We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
30 Jan 10
20:16
Joined:
Date Joined:
03 Jun 07
Right i am not here to be big or clever.
I am a minor player on here but i am about to put 1k on federer to win tomorrow. I have have placed 3 £500 bets before with a 33% strike rate but with betfair the loses were not that bad.
I mainly bet with 10,20&50's.
Fed ticks every box i have put up.
Someone put me off.
tia
I am a minor player on here but i am about to put 1k on federer to win tomorrow. I have have placed 3 £500 bets before with a 33% strike rate but with betfair the loses were not that bad.
I mainly bet with 10,20&50's.
Fed ticks every box i have put up.
Someone put me off.
tia
Show More
first serve % will be the undoing if he keeps this up
can't win serving that standard
can't win serving that standard
at least he sorted it after a first set shocker vs cilic
fed's playing with him .. just waits for match point and wham !
it's nothing like that
fed has served better and won more cheap points
45% is horrific
won't win a set serving those figures
fed has served better and won more cheap points
45% is horrific
won't win a set serving those figures
yep .. he has an extra gear though that murray doesn't
same as us open final and got demolished
same as rafa wimbledon and got demolished
same as rod wimbledon and got beat
has been my biggest reservation about murray cos in the big matches his serve is often so below par
same as rafa wimbledon and got demolished
same as rod wimbledon and got beat
has been my biggest reservation about murray cos in the big matches his serve is often so below par
yeah fed has a greater level
standard hasn't been that great so far from either
lots of ues
standard hasn't been that great so far from either
lots of ues
that's what happens when he gets his 1st serve in
murray now serving great
can he keep it up tho
can he keep it up tho
WD. Too many people call too many people geniuses in this world.
Some people were calling Murray a genius ffs.
Only one genius there and it wasn't smiler
Some people were calling Murray a genius ffs.
Only one genius there and it wasn't smiler
murray is a tennis genius.. just unlucky he had to play someone playing that kind of tennis, i guess murray brings out the best in fed
and he was far too passive, knocking it back hoping fed misses, just wont work
decent final in the 3rd set
murray very poor 1st set
fed different planet 2nd set
murray just not enough 3rd set
murray very poor 1st set
fed different planet 2nd set
murray just not enough 3rd set
bobby2424 30 Jan 23:24
Ibrahima Sonko 30 Jan 22:07
Plaiced it at 2.64 abt 5 mins ago.
------------
never saw Feddy at that price??
===================
This guys a DORK bobby !!
Nobody listens to him on the Footy forum either ....
Ibrahima Sonko 30 Jan 22:07
Plaiced it at 2.64 abt 5 mins ago.
------------
never saw Feddy at that price??
===================
This guys a DORK bobby !!
Nobody listens to him on the Footy forum either ....
Murray is not a genius. You are diluting the meaning of the word. How can a genius get mullered in 2 finals?
Ibrahima Sonko 30 Jan 22:07
Plaiced it at 2.64 abt 5 mins ago.
--------------
madsimon 30 Jan 22:08
isn't that murrys price?
------------
If Its Wet Drink It 30 Jan 22:12
LOL
---------------------------------------
2.64 yesterday ... :^0 :^0
Plaiced it at 2.64 abt 5 mins ago.
--------------
madsimon 30 Jan 22:08
isn't that murrys price?
------------
If Its Wet Drink It 30 Jan 22:12
LOL
---------------------------------------
2.64 yesterday ... :^0 :^0
How far down the ranks do the geniuses appear just so I know in future.
Is Davydenko one?
Is Davydenko one?
The Final / Federer v A Murray / Match Odds Roger Federer Back 639477771 30-Jan-10
21:43 C 1.64 130.00 1.64 83.20
21:43 C 1.64 130.00 1.64 83.20
quite obviously not about rankings, murray is still early in his career
davydenko has probably peaked, he's a great player, will never be remembered in 20 years time
the likes of fed murray and nadal will be
davydenko has probably peaked, he's a great player, will never be remembered in 20 years time
the likes of fed murray and nadal will be
Which tennis players are geniuses ,seeing as we ignore rankings and just decide on who you like.
The Final / Federer v A Murray / Match Odds Roger Federer Back 639477788 30-Jan-10
21:44 C 1.64 870.00 1.64 556.80
21:44 C 1.64 870.00 1.64 556.80
Lets just agree to disagree andy. When fed retires you can clean up ;)
i consider currently murray and fed to be the only tennis geniuses
but again obviously its not about who i choose to pick.. trying to challenge my statements with sarcasm all you like, you wont change my views..
nadal is all about stamina and speed
del potro roddick etc are power
murray and fed are all about working it out and great shot making
but again obviously its not about who i choose to pick.. trying to challenge my statements with sarcasm all you like, you wont change my views..
nadal is all about stamina and speed
del potro roddick etc are power
murray and fed are all about working it out and great shot making
murry is up there with the best of the rest but fed is still top by some way when hes in top form
Mate, it came as news to you that Murray plays passive and couldn't win that way.
He is not a genius. I'm objective but its obvious you are blinkered by your adoration for Murray.
Wasting my time.
He is not a genius. I'm objective but its obvious you are blinkered by your adoration for Murray.
Wasting my time.
Mate, it came as news to you that Murray plays passive and couldn't win that way.
He is not a genius. I'm objective but its obvious you are blinkered by your adoration for Murray.
Wasting my time.
He is not a genius. I'm objective but its obvious you are blinkered by your adoration for Murray.
Wasting my time.
murray and fed are all about working it out and great shot making
Absolute utter sh1te.
You've already admitted he plays passive and thus waits for errors so that is not shot making.
Absolute utter sh1te.
You've already admitted he plays passive and thus waits for errors so that is not shot making.
it came as news to me?
i said murray was playing too passive.. he doesnt often play that passively, its cost him before in big matches, and it did again today
im not blinkered in anyway, maybe u are in your dislike for murray
i said murray was playing too passive.. he doesnt often play that passively, its cost him before in big matches, and it did again today
im not blinkered in anyway, maybe u are in your dislike for murray
brodie
becker/ henman called it correct...andy did have the armoury to attack more but didnt...
the legend at the other end put him off doing so
becker/ henman called it correct...andy did have the armoury to attack more but didnt...
the legend at the other end put him off doing so
You said he played passive. Why bother saying that if you weren't trying to be observant? Trouble is he did that against Roddick too and is a common charge made against him. Hardly an attribute of genius is it?
yeah he did play passive..
did you see him playing that passively during the rest of the tournament??
did you see him playing that passively during the rest of the tournament??
I'm arguing with you and this common thing nowadays to heap superlatives on people when they are not deserved. When you grow up a bit and stop behaving like a giddy girl ,you might be objective and realise you are talking sh1te.
He played passive when it counted ,that's not a genius and he's not a shot maker. Your arguments are flawed.
why bother insulting me? can u not hold a debate without getting personal? does it add a touch of superiority towards your side of the argument?
It's not the main attribute of his game when the heat is on is it?
All players can look like superstars and blaze shots around when there's no pressure on.
I've got it straight now anyway.
A very good player in your head = genius.
About wraps it up
All players can look like superstars and blaze shots around when there's no pressure on.
I've got it straight now anyway.
A very good player in your head = genius.
About wraps it up
murray not that passive tbh
just doesn't have the weapons to really hurt roger
just doesn't have the weapons to really hurt roger
Because you are beginning to come across as a fool and I don't like wasting my time. Child
im not coming across as a fool at all, you are the one who doesnt seem to know what they are talking about
my views are my views.. and some argumentative person will not change them no matter how you manipulate my statements
and for the record i said he was a tennis genius, before you bring anything else other than tennis into it
my views are my views.. and some argumentative person will not change them no matter how you manipulate my statements
and for the record i said he was a tennis genius, before you bring anything else other than tennis into it
one of the best returners ever and that's simply a fact
what else am i going to bring into it andy. in what respect of genius did you think i was talking about. is it not obvious i'm referring to murray's tennis game?
see ,talking like a fool.
see ,talking like a fool.
andy would have two grand slam's in his hip..if the greatest player that ever breathed wasn't around in his era.....
the way you have manipulated everything else i have said, i just wanted to make it clear.. nothing wrong with that
do you watch tennis much btw?
do you watch tennis much btw?
12.05 post by AM is pathetic.
Murray is a very good player.
Federer is a genius.
The simple point I am making.
Murray has improved markedy thru fitness training like Nadal, but they are not genius like a Fed.
Really is that simple.
Nad w/o his endurance is average. Manufactured like Murray is in comparison to Fed..
Murray is a very good player.
Federer is a genius.
The simple point I am making.
Murray has improved markedy thru fitness training like Nadal, but they are not genius like a Fed.
Really is that simple.
Nad w/o his endurance is average. Manufactured like Murray is in comparison to Fed..
I haven't manipulated what you've said andy ,i've replied to it and disagreed.
i agree nadal isnt a tennis genius
but disagree with you about murray
but disagree with you about murray
okay sorry for the insults ,but its obvious we'll never agree. Bye
Actually I wanna apologise to Andy. I remember when I was young and would get right behind sportsmen I liked and it would affect me when they lost. Nothing wrong with being passionate about summat and believing in someone. Take care, sorry again.
A pleasing outcome all round,eh? I just hope 23yo Nadal and his six Slam titles aren't too crushed at not being considered as much a genius as Murray.
maybe canary, but some people still been very dismissive of his talent.
yeah the weight of muscle done for roid-boy imo. joints couldn't take it no more.
sorry ,but I hate c****s and I think he really could be one.
sorry ,but I hate c****s and I think he really could be one.
it's rather difficult to be given he's owned fed on every surface in slam finals
sadly injury will cut short his greatness
sadly injury will cut short his greatness
Do you call winning a 5th set in the dark 9-7 owning someone? What do you call a close one then?
Thumb on your nose and wiggling your fingers in response to my apology eh andy ? Class.
I recall you saying that Murray owns Fed when the H2H was 6-2. Your views now?.
Also tell me the score at wimbers that Nadal would have to beat Fed by for it to be close.
Also tell me the score at wimbers that Nadal would have to beat Fed by for it to be close.
What are your views on Murray blubbing and staining the moment with his jibes towards fed? I seem to recall you were scathing of fed crying in Oz when Nadal beat him?
it wasn't that close despite the scoreline
fed was hanging on throughout
nadal never looked in trouble
fed was hanging on throughout
nadal never looked in trouble
canaryboy 31 Jan 12:00
murray not that passive tbh
just doesn't have the weapons to really hurt roger
Am I right in thinking when you say 'own' this isn't conclusive. In other words, one can own and then be owned in turn?
Can feel another argument coming. No-one admits when they have erred on here and holds their hands up and says they got it wrong. Ah well, I don't take people on here too seriously, good job ;)
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539