost feel the best way forward is to only play with what you can afford to lose then aim to lose it in style to have a chance of winning. I strongly feel that Krejikova is the best on the field left especially with her very convincing 2-0 h2h over Sakkari. the set score in both cases will clearly suggest that Krej is master. Nothing would have changed much. I feel the bookies much have had some balls to make Sakkari favorite. Anyone who beats the tournament favorite should be favorite in their opinion. After all What do they care if such thinking has the potential to drown a few unsuspecting punters.

I am even more tempted to go with Krejikova after reading a comment like this. Losing money in style is the natural default state of a gambler so one will not be doing anything really different going with a favorite like Sakkaraki as you have preferred to call her. Sakkari has always looked like this female Lion that you have described. It certainly did not come into view after her victory over Iga. And by the way Iga had been long overdue for a heavy defeat as players were now beginning to catch up with her game. This is something that every player has to go through till they rediscover themselves a second time, We saw that with players with Muguruza, and recently with Kenin, Vekic, Kerber . Some players never quite make it back like Bouchard. In what has certainly been a very erratic and strange tournament I almost feel the best way forward is to only play with what you can afford to lose then aim to lose it in style to have a chance of winning. I strongly feel that Krejikova is the best on the field left especially with her very convincing 2-0 h2h over Sakkari. the set score in both cases will clearly suggest that Krej is master. Nothing would have changed much. I feel the bookies much have had some balls to make Sakkari favorite. Anyone who beats the tournament favorite should be favorite in their opinion. After all What do they care if such thinking has the potential to drown a few unsuspecting punters.

Top spotlight players for today: Koepfer and Linette

The markets seem to be suddenly taking a u-turn against Cilic now going from 2/1 to 12/5 the win. This is mostly the result of sharp money coming on Federer for some reason. I am strongly believing that if Cilic is going to lose then it will be by a collapse of 0-3. I will be siding with the fed here from all the new pointers.

@lelit Yeah, you're right in that she's in with a shout. She's quite fragile health-wise, though. Obviously a lot depends on the draw as well, hard to find a bet before that.

After what Pablo Cuevas surprisingly saw himself do to Opelka, there has to be a sense that the young Cazaux is walking into a death trap. Cuevas is a very good player when on song, and one does not need a soothsayer to tell you that Cuevas looks very game here. I thought the first part of your write-up was on point till you got distracted by giving Cazaux the vote borne of a feeling. Really?? lol. Cuevas to with match @1/2 is good value

Feliciano Lopez to beat Dominic Köpfer at 2.55 with Unibet
Still going strong with his lefty serve even on clay but not at the same rate of course but enough to beat this german for the second time even on Domis prefered surface. I can't say I'm impressed by Domi either in München or Geneva. His serve isn't there, his footwork is lacking, he's mentally weak and can't handle anyone who serves big.
Edit: Only reason Domi is still in Geneva is the mental headcase Paire who as usually threw away a match he was winning.

I didn't give Cazaux the vote, I just thought he might have improved but not enough to beat Pablo but I'm gonna leave it alone so no bet.

After what Pablo Cuevas surprisingly saw himself do to Opelka, there has to be a sense that the young Cazaux is walking into a death trap. Cuevas is a very good player when on song, and one does not need a soothsayer to tell you that Cuevas looks very game here. I thought the first part of your write-up was on point till you got distracted by giving Cazaux the vote borne of a feeling. Really?? lol. Cuevas to with match @1/2 is good value

After what Pablo Cuevas surprisingly saw himself do to Opelka, there has to be a sense that the young Cazaux is walking into a death trap. Cuevas is a very good player when on song, and one does not need a soothsayer to tell you that Cuevas looks very game here. I thought the first part of your write-up was on point till you got distracted by giving Cazaux the vote borne of a feeling. Really?? lol. Cuevas to with match @1/2 is good value

Paire is a real nutcase. Looks like he leaves his brains in his racket bag before his comes on court. Schoolboy player!!!

Cilic Vs Stricker
Cilic is not in any kind of real form but classwise should be able to beat Stricker easily which really should be the default reasoning here - that is if you are too blind to notice the other hidden factors.. Cilic 4/3 on clay this year and Stricker 0/1. The question is who is this Stricker? Do not expect me to have an answer for you as I have only seen as much as you have probably seen about him. However there are some very import things that stand out about this match that I just cannot overlook. Stricker is only 18 and has a very impressive hard court record under him. He has only played the one match on clay yet the tournament organizers have deemed it fit to slot this match into the prime time slot. Most times they do this for reason. (Saving the best for last)This boy must have some real potential especially with the way the odds have moved in the last 2 days. Verdict: Stricker to win a set @ evens . Sprinkling a few euros on Stricker to win 3/1 is also strongly advised. Good luck!!!

Paire is a real nutcase. Looks like he leaves his brains in his racket bag before his comes on court. Schoolboy player!!!