Foxstar

No everyone hasn't gone quiet. I can only speak for myself and for me it's like I'm in denial when others post and I don't react in time to give a like but I can agree @CzechPunter posted a good bet on JLS.

Very good betting tip!

Jan-Lennard Struff to beat Albert Ramos at 1.62 with William Hill
Ramos hasn't won a match in ages, and, while the return to clay should help, Struff did rather well in the qualifiers here, and should be primed to win this as well. Beating Varillas and Ruusuvuori is no easy feat, and he should be fitter than Ramos these days as well.

Of course it remains to be seen, but if it's a choice between multiple Wimbledon winner Djokovic and wet behind the ears on grass Alcaraz, I know who I'm going for every time. You seem to be suggesting Alcaraz has a good chance and good luck to you if you've bet on him, but right now I'm very happy to be on Djokovic and I'll still feel that way even if Alcaraz does win the tournament. This is the thing I don't understand about certain users of this forum - different opinions are OK. It's not about trying to get everyone to agree with you.

I'm still here. I admit I was way off last night. Zverev was a totally different player lol. It was as if he didn't wanna qualify to the next round. It was so lopsided that it makes you wonder what really happened to him. 

I see the posts regarding Shapavalov and Zverev and for me this match goes in fav of the fav. There is simply no comparison between the two. Shapavalov fell of a cliff after WImbledon while Zverev is getting better and better.  I think the victory at the Olympics has given Zverev the belief, because the way he dismantled Djoko there was frightening. Nobody is playing better 1st strike tennis , behind the serve than him.
Looking for 3 low priced winner today, taken all as singles;
1/23/2022 G Monfils v M Kecmanovic G Monfils 0.22 1/23/2022 A Barty v V Anismova A Barty 0.27 1/23/2022 S Halep v E Cornet S Halep 0.15  
 

I come in peace ...
I said I would not post but I simply could not  help myself. Not looking for an argument here, but do you understand implied odds?  So if somebody takes 100 bets at average odds of 3 to 10, at what win rate do you need to win to be profitable? Well the calculation is  1/1.3 or 76.9% . So If you are winning at a rate of over 76.9% you are winning, otherwise you are losing.  If you take 40 bets at odds of 9 to 10 then the calc is 1/1.9 or 52% win rate needed. When somebody says 'I'm winning 90% of my bets' the immediate question should be "ok, but at what odds".

A question that one should ask about odds is where these odds come from, who makes them, and what is the intention behind the given odds.
The bookmakers buy these odds from companies that produce them, and then make minor tweeks. But the companies that produce the odds are packed with super smart actuarial types, that have real knowledge, backed by mountains of data (at a level that we don't have). If you think you can outsmart them, good luck with that! You have to use what they are giving you as a starting point.
The intention is reasonable clear. The bookmakers want to be on the right side of the bet more often than not. But they have a other interests. The want odds on an event, that will create a balanced book, that gives them maximum volume. If they achieve that, they are in the money with their 5% 'overround' or 'juice'. The bookmakers actually hope you take multi legged bets, because the overround gets compounded by every leg you take, thus, giving them more and more 'juice'.
Calculate the juice is quite easy. Just using a soccer bet, today Arsenal v Burnley. Arsenal home win 1.28, draw 5.25, away win 12 (in this case dont add the 1, so 1.28 is really 2.8 to 10).   So 1/1.28  (home win) is 78.1%, the draw is 1/5.25 is 19% and the away win (1/12) = 8%. So when you add up 78+ 19 + 8 you get 105. SO the bookmakers overround or juice is 5%.  
 
In the current match on bet365 Shapa is 2.37 and Zverev is 1.57 (score 2-5). So 1/1.57 is 63% in fav of Zverev and 1/2.37 is 42%  so the overround is the 5% again (which is about standard).
 

Australia is country with,approximately,20 millions citizens. They have a percentage of over 90% vaccinated population..and stil they have a number of a 130.000 new cases in one day..somehow the logic that Djokovic is one who is threat to public health doesn't stand.. simply - numbers don't "approve" that logic..

Also, more than 3000 medical exemptions were issued ang given to the people for entering to country..i'm speaking of total number in this,let's call it,pandemic-era..pandemic-time..so,Novak is not the only one who was given this exemption as a ground to enter the state..

Even Minister Hawke concedes the unvaccinated Djokovic entered with a valid exemption and poses a low risk of contracting the virus while in Australia and passing it on to others.

But,no..here we have one member who "knows" better.
The only thing with i can agree is that Novak should have been vaccinated,because it's better for him personally and because of his career. Because,with this kind of attitude and behavior i can see that his profesional career is coming to the end..very fast end,that is. Which i think,is a shame. Cause,no one can tell that his career wasn't the great one.

So,like you said earlier @neilovanwe agree not to agree. Let us both stick with our tennis picks,from now on,please.
Appreciate.

Sorry for the this troll-post to everyone.

No, it's also something that he has to live with. Imagine causing the death of someone via Covid that you gave to them? That attitude is partially the reason that he is not 'loved' like Federer and Nadal.

be rest assured australians have to pay heavy penalty for doing this for years to come. First you give him visa, cancel his visa, isolate him, PM approves his visa, immigration minister rejects. What a jokw. Is this how u treat foeeigners. Novak would be bad image for 5% of the anti vaccinated aussies is the reasom they gave.

The Aussie governemt should have say that two or three shots of vaccines are condition to participate the event/enter the country. Thed didn't. They gave him a valid exeption. And then canceled his visa.

That he did interviews when he knew he had covid is just unacceptable. He has no regard or respect for other peoples safety.
This is something for Serbian,and not Australian,bodies to handle with..this is not the ground to cancel his visa.

I respect your opinion but I disagree completely. It was entirely his fault. Two injections and he would be playing tomorrow. That he did interviews when he knew he had covid is just unacceptable. He has no regard or respect for other peoples safety.

Novak would never have gone to Australia if he had not been given an exeption to enter the country by the goverment (which he did recieve; hence Judge Kelly's initial ruling). He would have skipped the Australian Open.

It's a lie that Novak had to be vaccinated to enter Australia. He had a clean medical exemption given by two Aussie medical panels. But,there was a political agenda at play here with the elections coming up which couldn't be more obvious. This is not his fault. Hi did not force his way into the country and did not "make his own rules";he was ready to stay home.

Okay, taking a couple!
Iga Swiatek to win the 4th quarter at 3.75 with Bet365
Krejcikova to go further than Sabalenka at 1.66 with Bet365
Swiatek was very good until she ran into Barty and she won't run into her in the quarter. The price is really good for one of the biggest talents on the tour, Sabalenka is next in the quarter and she's a mess. That's why I'm also backing Krejcikova to go further than her. 

Well, he's not going to jail, that much I can tell you. As for whether he plays or not, I think it's not set in stone yet.

Well, we are getting a Grand Slam after all – and chances are that we’re going to get another one soon after as well!
Looking at the US Open, it’s hard to be confident with one’s bets when it comes to those players that haven’t played since the coronavirus break and there’s certainly a case to be made for staying away from the first round in many match-us. I’ll be in the action, though, so let’s take a look at some of the matches.
Outright-wise, Djokovic is the big favourite in the men’s draw and that’s obviously right for many reasons. We did see him struggle in the warm-up event though and I don’t want to back him at this sort of odds no matter what. I liked Raonic, though, and I’ll be backing him to win his quarter.
On the women’s side of things, the bookmakers know that Williams isn’t such a big favourite as the media are making her out to be and there’s not much that I like honestly. Osaka has been surprising me lately with how good she is, but getting back-to-back events in such a short time frame will be tough. She’s also withdrawn from the finals as I’m writing this, so there’s that.
Now for the matches – I might add a few more later on, but, for now, I’ve got theses ones lined up. First, I’ve got Feliciano Lopez to win against Carballes Baena. The latter was pretty average on clay in Europe and the conditions in this US Open are quick enough to give Lopez a good advantage, especially given that he’s kept himself in some for during the coronavirus break. I’m taking the set handicap, as I’d reckon that RCB will win if he drags the match on and on.
Next, I’ve got Dennis Novak beating Alejandro Davidovich Fokina for largely the same reasons. Novak can be great in quick conditions, Fokina can’t – and he’s also been disappointing me for quite some time now. I had him down as a big talent, but he’s been struggling to establish himself on the main tour.
Then, I like Corentin Moutet to beat the underperforming Jiri Vesely. Vesely has some wins under his belt and that’s fine, but not against the level of Moutet and the Frenchman has been keeping himself busy on hard in the off-season against top-class players, which should do him a world of good here.
I also like the odds for Bedene to beat Ruusuvuori, as I liked his performances in New York before that and especially his win over Fritz. That was a long match in which he stayed collected throughout and was serving really well.
And, as a small double, I’ll be taking Christian Garin to beat Ulises Blanch together with Ricardas Bernakis to beat Federico Gaio. Both are way better and have played on hard recently.
On the women’s side of things, I’ve got Pera to beat Diyas. She’s been the surprise package for me since the restart and she even has mental resilience after facing Serena and doing well, while Diyas has played just a single match against Li and lost with no resistance whatsoever.
I also like Golubic to beat Lapko. She’s got a good game for faster conditions and she has one of the better serves on the WTA, if that can be even said. Moreover, Lapko hasn’t played since March and has just three wins this year against poor players. Golubic has been keeping herself busy, on the other hand, and can make an impact here.
Milos Raonic to win the 4th quarter at 5.50 with Unibet
Feliciano Lopez (-1.5 sets) to beat Roberto Carballes Baena at 2.07 with Sbobet
Dennis Novak (-1.5 sets) to beat Alejandro Davidovich Fokina at 2.03 with Sbobet
Corentin Moutet to beat Jiri Vesely at 1.74 with Pinnacle
Aljaz Bedene to beat Emil Ruusuvuori at 1.84 with Pinnacle
Christian Garin (vs. Blanch) + Ricardas Berankis (vs. Gaio) at 1.70 with Bet365
Bernarda Pera (-3.5) to beat Zarina Diyas at 1.84 with Pinnacle
Viktorija Golubic (-3.5) to beat Vera Lapko at 1.86 with Pinnacle

Betting against the recently mentally weak Bencic is quite logical; she loves her daddy but doesn't respect him, always argueing with him when she looks for good advices. She is hysterical with her mistakes. She wins first sets easily and then loses the next two easily. Very weak second serv, too. Maybe she needs a new coach? 
I also think the odds on Kuznetsova are encouraging; she is too experienced and Swiatek's tactical skills are not very good.

Nick Kyrgios (-2.5) to beat Ugo Humbert at 1.83 with Bet365
You obviously never really know with Kyrgios, but this looks like a decent spot to me. He has a soft spot for Acapulco, he's the defending champion, and he'll be playing against a young gun that he'll probably want to establish himself against. Moreover, Humbert suffered pretty badly against Nishioka, losing the thread completely after starting incredibly well.

It’s a good job I followed you on that one. ?

Also, Barty .

Also thinking about Diego stealing a set off Djokovic, the odds are certainly juicy and, even though he doesn't have any big weapons, he'll be there as he was against Rafa in 2018. Hasn't even dropped a set yet, which is sort of incredible given that he doesn't have a serve to fall back on, while Djokovic has. I'm not saying it's going to happen, but yeah, I'm going to go for it at 2.89 with Pinnacle. Diego just sort of has this habit of not falling apart and he can run all day long, while his groundstrokes are as good as they are when it comes to the big guys. Having no serve means that he just can't be among the top guys, but he's not Nishioka-like if you want to make comparisons, he's much hardier and mentally apt. He took a set of Medvedev in the ATP Cup, so I am going to have a sporting play based on the odds alone.

I like Fucsovics against Federer on sunday. Roger must be tired after that 4-hour match against Millman who fought really hard but in some ways choked in the end. Fucsovics has played his best tennis here in a while and has been liking the conditions too. Best odds around 5.50 @William Hill
 
 

Considering something there as well @Judeksi, I remember Fucsovics playing very decently against Roger in the past and the circumstances look right indeed.

Marton Fucsovics to beat Tommy Paul at 1.64 with Marathonbet
CzechPunter has already posted this. Tommy is physically a weak player and he should be tired for this one after his 6 matches played in Adelaide and his 2 matches here (including a 4 h 22 m match against Dimitrov). Fucsovics is playing really really well and he has only dropped a set in his two matches against dangerous players (especially Shapo of course). 
Roberto Bautista (-4.0 Games) to beat Marin Cilic at 1.83 with Marathonbet
Cilic had a horrible 2019 season. I expected him to have a tough match against Moutet but he destroyed him. After that I thought we was the right favorite against Paire but he almost lost that match. He was very vulnerable with his second serves. Bautista failed me and lost his first set against Mmoh. It was disappointing because after that set he played in a very high level and destroyed Mmoh in the following sets. He said after the match that the strong wind affected him. The last year Bautista won against Cilic by 3 sets to 2 but this handicap should have been covered (6-7, 6-3, 6-2, 4-6, 6-4). This time Bautista is in better form than Cilic so I expect Bautista to win this.
Serena Williams vs Qiang Wang Under 19.5 Games at 1.72 with 888
Nothing much to say here. Serena has destroyed Potapova and Zidansek in her first 2 round here. The last time these 2 players faced each other was in the US Open and Serena won 6-1, 6-0…