Wimbledon 2021

[CzechPunter]

Pliskova has certainly turned the clock back a couple of years and she's playing her best tennis for quite some time now. It all comes down to pressure again and you know how things work with GS finals in this respect. You can get someone like Ostapenko who just doesn't care or get someone who chokes all the way down. Pliskova has played on the big stage for long enough, but Barty has the more impressive trophy cabinet by far. I echo what's been said above. If Pliskova serves well, she has a good chance. If her serve stops working at any point, though, she'll be in a world of trouble. The odds are probably spot on, though I'd lean slightly on Pliskova.

[Torque]

The problem for Sabalenka that manifested against Pliskova is the same problem she's always had - namely she doesn't seem to have the ability to do anything other than hit the ball hard. Against most players, and on good days of which she has plenty, she blasts through whoever she's playing against and is able to rack up win after win and because she's winning the deficiencies in her game are masked over. But they've always been there. Plan A is hit the ball hard, Plan B is hit the ball harder and she doesn't seem to be able to adapt and adjust her game during a match.

The best example of that against Pliskova was being in control of about 4 or 5 rallies and being in a position half-way up the court to put the ball away and win the point, and she kept going to Pliskova's forehand and losing the point. Someone like Barty might play that shot once, maybe twice, but come the third time they'd be going down the backhand side having realised that going to the forehand wasn't working. If she's to take her game to the next level, she really needs to work on tactics and point construction and also awareness of how a match is going so that she can try to change what she's doing if it isn't working.

[CzechPunter]

To be fair, Pliskova often resorts to the same game plan as Sabalenka. When out of form, she's just a ball basher that hopes her serve will beat her opponents on its own while they self-destruct with a free break.

[Torque]

1 minute ago, CzechPunter said:

To be fair, Pliskova often resorts to the same game plan as Sabalenka. When out of form, she's just a ball basher that hopes her serve will beat her opponents on its own while they self-destruct with a free break.

Absolutely. I've said on here before that without her serve, Pliskova is an average top 50 player at best.

[Hermes]

On 7/8/2021 at 12:50 PM, neilovan said:

I really don't think Djok has been playing particularly well. Opponents have been average at best. They all looked a little scared, playing the man rather than the opponent. I thought Anderson might bring some game, but he looks to be heading the same way as Murray and Fed. Maybe it's the center court camera angle (Aussie open has the best center court camera angle/coverage. Framed fantastically well), but it seems they are not hitting the ball that hard.

Shapavalov and Berretinni will be his two toughest challenges. Berrettini is just ridiculously good behind his serve. He is able to serve himself outta trouble over and over again, something tha Djoko is pretty good at too.

My betting is somewhat skewed because I just don't like Djokovic !

Even though Berretini is destroying Hubi as we speak Shapovalov is a bigger threat than whoever he meets in the final. Gameplay wise Berretini is tidy, Shapo will be aggressive and fearless with nothing to lose today. I guess only time will tell.

[Hermes]

If Shapovalov takes cares of his double faults, this match will go to overs no doubt.

[Torque]

7 minutes ago, Hermes said:

If Shapovalov takes cares of his double faults, this match will go to overs no doubt.

Nothing in tennis is certain and the unexpected happens all the time. Everyone expected the Berrettini match to go over and that's looking highly unlikely. What was even more unlikely was a bagel set for either player - the odds on that must have been huge given they are both big servers that tend to hold serve well.

[liquidglass]

4 hours ago, Torque said:

Nothing in tennis is certain and the unexpected happens all the time. Everyone expected the Berrettini match to go over and that's looking highly unlikely. What was even more unlikely was a bagel set for either player - the odds on that must have been huge given they are both big servers that tend to hold serve well.

Very true about nothing being certain. The score in the Djokovic match indicates that Shapovalov must have put up a good fight when he actually was rubbish. Yet, many other players will play twice as hard and not get past winning three games in a set. Shapovalov could never put more that five back to back strokes in play without missing. Fake player!!!

[liquidglass]

Reading from page 1 of this thread, it becomes so apparent how this indulgence almost seems a complete waste of time. If this forum was a university then most of our parents would have given up paying our school fees from us being too dumb to excel....Always hopeful but never really coming to the knowledge of the truth. It is like trying to catch the wind in the palm of your hand to show someone as evidence. Hahahaha!

[CzechPunter]

6 minutes ago, liquidglass said:

Reading from page 1 of this thread, it becomes so apparent how this indulgence almost seems a complete waste of time. If this forum was a university then most of our parents would have given up paying our school fees from us being too dumb to excel....Always hopeful but never really coming to the knowledge of the truth. It is like trying to catch the wind in the palm of your hand to show someone as evidence. Hahahaha!

Not sure what you're talking about, I think most of us had good two weeks!

Karolina Pliskova (+1.5 sets) to beat Ashleigh Barty at 1.75 with Pinnacle

I usually like to protect my betting a bit in the second GS weeks and this one was no exception. Just didn't have any strong feelings and the first week was so good that there was no need to push things. I'm going to take Pliskova, though, after considering everything. Barty hasn't quite faced anyone with a good serve so far and only one in-form player in Kerber as well. Pliskova took a set off Barty in Stuttgart and now the conditions favor her even more.

[darko08]

Karolina Pliskova - Total Aces - Over 8.5 at 1.83 with bet365

Pliskova has played 6 matches and she has covered this line in 3 of them. In her match against Zidansek she did 10 aces (7-5, 6-4), 5 against Vekic (6-2, 6-2), 7 against Martincova (6-3, 6-3), 10 against Samsonova (6-2, 6-3), 8 against Golubic (6-2, 6-2) and 14 against Sabalenka (5-7, 6-4, 6-4). The reason why she did not cover this line in the other matches is that she broke her opponents' serve more than 1 time per set (Golubic, Vekic and Martincova). Despite that, she was very close to cover this line in 2 of them (Golubic and Martincova). Pliskova has been serving really well here so if we have 2 "tight" sets this bet will have good chances (the last time they played on grass was in Nottingham 2016 and Pliskova hit 20 aces in 2 sets). The worst scenario is one of these players being severely defeated, of course.

Edited July 9, 2021 by darko08

[darko08]

Ashleigh Barty - Total Aces - Over 7.5 at 1.83 with bet365

Barty has played 6 matches and she has covered this line in 2 of them. She did 13 aces against Carla Suarez (6-1, 6-7, 6-1), 5 against Blinkova (6-4, 6-3), 6 against Siniakova (6-3, 7-5), 7 against Krejcikova, 5 against Ajla (6-1, 6-3) and 8 against Kerber (6-3, 7-6). Pliskova received 18 aces against Sabalenka (in 3 sets) but Barty is a better server (has more variety on serve). Same reasoning here, if we have a fought match I see really good chances. 

[owenclass]

The aces bet will be interesting in the Barty Pliskova match

[darko08]

1 hour ago, 38sdk1 said:

I’m not usually a big believer in using historical statistics, to help select bets. For example, things like ‘the number one seed has beaten the number eight seed, on all five occasions they have met in the final,’ and things like that, that involve random matches, spread over many decades. (I made that one up as an example, that’s not a correct statistic!)

However........

When the statistics are A: Involving all recent finals, up to the modern day; B: Consecutive and still running; ? To such a huge extent as the ones I’m about to present; then I do on this occasion think these are very relevant.

Looking at recent Women’s Grand Slam finals, the Australian Open and French Open both have a reasonable split of two-set and three-set matches. However, Wimbledon has a ridiculously lopsided tendency towards two-set finals in recent years.

Between 1976 and 2006, there were 16 three-set finals, and only 15 two-set finals. I don’t know what changed, but since then, 12 of the last 13 Women’s Wimbledon finals have been won in two sets (including all of the last seven finals.) As well as that, there has only been one tie-break in the past 14 finals (and none in the last ten finals.)

I can’t really think of any particular reasons why these stats would have occurred. Having watched nearly all of these recent finals, it just tends to usually be the case that one player turns up and plays a great match, and the other doesn’t manage to live with their level. I’m not sure why, but until that starts to change, I think we have to place our bets accordingly.

Barty against Pliskova would be the exact sort of match that I would expect to oppose this, and go long, and include tie-break(s). However, I have to go with these overwhelming stats, and assume that one player will turn up and play to a much higher level than the other.

So, I would highly recommend any combination of the following bets:

UNDER 22.5 GAMES (8/11 on SkyBet)

2 SETS IN THE MATCH (1/2 on SkyBet)

NO TIE-BREAK IN THE MATCH (1/3 on SkyBet)

Please feel free to recommend better prices, or similar markets, elsewhere.

 

*Interestingly, the stats for the Women’s US Open are even more skewed towards two-set finals and a lack of tie-breaks. Only 4 three-set finals in 25 years, and only three tie-breaks in that time. Remarkable, and something to remember in two months time, when that tournament rolls around.

Well, those stats are quite interesting (I love this kind of stats) but neither Barty nor Pliskova played in any of those 13 finals. Serena was in 8 of those 13 Finals you mentioned (and 7 were 2 set matches). Venus was in 4 and all her matches were 2 set matches. It seems the Williams sisters do not like to play 3 set matches.

Edited July 10, 2021 by darko08

[CzechPunter]

I won't be getting involved in the men's finals most likely, especially since I still have that 1.44 bet on Djokovic to win. Do I trust him to win 3-0? Not exactly. Do I trust him to win? Definitely. Despite his bad performance against Shapovalov, Berrettini will have his biggest mental test of his career and it will be even bigger than when he met Djokovic in the French Open. Despite the scoreline against Hurkacz, I didn't feel he was playing THAT well to have much of a claim here and this will be a different match-up entirely. He has a better chance than Hurkacz would've had, but the odds are arguably spot on if you factor in the occasion and Djokovic's ability to rise to it.

[liquidglass]

Pliskova needs her head examined. She is just too mentally fragile to be doing business in the WTA. Maybe she was expecting Barty to give her an arm-chair ride to the victory podium. Gutless turd!!!

[bet4fun]

11 minutes ago, liquidglass said:

Pliskova needs her head examined. She is just too mentally fragile to be doing business in the WTA. Maybe she was expecting Barty to give her an arm-chair ride to the victory podium. Gutless turd!!!

ya anybody in her place could have taken advantage of the fact that barty has started choking again and cannot finish the touch line. pliskova lost her realistic opportunity to win a grand slam.

[bet4fun]

will not comment on tomorrow's final and will focus on the US open and trying to make up some ground for the bad wimbledon. good luck all and hope u had a wonderful wimbledon. see u at the US open

Edited July 10, 2021 by bet4fun

[delfino]

although after the result we are all wise, i think however that today Pliskova totally disappointed me. After the second set, i said to my self that Barty is over, she started to choke, however Pliskova gifted her the title with the losing attitude in third set. Congratulations to the very nice tip of Czech Punter, i followed him on that, and now i expect Brazil to win tonight to go to the cash. 

[mark22]

my comment on women´s final: watched the match till 6:5 in 2nd set, after all I saw had no hope for Pliskova.. even later bet was won, finals disappointed me. In first set there was NO Pliskova at all, serving was horrible, but she still had chance to get back like on 5:3 because of Barty doing the same. Pliskova showed all you discussed she IS NOT on this tournament, but she could be  no game plan, bad movement, missed shots, just keeping the ball in game and she even failed to do that after 4-5 shots in point. In second set Pliskova choked again, if she wouldn´t gift Barty that first break, she would won it easily. Than she played better, but had no luck when Barty hit the line 3x in one game. Top of her game was point, where she was standing near serve T, putting the ball 3 times on same spot on court, and eventualy missing cross court shot by miles?? That point would be like trailer for this match if it was a movie. Ok she got that 2nd set, but I´m sure she could win this with ease, since Barty showed nothing special to be honest. Level of tennis was just too shaky for match called finals of Wimbledon.

[owenclass]

Great match from both players. But Barty was the deserved winner

Edited July 10, 2021 by owenclass

[liquidglass]

3 hours ago, 38sdk1 said:

I mean, the bet won, but I think ‘very nice tip’ isn’t really correct. I’d hope CzechPunter would agree! The bet should have lost, with Barty (deservedly) a set and a break up, and then later (not so deservedly) serving for the second set, and failing to see it out.

What are you talking about my friend? There are only winners and losers in this game and no luck or close shaves. A nice tip is one that wins. End of story!!!! All the attractions and distractions on the road to that win is just as irrelevant as the loss. It is that simple!! Remember the tipster is giving you information from a perspective on what has already happened before it happens (if you can understand that). Everything in this game happens deliberately, no if, buts, or long distance hopes. I most times do not blame any player for playing bad or making me lose, instead I blame myself for not being sensitive enough in the spirit to avoid them. That is the maturity of the game. It is why you see the bookies winning 90% of what would normally appear like a 50/50 toss up where you are really manipulated into thinking that you had a live chance. This would seem the most closely guarded secret ever in the modus operandi of a secret cult that dares to invalidate the cognitive senses of man. Even in critical situations where a parlay is just waiting on a final selection to win and the bookies even have something as insignificant as a 3/10 chance of winning, they still win those situations 75% or more of the times (I am sure there are a lot of people on this forum who can testify to that). The average parlay will lose out deliberately by just one selection over 85% of the time most times. The bookies deliberately always never have close shaves where the punter is winning large out of turn. It is all well organized to produce a deliberate and desired outcome. As soon as a punter starts winning large habitually, that person is banned and ostracized from all betting shops regardless of the betting company. You are now considered a threat to a well established process. Out of necessity, they all come together to ban you saying "We do not like the way you do business". Back in the day your photo will be sent to all shops to be on the look out for you. I have seen that too many times. "It is established deliberately to the obstruction of the senses and the permission of the spirit". It is for the same reasons that people can be unmistakably making profits with their tipping here on the forum( feeling swell and cool about it) and be simultaneously losing heavily in real life playing the same identical games. Did I say same identical games? yes I did! How does this happen? (I know that there are a few of you reading that can relate to this) Why do our parlays most times always lose out by one selection most strategically located at the end of the betting entries? The deliberate fundamental structure of this methodology gives birth to constant human responses and results. It is why that bookies can ensure most times that you have that loser safely mixed into your selections without you knowing. There is an adage that says it is talk that begets talk. It is so funny how I have been made to spontaneously employ so many words on the basis of someone's simple response. I have long always wanted to go into the depth of this matter by trying to unravel this mystery that has been so well hidden for years. This whole idea of the bookies selling dead hope to people in exchange for a security which is entwined in this fleeting hope that has been bought...giving birth to an insatiable desire to be clung to.  Sometimes I just wish I could have the time to dedicate my pen to paper, to unveil what I consider a new facet of reasoning that would most certainly challenge what has always been the norm, and most certainly extricate the spirit of man from the captivity of this Ouija board mentality that has long kept him in bondage!

Being a writer I sometimes just find myself in one of those moods where I just want to pour out my spirit to enhance positive energy. Good Morning!!!

 

Edited July 11, 2021 by liquidglass

[mark22]

7 hours ago, 38sdk1 said:

I mean, the bet won, but I think ‘very nice tip’ isn’t really correct. I’d hope CzechPunter would agree! The bet should have lost, with Barty (deservedly) a set and a break up, and then later (not so deservedly) serving for the second set, and failing to see it out.

while most of us thinking in that way, all bet would be on edge of loss when Barty was set and break up. over 21.5 games, Pliskova over 11.5 games, Pliskova +1.5 set/+4 games were my picks. but as she won set in most H2H matches, with not really close sets, this was the right pick ? and also luck can show us sometimes, as there was almost none for me on Wimbledon.

[mark22]

22 minutes ago, 38sdk1 said:

I’d gone the opposite way - I was on under 21.5 games, due to recent Wimbledon finals almost exclusively going that way in the previous 13 tournaments.

I think the way that Pliskova played early on, in going a set and 3-1 down, suggested that trend was likely to continue, with one player playing the final at a level above the other. However, Barty then dropped a bit and they both ended up playing at a fairly poor level.

I think that any bet that loses when the player is a break up and only has to hold serve could be considered unlucky, and vice versa, any bet that wins from a set and a break down, could be considered lucky.

(I don’t count the second break of Barty, and failing to serve the set out at 6-5 as an unlucky loss for me, because that was a completely undeserved and fortunate break of serve for Barty, with Pliskova throwing away her service game, from 40-0 up, and with an easy volley at the net, to win the game to love.)

yeah i saw this, but you have to consider surface and easy serve holds! this line is low even if it´s women match and also H2H suggested there is big posibility of 3rd set also. Sabalenka-Pliskova was an easy over for me.. in finals there was just too many drops in the game, otherwise this would go in over also in 2 sets (at least TB in 2nd set). If I were thinking the opossite, I would gor for Barty -3.5, which would be he safest bet at the end.

[neilovan]

On 7/10/2021 at 12:30 PM, CzechPunter said:

I won't be getting involved in the men's finals most likely, especially since I still have that 1.44 bet on Djokovic to win. Do I trust him to win 3-0? Not exactly. Do I trust him to win? Definitely. Despite his bad performance against Shapovalov, Berrettini will have his biggest mental test of his career and it will be even bigger than when he met Djokovic in the French Open. Despite the scoreline against Hurkacz, I didn't feel he was playing THAT well to have much of a claim here and this will be a different match-up entirely. He has a better chance than Hurkacz would've had, but the odds are arguably spot on if you factor in the occasion and Djokovic's ability to rise to it.

I don't think Djokovic was poor against Shapavalov. Djokovic actually played the big moments amazingly well, and Shapavalov  came at him all guns blazing. Hit one ridic forehand over the baseline at 30-all at 4-3 (first set with Djoko stranded), and butchered 7 break points early in the 2nd. Played a crap breaker losing all his points on his own serve, especially after going 1-0 up.

I watched Musetti take Djoko apart at the French open (looping slower balls with no pace) and Tsitsipas battered him around for 2 sets. What beat both of them was not a tennis conundrum but a refueling problem. Djokovic is a master of recovery. They have figured out how to get him back to almost 100% capacity, after a long 5 setter. Musetti ran out of steam, and Tsitsipas looked knackered after 2 sets (probably started the final at 70% capacity. 

Berrettini should not have this problem. It's a weird thing, but it's not tiring when you are serving so well, and getting so many free points. Also, Berrettini  got to the USA open semi finals in 2019. So, he has been close to the biggest stage before. 

I have a feeling it's an Italian double today!

[neilovan]

5 hours ago, neilovan said:

I don't think Djokovic was poor against Shapavalov. Djokovic actually played the big moments amazingly well, and Shapavalov  came at him all guns blazing. Hit one ridic forehand over the baseline at 30-all at 4-3 (first set with Djoko stranded), and butchered 7 break points early in the 2nd. Played a crap breaker losing all his points on his own serve, especially after going 1-0 up.

I watched Musetti take Djoko apart at the French open (looping slower balls with no pace) and Tsitsipas battered him around for 2 sets. What beat both of them was not a tennis conundrum but a refueling problem. Djokovic is a master of recovery. They have figured out how to get him back to almost 100% capacity, after a long 5 setter. Musetti ran out of steam, and Tsitsipas looked knackered after 2 sets (probably started the final at 70% capacity. 

Berrettini should not have this problem. It's a weird thing, but it's not tiring when you are serving so well, and getting so many free points. Also, Berrettini  got to the USA open semi finals in 2019. So, he has been close to the biggest stage before. 

I have a feeling it's an Italian double today!

And there ends a train smash Wimbledon, which will cure me of my desire to bet on tennis.

[Torque]

Disappointing final I thought. Berrettini was poor. Way too many unforced errors and the fact his first serve-forehand combination was hardly to be seen meant he was facing an impossible task.

That said, after stealing the first set if he'd been able to hold his serve from 40-15 things could have been very different. But he didn't and you could almost see the momentum he'd had up to that point evaporate and transfer over to Djokovic. Ultimately though, that's the story of a lot of tennis matches. Key points are very often what decide the outcome.