Anderson v Ferrer

In your view, but not in mine.

S or A, you can argue as long as you want, but your first use of stats will never be correct.
You can't look at all matches where the favourite started 1.19 or less to compile odds for a 1.16 favourite.

Where are you even getting odds data from? I want in on this.

good start for Ferrer

all on my tennis database

Nice, I only track player stats on mine. I haven't figured out where to data mine historical odds data from yet.

I could tell you nice stats like, for example, in this round of the French Open since 2005, just one out of seventeen French players have won 3-0.

I just put all the data into a database, then filter it for the 4th round of the French Open and use a s/sheet to analyse it.

I keep mine written on post-it notes which are haphazardly stuck around my house.

A double break here would be nice for my total games bet.

im anxious as to how this ends up...seeing as Ferrer was a set up (and almost i think a break up at 15-40) the last time they played and he basically threw it away

Yeah, I don't know what I was worrying about earlier. Anderson looks more UE than man today.

he knows he has to be aggressive to get anything here and with that comes the danger of committing more UE

Anderson needs his serve to have an effect and a) this is on clay so it is lessened and b) it is against Ferrer, one of the best returners. Without that serve, he loses a large amount of points when it goes to long rallies.

brave 1.05     £229,784

In saying that SoA, does this make this match similar to Haas vs Isner

I think you have to add into the equation too that Ferrer has a good chance of getting to the latter stages here this year, and will want to win quickly to ensure he is not fatigued.

Well, Haas is not in Ferrer's league in terms of returning serve.

Jun 2, 2013 -- 4:36AM, Srichaphan or Ancic? wrote:

Well, Haas is not in Ferrer's league in terms of returning serve.

i think Haas handles the big 4 better than ferrer

Haas vs Ferrer from a couple of weeks ago is one of my favourite matches of the year.

ferrer looks like lord farquaad from shrek - http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/2/25521/637957-shrek06_lordfarq...

http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/2/25521/637957-shrek06_lordfarq...

ferrer - federer, the one we should get will be interesting, the first time i'll have been interested in a fed dave match for years.... can he do it and overturn the 13 or is it 14-0 h2h. he wont get a better chance imo

Anderson looks like Plug from the Beano

http://www.beano.com/media/80776/character-bash-plug.jpg

Ferrer's record of winning matches having won the first set 6-3 is 94-7.

(since 2005)

what's his record of winning matches 6-4?

(6-4. first set)

67-14

so clearly ferrer likes serving first

is this what you would call fishing?

Anderson's record of winning matches from 3-6 in the first set is 5-13.

And from 4-6 is 4-28. Does this mean that he dislikes serving first?!

here's one for you s&a, whats wawrinka's record like v deep lying players like gasquet

baseline ralliers?

yeah, in slam 5 setters to be precise

i don't have a clue how you've compiled these statistics but your excel spreadsheet must look very very interesting. all i need is your I.P. address now...

Well Anderson isn't going to break, and his only hope of winning points is a big first serve.  It's a complete mismatch.

I'd be surprised if Anderson won more than a handful of points on the Ferrer serve all match as he is so limited.

It's about 22-9

I dont think Wawrinka and Gasquet specifically have played in a Slam.

DF 14-3 KA (UE)

ty s or a

no they have only played once, its an interesting game price wise.

can someone tell me who is serving, as my dodgy stream has gone.

anderson. its 30-40 BP

thx

S o A spelt a word wrong

break ferrer

nice :)

Unders on the total games still at 1.2s!

Surely Williams is free money v Vinci today too?

surely it's more efficient to focus your tennis trading career on one market as oppose to all these different markets? that more time you focus on a single market i.e. sets market or match odds market, the better you become acquainted with the trends and potential outcomes associated with the odds given, I've only ever really tried match odds and i'd like to think i do a pretty good job at it... isn't it cumbersome doing all these different markets?

sometimes the odds don't make that possible AZ91.

The top punters, I am sure, will be those who can look at every match and pick out the best betting market for it.

i presume you are talkinng about yourself

talking*

no, I dont do that a lot.

only pullin ya leg

just that on this match, I wanted bigger than the 1.1s on Ferrer.

anderson isn't playing too bad, it's just that ferrer is in top gear and top gear ferrer > top gear anderson

I thought that if the handicap was so large, that meant that the market/bookies knew that Ferrer was going to win easily. If he was going to win easily, then total games was going to be unders, and the odds on it were above evens, so I checked the stats for this round of the French Open and compared what they showed to the odds, making that, in my view, a value bet.

I see, good observation.

As was the 3-0 odds, but they were at lesser price, so the total games made more sense to me.

an astute punter would be able to bet on all of those markets and make a profit whatever happened on this match, probably. I can't do that type of thing very easily.

these methods seem to require more stress than the £ to be made is worth. i only really do match odds markets and i'm very happy with the £ i make

hence the database and s/sheets etc. they make it easier.

but surely minimal stress is better. match odds = minimal stress, good £. can't complain. somethings are just better when simple. the beauty of match odds market are despite **** up's during play (which affect all other markets, unders, set betting etc...) the final result is what matters

haas vs isner. harrison vs isner. prime example

Anderson struggling on every service game and finding it impossible to get into any receiving games.

Match odds isnt necessarily minimal stress. Yesterday I bet on Ormaeachea at her lowest possible odds for a minor trade and her odds shot off in the opposite direction with no way out.

Jun 2, 2013 -- 5:07AM, Srichaphan or Ancic? wrote:

Match odds isnt necessarily minimal stress. Yesterday I bet on Ormaeachea at her lowest possible odds for a minor trade and her odds shot off in the opposite direction with no way out.

WTA - anything can happen (as you said 2 days ago in a thread i believe). i can't stand WTA, whatever looks like may happen, i go against, and it works out for me for a good trade. that's the way i see WTA

It's not cumbersome AZ91, if you already know where you think the odds should be at certain stages during a match.  e.g In this match if Ferrer goes 2-0 up in sets then I already know what odds I would back or lay to win 3-0.

Andersen is terrible.  So little to offer.  And what does that say of Raonic?

Jun 2, 2013 -- 5:08AM, shiraz wrote:

It's not cumbersome AZ91, if you already know where you think the odds should be at certain stages during a match.

shiraz : i meant making a decision from the start of the match

I think you either have to plan your betting strategy way in advance, or be able to quickly get to the stats to check the bet before you do it.

speaking of stats. the IBM slamtracker has the "keys to the match" tab. do you guys think that is really relevant to who actually wins the match? how are the "keys to the match" criterea decided? surely it's based on data and stats

the dodgy stream has returned

no, its completely pointless.

there are two important stats to matches I think - aces, and first serve % compared to second serve %. Everything else is just dressing.

surely the % of points won on 1st serve is more important than aces.

I usually trust a player who has a greater % of first serve points won than second, and distrust those who are the other way round, and it is quite useful.

i think that is the most important thing. #

I guess it is a stat that can be considered with knowledge of who is playing. Aces in a match between Ferrer and Hewitt, for example, would be more or less irrelevant, but between Federer and Djokovic they could be quite important as in rallying they will be evenly matched and the aces are effectively free points.

Same applies pre match but you have much more time to place bets at the odds you want.

Federer is one of the players I would suggest rarely loses having hit more aces in a match. Aces are linked to confidence, and he is a confidence player, like a number of them.

i think each match up is unique and each match up requires different sets of stats to be focused on (obviously dependent on weakness/strengths of the players and their key attributes and playing styles)

incidentally, I noticed Ivo Karlovic was on Twitter earlier arguing that they should have a fifth set tiebreak. I thought to myself, no surprise there then, considering he is unable to win without tiebreaks.

Kuznetsova beating Kerber

how does she play badly all year and then do well in Grand Slams?

she/he

Two horrible shots in three points....

Andersen is just an embarrassment.

I go for set betting if the odds for the match are too short. I only play in the 3-0 market, to lay it, or to back it. It's as simple as the match odds market, and the odds are very worth it even in short matches. Like SoA, I don't like to bet on any match without knowing the way the players have been playing and are likely to play (except for on this match because I was being dumb).

Gutless.

Anderson already matched at 1000/1 half way through the third set.

I got 1.01 on Ferrer set 3 had a late night but a few quid will have to do