Announcements
** August Nap's Competition Result : 1st Thebestthere, 2nd Glavintoby, 3rd Bathtime For Rupert, KO Cup Steve75, Most Winners Alastair, York Comp: Thebestthere**
**September Poker League Result : 1st Kevsul £75, 2nd Gemic £45, 3rd Barry John £30**

Recommended Posts

I can see the merits of backing Carreno-Busta, but personally I'd want a higher price. As it is, I don't think it's worth backing either player. If I was forced to take something in the match it would probably be overs in the set market, as I don't think this will be finished in straight sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alex De Minaur to win a set at 1.8 with bet365

De Minaur has so much potential and talent to become a top 5 player in men's tennis. I'm not even sure that Thiem is gonna win tonight, let alone grab a straight set victory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are odds so high on Brady tonight? :eek

Is it because of Osaka's reputation? Brady didn't do nothing wrong in tournament so far..Can she snitch a set at least?

Edited by DrO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Osaka is the best female tennis player right now. Her best > anyone elses achieveable best. I agree that Brady has been playing better this tournament, the assumption is that that will force Osaka to play better and ultimately come through. I do see a lot of value in Brady and the handicap though as its a large assumption. But similiar to how Serena has been struggling each round and then just raises it enough to get through, the market is assuming Osaka will raise her game enough to overcome anything Brady has to throw at her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Larkin22 said:

Osaka is the best female tennis player right now. Her best > anyone elses achieveable best. I agree that Brady has been playing better this tournament, the assumption is that that will force Osaka to play better and ultimately come through. I do see a lot of value in Brady and the handicap though as its a large assumption. But similiar to how Serena has been struggling each round and then just raises it enough to get through, the market is assuming Osaka will raise her game enough to overcome anything Brady has to throw at her.

A huge percentage of that large assumption must center around how much Brady really believes in herself and play within the freedom of the invisible mode that has brought her this far. Both players really thrive on playing on the front foot and winning most of their points behind the first serve. Therein lies the equal chance for both.. Brady has a very potent serve backed up by the security of heavy balls on both sides of the racket. I really think that she has more chances of winning than has been reflected by the market.. I will not comment on Osaka aside the fact that I feel that she is too short a price from what I can see. Unless she has solely been priced in the hope that Brady might just be overwhelmed by the whole situation. I think not. Just to add an extra thought. I have this feeling that Serena's chances of making number 24 is predicated on a Brady victory. Alternative handicap Brady +5.5 on paddy power @ 4/11 heavy stakes seems the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, freeyourself84 said:

One more airbag-bet?  I just heard the match is likely to play indoors due to rain so this is really good for Naomi.

All in on airbag mode and backed by some positive reasoning. The Brady game even giving ample room for a loss, should be able to hold her serve more than enough times to cover what i see as a week target. The real target should be 4.5 and I still think that she covers that easily. Brady has also played better up to this point in the tournament compared to Naomi who has wobbled a bit under the barrage of a few body blows. Secondly, this has really been a strange year and even if I cannot rely on humans to deliver, I feel it is about the right time for the covid 19 effect to kick in as I know it must. The odds have moved well enough to indicate that Brady will certainly show up very well(Yes! I said it!) This will be one of my biggest game wagers ever. ever!! Very well worth the risk for me and with my bottle of red wine already in position, I feel ready to roll. Common Naomi, bring it on!!!!!!

Edited by liquidglass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Azarenka is playing well enough to beat Williams but she has to get over some mental challenges. I know she's beaten her a few times, but never in a slam. She's 0 from 10 in slam meetings. But its been a while since their last match and Williams is now almost 39 years old, and at some point that has to count against her. Maybe tonight is the night. But we also know how much this means to Williams and she always raises her game for the big events like this. I think the outcome of this match will be influenced by the result of the first semi. If Brady upsets Osaka I think Williams will get an extra lift and it will fuel her to a victory over Azarenka. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fascinating and strange watch so far and it can be distilled very simply - if Serena hits her first serve, she looks invincible. If she doesn't, she looks like anybody could beat her.

Edited by Torque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2020 at 2:32 AM, Torque said:

Not long now until this starts, so I'm starting to think about who might win it. For the men, it's hard to look past Djokovic especially with no Nadal or Federer in attendance and for the women I have absolutely no idea - it could be any one out of about ten and I'd imagine the draw will have a big part to play. One player who definitely will not be winning it - famous last words - is Serena and that's regardless of withdrawals and despite how high up she is in the betting. I'd love to see her win it because I think she deserves to have the Slam record for her career's work, but I just can't see it. 

Since the tour restarted she's been absolutely nowhere near the standard required to win a Slam from what I've seen. She's been struggling massively against players she would be expected to beat easily if she was on top of her game. She should have lost today against Rus in what was an unbelievable performance given what you expect from a player of her stature against an average opponent. She took the first set in a tie-break, immediately went a break up at the start of the second and at that point you'd expect her to put her foot down and win with ease. Instead, she got broken twice in a row on the way to losing the second set. Like the second set, she got ahead early in the third and then served for the match. At that point she got broken and then got broken again which saw Rus serving for the match. Somehow she clawed the break back before racing away in the deciding tie-break. She said afterwards that she thought she'd played well but deep down she must know she was nowhere near good enough, just like in her last match when she lost to Rogers - another player she would have expected to beat without too much trouble. She said after that match that she knows she can play better but I didn't see any signs of improvement against Rus and it makes you wonder; if she thinks she can play better then why isn't she.

There's no way she should be losing to Rogers and struggling to beat Rus if her game is working well, and if the talk is right that she's got a 'new and improved' serve - I've also heard something about a new racquet - she might want to think about going back to the way things were. Being broken by a player as limited as Rus as many times as she was should set alarm bells ringing in her camp about her chances at the US Open. If her serve isn't firing, if she isn't getting easy points from it then she's in big trouble because once it gets into a rally that's a definite leveller for any opponent. It took about three hours to get the win today and she needs to avoid matches that require that much effort and intensity if she's going to stand a chance at the US Open. It's not like it can even be written off as one sub-par performance - she's needed three sets for all her wins since the restart plus another troubling pattern has emerged which is her winning the first set of a match and still struggling. I'm sure other players will have noticed that which will mean they'll still feel they're in with a chance even at a set down. It used to be that going a set down to Serena would cause a player to lose heart and make winning that much easier for her, but I think those days are gone.

It could be worth going against her if she wins the first set of her matches at the US Open and I'll certainly be looking at that, but in short if you're a recreational punter who's just dropping by to get an idea of what to bet on then it might be best to find someone else to back. Serena may be the best known player and she may be the best to ever play the game, but she's not a good bet in my opinion based on recent form and going back a few years as well.

I was really hoping I'd get egg on my face and Serena would win the whole thing, and after taking the first set against Vika 6-1 it looked as though she'd be making the final and getting the chance to avenge her loss to Osaka in the title match here two years ago. But it wasn't to be. In the first set she was finding her first serves and playing really aggressively, even going so far as to overturn 40-0 on Vika's serve to win the first set without needing to serve it out. Vika was strangely subdued and timid to begin with which I found really odd, particularly as she started pumping herself up and getting much more animated at the start of the second when she managed to avoid going a set and a break down - why she wasn't like that from the start I have no idea. As her intensity rose, Serena's serve started to falter slightly and Vika was able to break her in a game where Serena only found her first serve once. As if to illustrate the importance of her first serve, she failed to win a single point in the second set behind her second serve.

Just like the start of the second, Serena got a look at Vika's serve at the start of the third and might have broken but wasn't able to. Serena then got broken from 40-0 after injuring herself towards the end of the game - an injury which required a lengthy MTO. By this stage, Vika was picking up Serena's first serve meaning that Serena couldn't get many cheap points on it, and although she was doing better on second serve those points were often longer and she was beginning to tire which meant she wasn't as mobile as she had been - the heavy strapping on her ankle wouldn't have helped with getting around the court either. By now it seemed inevitable Vika would get the win, and she duly served out the set and match without too many issues.

For Serena, undoubtedly there'll be thoughts of what could have been. If her first serve hadn't deserted her for just one game in the second set there would have been every chance of a straight-sets win. If she'd been able to hold from 40-0 in the decider. If she hadn't made so many unforced errors in the decider the times she got ahead on Vika's serve. If she'd been able to conserve energy by winning more easily in the earlier rounds. As well as Vika played - and she did play well from the point her back was against the wall early in the second set - I don't think it was that difficult for her to get the win.

The template for beating Serena has been in place for a while now and Vika ended up executing it perfectly - keep the ball in play, move Serena around and wait for the errors to come. I'd love to see Serena win another Slam but I don't see how it can happen when there is such a contrast between her high level and her low level, which seems to be inextricably linked to her serve. 'First serve' Serena is a thing of powerful, brutal and dominating beauty like 'Sunday' Tiger Woods. 'Second serve' Serena is as bad as 'First serve' Serena is good - watching it last night it almost seemed binary in that if the first serve went in she won the point and if it didn't and she had to rely on her second serve she lost the point. In the end, that was the key to the match. Serena wasn't great on second serve in the first set, but it didn't matter because she was so imperious on her first serve. Once Vika got a handle on her first serve and with her second serve still a liability, the match was only likely to go one way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to see much value in the finals for me. Osaka is better than Azarenka at the moment, though only slightly so. Meanwhile, Thiem has way more mental consistency than Zverev. You just feel that he's going to self-destruct in at least one set and start going downhill from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

This is the main reason why Osaka is a long way from being mentioned in the same breadth as with the greats of this game. A one dimensional bully who never has a plan B. It’s a long time I saw her sulk like a baby. Funny she has never been able to part with the gloomy habit. Simply a paper tiger!,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zverev A. (ATP: 7) - Thiem D. (ATP: 3)

To present my point of view, I will use short anecdote.  The coach assistant Dariusz Śledziewskiego during Opposition Instructions say - "Guys... France! What I can say? Winners of World Champions and European Championship. Barthez - experience, phenomenal game and ball controlling. Right defender Thuram - what i can say? - it's it! Central Defender - Blanc game visions and Desailly - rock! dont even jump to ball because it's not make seanse. Next - Zidane, guys don't come closer than 2 meters because it will be ridiculous. Forward - Henry! don't even try to go out and catch offside because it doesn't make sense." And so they are sitting, you know, depressed.. In a moment we have to leave, 80,000 Stade de France. Now coach entered the cloakroom, looked at the board ... and says - "Gentlemen, France ... this is the past ...".

 

Zverev during tournament plays very chaotic and makes a lot of mistakes, hims opponent Thiem plays one of the best tournament in life. So why did two competitors with such a different form meet in the final? Because Zverev at decisive moments he gains concentration and plays very wall. The Final is decisive moment. Tennis in large part is psychological game. A long overview of the statistics and description of the form doesn't make sense because everybody who watch tennis know about it. If Zverev will be concentrated, he should win this battle. 

Zverev @4.75

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, TomOlej said:

Zverev A. (ATP: 7) - Thiem D. (ATP: 3)

To present my point of view, I will use short anecdote.  The coach assistant Dariusz Śledziewskiego during Opposition Instructions say - "Guys... France! What I can say? Winners of World Champions and European Championship. Barthez - experience, phenomenal game and ball controlling. Right defender Thuram - what i can say? - it's it! Central Defender - Blanc game visions and Desailly - rock! dont even jump to ball because it's not make seanse. Next - Zidane, guys don't come closer than 2 meters because it will be ridiculous. Forward - Henry! don't even try to go out and catch offside because it doesn't make sense." And so they are sitting, you know, depressed.. In a moment we have to leave, 80,000 Stade de France. Now coach entered the cloakroom, looked at the board ... and says - "Gentlemen, France ... this is the past ...".

 

Zverev during tournament plays very chaotic and makes a lot of mistakes, hims opponent Thiem plays one of the best tournament in life. So why did two competitors with such a different form meet in the final? Because Zverev at decisive moments he gains concentration and plays very wall. The Final is decisive moment. Tennis in large part is psychological game. A long overview of the statistics and description of the form doesn't make sense because everybody who watch tennis know about it. If Zverev will be concentrated, he should win this battle. 

Zverev @4.75

For me, an asteroid to hit Earth is more probable than Zverev to beat this current super classy Thiem.

C'mon Thiem! Give him the lesson my boy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, delfino said:

For me, an asteroid to hit Earth is more probable than Zverev to beat this current super classy Thiem.

C'mon Thiem! Give him the lesson my boy!

There's definitely more chance of Zverev beating Thiem that an asteroid hitting the earth - but I get your point. Thiem should win but if his feet are an issue, as they were against Medvedev, then that will help Zverev's chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was some final - Zverev threw it away in all honesty. Until he sorts out his serve I can't see him winning a Grand Slam. I read a quote that said he alternates between serving like Isner and serving like Errani and that about sums it up. Worse than that though is that he alternates like that between first and second serve - it's incredible to watch.

Edited by Torque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.