Tennis - 2015 US Open

BetCrimes1984

BetCrimes1984

CTG Big Brother
I'll use this thread to post any pre-match thoughts & bets.

--------
Day 1

Ivanovic vs. Cibulkova
Ivanovic's is 3-2 on HC since Wimbledon, but outside of pushing Serena somewhat hard in a loss at Cincy, has no form to really to write home about. Beat Stephens in a 3 setter (won the 3rd 6-1, so I'm guessing that was yet another Sloane meltdown), and got dealt to pretty comfortably by Bencic. Cibulkova is 3-3 on HC since Wimbledon (incl. a 2 set win over Stephens), with her most notable effort being a tough 7-6 4-6 5-7 loss to one of the form players of the moment, Lucie Safarova.

These two are 2-2 HtH, with Ana winning the last 2 meetings (both in '13). However none of those results really mean much to me here, because (1) Ana's losses happened so long ago (last in '11), and (2) Cibu's losses occurred before she achieved her breakthrough result at the '14 AO, a result that seems to me to have boosted her potency as a dark horse against better players.

Cibulkova strikes me as the kind of personality that lifts when facing a really good opponent. Some of her HC Slam victims from the last 2 years have been Sharapova, Halep, Radwanska, Azarenka & Cornet (some names obv. a lot more impressive than others, but all of them ranked significantly higher than Cibu.), and that's partly what makes her worth some cash here imo. The other part is well known: Ivanovic blows. Since winning her only Slam title ('08 FO), Ivanovic's rates for exiting a Slam in the 1st or 2nd Round have been...

AO - once every 2.33 appearances
FO - once every 3.50 appearances (her best rate = the only Slam she's won)
Wim - once every 2.67 appearances
USO - once every 2.33 appearances

The only consistency Ana's shown at HC Slams in recent years is to exit early (basically once every two years). Also, outside of the clay of Roland Garros, she's bowed out by the 2R in 4 of her last 7 Slam appearances (a feat she's only managed one other time in her career). It would be remiss of me not to mention Cibu's horrible 1R loss to a WC in last year's USO, but that came at the end of her breakthrough AO effort, so I can imagine she paid the price for overlooking her opponent in a match at the end of a long year (she performed well by her standards at the FO & Wimby, as well as that AO effort; and this year repeated a decent AO run, only being stopped by Serena). As I said, she strikes me as someone who lifts for tough opponents; Ana at anything but her best + Cibu reproducing her recent Safarova effort = this should cash.

Small bet on Cibulkova +230
 
Day 1

Suarez-Navarro vs. Allertova
When I looked at this match-up, what struck me were the odds. Everything else being even, I'd expect a "nobody" vs. a top 10 player to be at least +350-400. Digging deeper, I found things are not normal for the Spaniard.

(1) S-N's 0-6 her L6 matches, and 3-7 since making the final of the Rome Masters (mid-May) vs. Sharapova. She's not only in poor form but seemingly underdone.

(2) S-N has a strange dichotomy going on in her performances this year. In the Slams she's been decidedly poor relative to recent years: 2 x 1R exits & a 3R exit (the latter @the FO, her best Slam surface). Yet contrast that with her efforts at the WTA Premier mandatory tournies: 2 QF (HC & clay) appearances & a F (HC, Rome Masters) appearance (& a host of decent scalps). She can't blame her poor Slam results on the draws: she lost to a WC at Wimby, and a player outside the top 50 (at the time) at the AO.

As for Allertova, she has beaten Lisicki & Cornet within the last year, and she has a strong record in non-WTA tour matches (34-10 on HC & 58-16 on clay since '13), so she obviously has something to her game. This is a bet predicated on the odds.

small bet on Allertova +230
 
Good luck BC. Love the write ups. I have a love/hate relationship with Domi. Saw her live a couple years ago in Miami and that's when she was on top of her game. Feel like she went through a rough patch and is now playing better tennis. Agree on your thoughts on that match.
 
Guys:cheers3: Looking forward to many sprayed FH by Ana. When her FH is off, she's a dead Serb walking.

Just realised I got my start times all screwed up. Cibu is up 6-3 3-1(...3-2).
 
nbafan88 said:
Really like Zverev tomorrow vs Kohlschrieber. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Until the QF stage rolls around, I've got no pre-game thoughts on the men's side of things. Matches sans the top/better players just don't interest me, so my lack of feel for them doesn't warrant betting (Live is a different story, since naturally then you get to experience the in-match dynamics/flow, and can pick up on that to guide betting involvement).
 
Day 2

My theme for Day 2 is totals.

Wickmayer vs. Schiavone
This bet is another fade: Schia is clearly coming to the end of her career. She turned 35 in June, and hasn't shown anything like her best in Slams for years (excepting the '15 FO, easily her best Slam surface historically).

- Between Wimbledon '09 & Wimbledon '12, she made 2 F (both FO: w/l 1-1), 3 x QF & 4 x 4R while experiencing only 1 x 1R exit in 13 overall Slam appearances. Since then (essentially from the point she turned 33) she's experienced 10 x 1R exits in 12 Slam appearances (though 1 was to Serena, so obv. that's forgiveable).

- In her last 5 overall HC Slam matches/her last 4 USO matches, she's won a total of 1 set ('14 USO, a 3-6 6-3 3-6 loss to Vania King: King's only 1R victory in her own last 10 Slam appearances; her current WR being 414 a year on from that win).

- Schia's 2-7 since (& incl.) her 3R FO exit, losing to names just a few years back she'd have been a Fav to beat (Flipkens, Vekic, Errani, Diyas, & a couple of other 'no-names' ranked 107 & 143: bolded = straigtht set losses, all to players Wickmayer could whip on her day).

- To be honest, at this point I think she's just showing up to collect the easy money, because at 35 she is well & truly done achieving anything more significant relative to her '09-12 period (I'm guessing, but I would think her '09 FO win has earned her the right to automatic entry in WTA Slams until she retires. No qualifying necessary? = easy 1R exit payday).

In Wickmayer, we pretty much have a talent that failed to kick on from what otherwise should've been her breakthrough period (2009-11/aged 19-22), starting with her making the SF stage of the '09 USO. While her results in recent Slam appearances since that period have dipped, she's consistently shown her best at the HC Slams (as that '09 USO effort would naturally anticipate). While she's existed the USO in the 1R the last 2 years, I'm willing to forgive those losses re believing in her for this bet. She lost to Bencic last year (the Swiss chick's breakthrough Slam). In '13 she lost to Kirilenko in the 1R, a time period during which the Russian was achieving her peak WTA ranking (10). So what is it I like about the Belgian here? I like her '15 AO effort (lost to Halep in the 4R, beat a top 20 & top 30 player to get that deep), I like her lead-in results to this match (5-2 last 7: consistently testing competition relative to what Schia's going to present her with here, neither loss a walkover), and I like she's back at the scene of her best Slam result (memories always play a part in self-belief). In her own mind she must surely see Schia as all but a gift opportunity to get back to the 2R after tough 1R draws the previous 2 years (though obv. Bencic is seen to be a tough opponent with hindsight).

The bet? What I like here is the Under. Schia's penchant for not only losing in the 1R but doing so comfortably (esp. on HC) means I see value in the 21.5 line. You get a tb in women's tennis, that usually puts any Under on the knife edge unless you're dealing with that rare 22.5. But here I can see Schia mailing the 2nd set if she loses the 1st (even if it's a tough loss). And finally, if I've read this match all wrong and Schia turns back the clock & wins, well that doesn't automatically mean Under is dead along w/any & all Wickmayer ml bets.


small bet on Under 21.5 games

----------

Usually I don't show any preference for going back to the well re 2 players meeting soon again after a previous meeting. I always feel like it's a sucker play: that either the player who won the previous match will repeat their effort, or that the total result (easy/drawn out affair) will necessarily repeat. But here I'm going to make an exception.


Safarova vs. Tsurenko
These 2 played just recently in the lead up to the USO, with Lucie winning 6-2 7-6(4). In recent matches before that loss, Tsurenko had beaten the likes of Muguruza, Ka Pliskova & Strycova (all 2 set wins, hammering the last 2 in losing a combined total of 7 games), so she's def. in decent form. That form is reflected in these SU odds being as close as they are, because given Lucie has had one of the best runs of her career since the FO (and has been strong in Slams the last 2 years) I'd have otherwise expected Tsurenko to be at least north of +300 (adding in the fact she's never been past the 1R of the USO before, this being her 4th appearance).

I see this match lined 21.5 elsewhere, but at my home book it's 20.5 (-125). The SU odds suggest to me a dogfight, and I've anticipated for awhile Lucie to start showing signs of wearing down. I don't believe she'll have a deep USO run and will look to fade her SU soon enough, just not this early. Consequently I don't believe she's in the right place to hammer Tsurenko through 2 sets (just as she wasn't capable of doing in their previous meeting). A 12/13 game set here should cash either 20.5 or (if you don't have the ability to bet that line) 21.5. My only concern, going back to those SU odds + my belief about Lucie not going deep in this Slam, is that Tsurenko might pull off the comfortable shock win (19/20 games). That sole concern (again, these SU odds don't sit right with me) isn't enough to put me off betting (I expect a 3 set match), but keeps my stake limited.


small bet on Over 20.5 games
 
Day 3

Bouchard vs. Hercog
Didn't take much digging to learn that Riske wasn't the opponent to start a fade of Bouchard with at this tourney. As far as Hercog goes re the same consideration, a little deeper digging turned up a couple of things that ring the alarm bells for me...

(1) She's 1-12 in 2R Slam matches (her only win? 5 years ago on clay vs. Safarova. A good scalp, but that version of Lucie isn't to be confused with the one who was ranked 6th here). That means this match is almost going to be experienced like a final for her: a 3R berth must loom as a LARGE PRIZE in her mind, which should present its own mental challenges/weight to potentially affect her performance, both during the match and specifically if/when she arives at the stage of having to close out the Canadian for the win.

(2) In all of her HC Slam wins, I don't really see any scalp of note. She beat Svitolina in last year's USO, but the Ukrainian has really only broken through this year (& was still a teenager last year), so while it's not a bad win by any means I don't put a lot of stock in it. Same with her win at this year's AO vs. Ivanovic: the Serb won the 1st set 6-1 then proceeded to win a total of 5 more games over the final 2 sets, so it's not hard to guess that what transpired there was more about an Ana meltdown than anything Hercog suddenly changed up to turn that match around. About the best result I could find for her HC wise were a couple of wins over Makarova (one recently, the other last year), but as they weren't in a Slam there's always a question mark about how seriously a high ranked player like Ekaterina took her opponent on those given days. When she's faced Makarova at HC Slams, she's lost 6-2 6-4 ('13 AO) & 6-1 6-2 ('14 USO) = on the biggest stage, she's presented no problems to the much higher ranked Russian (not that I'm equating Genie with Ekaterina, just putting her wins over the Russian in the appropriate context). Hercog went 4-4 in her last 8 (non-qualifying) matches before the USO (the only really notable win of the 4 being vs. Makarova).

None of the above says she can't beat Bouchard here, but it leads me to seriously question her being the favourite. Still, one might ponder that as Genie has sucked so much donkey dick in recent times, does it matter her opponent has little to no Slam pedigree/that the biggest stage experience stakes reside so heavily in the Canadian's corner?

Taking the question of Bouchard's horrible form seriously, I don't think too many people would consider her efforts in 2014 to be a fluke and that somehow what she's shown over the majority of this year is more to her actual level of talent/ability. If one accepts that her poor results are more an aberration relative to her talents/abilities, then diagnosing the problem with her is pretty easy: it's all about her top 6 inches. Taking this to be a given, I looked at how her match against Riske panned out for clues about what it said about her mentality...

(1) She got her 1st serves in at a rate of 65%, winning 66% of those pts. That's a good 1st serve % that she'd take every time, but not quite as impressive a winning % of points off said service effort. Still, she repeats that here & Hercog's going to have a difficult afternoon.

(2) Looking at how the games played out vs. Riske, I'm first struck by how she responded to being broken in just the 3rd game of the match, to trail 1-2. She went up 0-15, then at 15-15 won for 15-30, then at 30-30 won for 30-40, then at deuce won for a BP chance. To this point in the 4th game she'd won every critical point barring her failure to break at 30-40. Riske then won 2 pts for her own GP, but Genie saved that and saved a 2nd GP before Riske finally nailed her 3rd GP chance. Genie fought hard, then off that tough game loss (given she had 2 BP chances before Riske had a chance to hold) she then held her serve to love where the all-at-sea Genie we've been used to over the recent months surely would've lost at least 2-3 pts in her subsequent service game, if not get broken full stop. Riske's very next service game Genie again fought hard and from 40-30 down won 3 straight pts to break. Skipping ahead to Genie serving for the set after another break, she had her first poor game of the match in going down 0-40 before losing the game winning only the solitary point. Immediately she got back on her horse mentally and played out a long (& must've been energy sapping) 18 pt 10th game, overcoming 2 BP/SP failures of her own and cutting down Riske's 4 game point chances to claim the game & set. In the 2nd set her challenging moment was to be broken in the 5th game to trail 3-2. From there she reeled off 4 straight games to claim the set & match (the immediate break back game for 3-3 she won to love).

The efforts I've just highlighted say to me she won an inner battle in that 1R win as much as anything else. And that's the warning sign I take for Hercog's chances here. Genie off mentally = Hercog is a deserved favourite. Genie clearly wasn't off mentally against Riske. But of course the answer to that observation is, it was only Riske. The counter to that, then, is what I've listed above about Hercog. If one looks at Genie's horrific loss to Vinci before the USO as being a match she didn't care to take seriously (say, just a pre-USO hit out), then her effort previous to that (against Svitolina, a more than acceptable performance against one of the WTA's current form players) anticipated the good things she showed at tough moments vs. Riske. If I'm going to fade Genie with a pre-match bet, I want to know that if Genie starts to show her best that my opponent then still has it in her to beat Genie off her own racquet. Players she has lined up to face in coming rounds (Cibulkova; Vinci; Makarova/Svitolina/Mladenovic) should she win here pass that test, where Hercog doesn't to my mind. I'm not disinclined to do a fade chase if I see a situation fits the bill, but starting such a chase when the odds value lies in the corner of the player I'm to chase against isn't how I want to kick things off. Still, it turns out this must be a featured match for Day 3 because my home book has listed this as a live betting match. I suggest that's the best way to approach this affair (unless one likes Bouchard to win, then by all means grab the current odds on offer), and how I intend to. I'll be watching for where Genie seems to be at mentally (the UE count is obv. always the first port of call on that front), and on the other side of the net how much game Hercog can bring to the court to 'force' Genie into bad mental spaces.

Finally, I see the total lined at 21.5: doesn't indicate to me Genie's expected to lose or win easily in 2, the former of which is what I'd expect Hercog to manage if Genie presents the kind of challenge she so often has at other times this year (and is surely an expected possibility, if not probability, by others keen to fade her).
 
Day 4

Theme for Day 4 is yet more totals.

Tsurenko vs. Lepchenko
With my take for this match-up, I'll start with the American. Vera qualified to be eligible to represent the USA in 2012 (after fleeing the Ukraine and living in the US 5 years previously), and almost magically her Slam results improved immeasurably relative to what they were beforehand: 4-13 Slam record to the end of 2011, 18-15 since. Concerning that latter figure, she's been especially tough on opponents not seeded for the Slam concerned: 15-4 vs. unseeded opps. against 3-11 vs. seeded opps. Isolating her results to just the HC Slams: 9-2 vs unseeded opps. against 0-5 vs. seeded opps. Furthermore, Vera hasn't just been beaten by any old low seeds, the last 2 years have seen her bow out of Slams to Muguruza (20, Wim: 6-4 6-1), Keys (16, FO: 7-6 6-3), Radwanska (6, AO: 7-5 6-0), Serena (1, USO: 6-3 6-3), Kerber (8, FO: 7-5 6-2), Halep (11, AO: 6-4 0-6 1-6). Note the competitive 1st sets. The only exception to this run was her loss to the unseeded Caroline Garcia at Wimbledon in '14 (current WR 33, just outside the seedings): here we find Vera's weakness. She's at heart essentially a brickwaller/a pusher/a baseliner. Garcia is a power player who has shown little ability to consistently harness her wildness (a lesser version of Lisicki), but it comes off regularly enough and her game on grass would always be a challenge for what Vera brings to the court (cue the way Muguruza dealt with her in the previous Slam). Still she only lost 7-5 6-3, hardly a walkover. In short, Vera far more often than not has been a hard out for both seeded & non-seeded opponents when it comes to Slams over the last few years.

Everyone knows Tsurenko just took out one of the years best performers in Safarova. Odds reflected it was on the cards, and while Lucie wilted in the heat with a mountain of UE after her long year to date, I think it'd be a mistake to assign those 2 factors as being solely responsible for that win. They may have been at the core of the one sidedness of the match, but Tsurenko was deserving her win (1st served at 67%, winning 79% of those pts). In all her HC appearances since Wimbledon as a lead-in to this Slam, she's gone 14-3. She won Istanbul dogged in all 5 matches she played, and regarding those 3 losses: vs. Errani, Safarova, and a final qualifying match). Amongst those 14 wins are impressive ones over Muguruza (7-5 6-1) and a hammering of Ka. Pliskova (6-2 6-2: Pliskova beat Lepchenko 6-3 7-5 on HC after Wimby). While Tsurenko is 1-5 in 2R matches of Slams, that drops to a better looking 1-2 when isolating the HC Slams (losses to Makarova in '11 & Hanuchova in '12, hardly no-names). One result that strikes me as impressive, is her tough 3-6 6-4 4-6 loss to Halep @Wimby in '14, the Romanian's breakthrough Slam year.

What we have between these 2 is a power player vs. a brickwaller, which immediately means the match will be on Tsurenko's racquet. It's for that reason that I won't play Vera SU. Vera did win 2-6 6-3 6-4 when they met at the '14 AO, but Tsurenko didn't bring the kind of impressive pre-tourney form into that Slam as she does here (she was actually 2-10 her previous 12 matches prior to meeting Vera that day). What I like here is a total. Vera has been a hard out at Slams for sometime, and Tsurenko, though less experienced & with less-Slam pedigree, has the power & the form on her side of the ledger. The only reason I keep this bet small, is we have a power player vs. a brickwaller, which means the propensity is there for one player (the in-form player) to end this quick given the heat factor. But all things being equal to the stats posted above I expect a dogfight, and will be surprised if we don't see 3 sets.


small bet on Over 21.5 games
 
Day 4

Muguruza vs. Konta
I'll start with the Spaniard, since I'm not going to highlight any array of stats. Since her Wimbledon final loss, Mugu has played little tennis. I'm guessing that her handlers didn't feel like she needed a lot of mental & physical work off that loss to Serena; that to absorb the lessons from it she'd be better taking things easy leading into the USO. I don't think, if I'm right, that's an unwise course of action to take, but it was always going to put her in danger of being underdone if she didn't perform in the tournies she did enter (cue her going 0-2, losing to an in-form Tsurenko & Shvedova, the latter a more than capable player on her day, so neither result a bad loss), so consequently I felt she would be vulnerable in the early rounds here before she got a decent amount of minutes under her belt. Her 1R opponent (Witthoeft) didn't strike me as capable of being trusted to show enough to make a bet on either her or the Over worthwhile, so the draw was kind to the Spaniard there, but it hasn't been so kind here...

Which brings us to the English chick, Konta. She beat a couple of name players leading into Wimby: none other than Muguruza (6-4 4-6 6-3) and Makarova (6-2 6-4), while suffering tough losses against Bencic & Ka. Pliskova (both 3 setters). Unfortunately for her she drew Sharapova in the 1R of Wimbledon itself, so her intensive pre-Slam efforts probably left her tank less than half-full, the type of situation Maria's otherwise garbage game feasts upon (the Russian winning 6-2 6-2). Since then she's gone 10-0 in a couple of lesser HC tournies and has gone 4-0 here at the USO (3 qualifiers + her comfortable 1R win).

I saw Konta play some of her matches during her golden pre-Wimbledon form, and along with a decent serve she has a solid ground game and a dangerous FH. She's almost a carbon copy physically of Muguruza (1 inch shorter & a couple of kgs lighter), so marrying the Brit's form with my perceived vulnerability existing in Mugu's headspace right now, I don't see this match being a walkover (neither obv. do those who have backed the Brit's SU odds down since their open). What keeps my bet small is the fact that Konta has not really shown up in Slams before (she's aged 24). If her recent good form was backed by any sort of Slam pedigree, I'd stake more (this result might just turn out to be her own mental breakthrough to the big time, considering she seems to have all the attributes to be much more highly ranked than she is now). I forsee another dogfight here (at least for a couple of sets: if there's a 3rd Mugu likely runs away with it).

small bet on Over 21.5 games
 
Day 5

Svitolina vs. Makarova
The prototypical WTA match-up: a Brickwaller/Pusher vs. Power. One guess who I'm going to be for. I'll start with the Russian. Makarova would have to be one of the most unheralded top 15 players out there. A massive part of her problem has been that 3 opponents have proved to be kryptonite for her (Serena, Sharapova & Li Na: she's gone a combined 1-15 against them to date), and she's repeatedly run into them in Slams on her favourite HC surface. Cue the fact that those 3 players have been responsible for her demise in her last 7 consecutive HC Slam appearances (dating back to the '12 AO: for the record, she lost to the 3rd seeded Clijsters at the '11 AO, & 24th seed Kirilenko at the '11 USO). Looking at her HC Slam results since 2011, her record in matches against seeded players reads as follows...

Opponent seeded _1-5_: 2-8 (losses: Serena 2, Sharapova 3, Li Na 2, Clijsters)
Opponent seeded _6-18: 8-0
Opponent seeded 19-30: 3-1 (loss: Kirilenko WR 24 in '11; Maka WR 41 at the time)

Since she's come of age as a player ('12), she's not bowed out of a HC Slam to a non-top 5 seed. What's also critical to note here is who she beat for her wins vs. top 5 ranked players, Radwanska & Kerber: PUSHER ALERT! Whereas all her other top seeded losses have been to power players, excepting Sharapova (Sharapova is a strange mix of pusher & power - her injury destroyed any capability she had of being a purely power player, but if 1 opponent can said to be Makarova's ultimate in kryptonite, it's her fellow Russian: 0-6 lifetime, winning only 1 of 13 sets played & forcing only 1 tb out of 12 sets lost). She's made at least the 4R in her last 5 consecutive HC Slams, and the SF of her last 2 ('15 AO, '14 USO). She knows Sharapova is not around to stop her, Li Na & Clijsters are of course retired, and she's had the experience of beating Serena at a HC Slam. I find it hard to believe these are facts that aren't registering in her own mind as she dreams of making her first Slam final. As far as lead-in work goes, Makarova has gone 4-2 since Wimbledon: no notable wins, no decent losses.

As for Svitolina, from what I've seen of her she's going to be a quality pusher who is capable of switching it up & attacking when called for (she's much like Kerber w/seemingly the potential to be better than the German; certainly potentially better than Wozniacki & Radwanska, to list the 3 most well known brickwallers around). Her serve is OK (even her 1st, not just 2nd, can be very soft when she's nervous/under pressure), but her ground game is better than solid. But, she's still a baseliner. Since she's really only started to show her true strengths as player the last 2 years, I've only paid heed to her stats from '14 onwards. In looking at those stats, I was struck by one thing: to date her most consistent Slam form has come not on any particular surface (though her best individual result came on a surface I'd expect her to do well on, the clay of Roland Garros), but rather at a certain time of the year. In the first 2 Slams of a year over the last 2 years, she's gone 9-4; in the last 2 Slams of a year (incl. this USO) she's go 3-3. It would seem that as the year wears on, her cumulative workload takes its toll physically/mentally as might be expected for a young player still making her way at the highest level on tour. I also note with interest her efforts against the top ranked left-handers the last 2 years: 0-2 (both HC) vs. Makarova, 1-2 (all HC) vs. Kvitova, 2-0 (both HC) vs. Safarova & 2-2 (all HC) vs. Kerber. Thats 3-4 vs. the power players & 2-2 vs. a fellow pusher. However, there has to be an asterix put beside both her wins over Safarova (who, out of the 3 mentioned here, would have the 'least' power to her game). One came with Safarova just off her '15 Doha win (where the Czech beat Stosur, Makarova, Petcovic, Suarez Navarro, Azarenka), and the other was 2 weeks out from this USO (a time when Safarova's cumulative efforts on the year started to weigh on her game). At least to my mind, she caught Lucie at just the right moments. Otherwise, her efforts against top ranked power lefties is decidedly poor this early in her career. As for her lead-in workload, since Wimbledon she's gone 7-4 (one a retirement down a set to power player Keys, but that was a week out so I don't think it's worth paying attention to): no notable wins outside the one vs. Safarova, but her 3 most recent losses were in straight sets vs. tough opponents (Kerber, Serena, Azarenka).

I question whether Svitolina has what it takes at present to knock Makarova out of a HC Slam. HC Slams are the Russian's home in the top flight of the WTA. Her results at the AO & USO are a big reason why she's ranked where she is in the world. Svitolina's overall form/results may be better, but that don't mean a lot right here & now. She's yet to win a set in 2 meetings (both this year), I have to back the Russian at these odds. My one concern is the Russian being underdone since the FO (she's played only 9 matches since then). Seems to me Svitolina's one opening here would be to provide a level of play from the start that catches the Russian off-guard, and of course most of these women can go south mentally when they suddenly have a mountain to climb (there's also the added WC factor of the heat). In reality, I expect a tough 1st set (tb wouldn't surprise) then should she win it, Makarova to comfortably take the 2nd.

medium bet on Makarova ml -153
 
Bouchard vs. Cibulkova
There's 2 things that have halted my intention to fade Bouchard beginning this 3R.

(1) Not only, for the 2nd straight match, did the Canadian show mental fortitude in the face of her own errors (both physical & mental) vs. Hercog, but she demonstrated a new dimension to her game (at least to my eyes) in so frequently getting to the net. If a WTA player wants to climb the rankings quickly, she'd best be advised to develop a net game - this is a sport rife with feeble baseliners afraid to go forward, and time and again offer opportunities to be abused by net play, yet those opportunities are scorned out of either inability or fear by opponents. Bouchard - like any other WTA player - becomes that much more dangerous by being willing to do so. Of course that may be a temporary move to try and circumnavigate her recent poor form, and if/when that form returns we might see her revert to her default setting of staying around the baseline. But for now, I have to nod my head towards how her intention to so play makes her harder to bet against.

(2) An improved Bouchard doesn't warrant being this much of dog to Cibulkova. The pocket rocket's weakness was seen mid-way through the 2nd set vs. Ivanovic. BP for a 4-1 lead, she failed then melted down horribly. She's a streaky player. Someone coming to the net against her has the capacity to short circuit her hot streaks. Also, when I noted against Ivanovic that she lifted herself for top players, that inevitably meant in matches she was dogged/not expected to win. She's the fav for this match, and she like everyone else knows what kind of year her opponent has been having. She'll expect herself to come through here, which means imo she'll be putting pressure on herself to advance that she won't have done vs. Ivanobitch.

The above is enough for me to pass on this match.
 
Day 6

Petcovic vs. Konta
I'm behind schedule so my thoughts here will have to be brief. Most obvious inertia to betting Konta here is the fact she's off that long 3.46 min match vs. Muguruza, and she's playing her 6th match in 10 days (having spent a tad over 10 hours on court in her previous 5 matches, 3 being qualifiers), However, Petkovic herself is off a 2.34 match, and the German has spent almost as much time on court through her first 2 round matches (4.12) as Konta has (4.47), and Konta had 3 days break between her final qualifying match and her 1R match. Also, Konta hasn't lost a 1st set so she's never had to win from behind (always a more taxing situation than leading from the front). Finally, Konta had a relatively easy last set vs. Muguruza, with the Spaniard paying the price for being underdone since Wimbledon ended; and Konta isn't one to lose a lot of energy expressing a lot of emotion during a match. Leaving the above issue aside, we find that Konta here again faces someone who is her physical doppleganger. Both players are the same height (Konta was 1 inch shorter than Mugu), and Konta is 1 kg heavier than the German (was 3 kg lighter than Mugu). So even though they've never met on court, Konta just got a good workout against the type of look she's going to face here. Konta seemingly has the weapons & the game to be much higher ranked than she is now, and she's just off her breakthrough result: so many times in this situation a player breaking through rolls their next opponent when the expectation is they'll fold off their peak performance.

I've covered Konta's history in a post above, so here just a quick covering of Petkovic's: Her breakthrough year of 2011 (made the QF of both HC Slams, and at the FO) was followed by injuries that put her in the wilderness for 2 years. Since then she's blown hot & cold at various Slams, but one thing I note is her routinely being unable to put away low seeded players: she's played 5 x 3-setters vs. players w/a WR of 82 or higher at the time (incl. against 129 & 146 WR) over the last 2 years. One of those losses was to Brengle at this year's AO, on any level a horrible loss. Petkovic's Slam form the last 2 years since returning from injury is patchy at best, I struggle to see why she's ranked as highly as she is in the world (obv. she's rolled well enough in non-Slam events). You'd expect, with her stature & game, that she'd thrive on HC yet her better Slam efforts since her injuries have come on grass & clay (cue that horrible loss at this year's AO). Finally, she's not Muguruza, so Konta is going to find what's coming from the other side of the net here is not near the quality she faced certainly during the first 2 sets in her previous match. If it goes to 3, the Brit probably runs out of gas, but I believe she can win in 2 (unless I'm underestimating her fitness/toll her previous matches have taken, but the odds here don't tell me those in the know believe she's going to be rolled, which I'd obv. expect to occur if she is out of gas).

small bet on Konta ml +140 (odds dropped on me)
 
Good shit

Azarenka today.... I think she is still so underrated.... Any reasoning you have to go against her? TIA
 
good write up and good hit. I had terrible car trouble at the beach this morning so was late getting bets in. Made Tomic a very large play on complete accident mistyping on the phone. Caught Konta live right as the match started at +143 so made a bit of that back. Keep it up!
 
nbafan88 said:
Good shit

Azarenka today.... I think she is still so underrated.... Any reasoning you have to go against her? TIA
Click to expand...

I'm looking into that one right now (certain offline things have me behind the 8-ball for today), but if Aza's near her normal HC best then Kerber doesn't stand much of a chance. Still, the Belarusian's '14/'15 fitness issues leave the ? as to where her game currently is relative to her producing her best (which is nothing that isn't well known).

ksimpsc said:
good write up and good hit. I had terrible car trouble at the beach this morning so was late getting bets in. Made Tomic a very large play on complete accident mistyping on the phone. Caught Konta live right as the match started at +143 so made a bit of that back. Keep it up!
Click to expand...

Good job, think she should meet her Waterloo in Kvitova next round.
 
I've done all the digging I need to into this Azarenka/Kerber match. One of those where I wouldn't back the dog, but I'm not interested in the Fav at her current pre-match odds. But turns out it's not unsurprisingly a featured match, so I've got live betting for it. That will be my approach.

Covering the basic facts/stats as I see them: since Kerber's breakthrough performance by making the SF at the '11 USO, she's been damned consistent in making the 4R of Slams. So her run of failing to make the 4R through her last 4 Slams entered should make her a German hungry-for-success today. To me this is a factor that makes her dangerous.

Azarenka's best Slam surface is well known to be HC. 2 AO wins, 2 USO finals. Only her injury put a halt to her progress, but since that injury she's only made the QF stage twice in 6 Slam appearance (she missed the '14 FO).

Azarenka dominates HtH meetings with Kerber, but they've only met once (this year) since 2012 ('12/'13 being Azarenka's prime), and that was right at the beginning of this year when Kerber was in poor form (Aza met her during the latter's run of 8 losses in 11 matches). Kerber recently won a title at Stanford (knocking off 3 top 20 players) in her lead up to the USO, so she has form on the board.

In recent matches just before the USO, Kerber pushed Halep (6-3 5-7 6-4) & Bencic (7-5 6-3) hard in losses, players who I'd consider to be at least as hard (if not harder) to beat as Azarenka at the mo. The fact Aza lost to Errani on a HC since Wimbledon indicates that she's still not at her best. The soft Italian pusher normally couldn't live with her on a HC all things being equal. In short, I think Azarenka's a suspect bet at her current SU odds. I'd expect her to win, but if I was to posit the pre-match value bet it would be a 2-1 set win.
 
Day 7

Serena vs. Keys
Let's start with the Beast. If a number of ladies had held their heads at the French, Serena would've been beaten before the final. Her play in that tournament wasn't great (she had to play the most game's she ever had to play in an individual Slam to claim that title, and obv. clay is her worst surface), and fortunately for her her final opponent decided to show absolutely nothing of the excellent play which got her there (Safarova's 7-6 1st set vs. Muguruza in that FO is still the highest quality set of tennis I've seen this year). Serena won Wimbledon because she caught the Spaniard playing her first Slam final on her worst Slam surface (I'd say grass is Mugu's 'worst' surface; that's how good she's potentially going to be at her best), and she beat Sharapova in the AO final because, like Safarova, the Russian is a f*cking headcase when it comes to facing Serena (certainly since her injury affected her game). Meaning, all this hype around her achievements this year can't hide the fact she, at all but 34 years of age, is hardly playing the best she's ever shown on court (with all due respect to Mattek-Sands, Serena dropping a set to her can only be put down to either a match-fix or a hideous display). These Slam titles can't deflect one's attention away from the fact: Serena is there for the taking for someone with power who can step it up (exactly like Stosur did in '11, at this venue no less): Keys fits this bill. The weakness of the top flight of the WTA contributes a lot to her succeeding despite putting in less than stellar efforts. Keys, along with Mugu & Halep & Bencic & (still someway behind those names) Mladenovic, amongst others - are the WTA's new wave of probable future Slam winners. Whether the WTA knows it or not, it needs Serena to lose at some point. The new wave needs to learn their time is now, not just when Serena retires. Self-belief on the ground is what holds this sport back from offering consistently high quality fare (it's basic human psychology: people don't out effort where they believe that effort will be futile/in vain). But there's one thing the new wave has going for it: while youth suffers from inexperience, it also has the trait of not knowing any better (fearlessness) on it's side. Safarova & Sharapova went into their finals against Serena with long & horrible HtH records against her, and they played like they were beaten before their matches were barely underway. Keys has no long history of failure to dog her play here.

From what play I've seen of Keys, she. has. the. game. to screw with Serena (like Stosur did here in 2011, a result that makes so remarkable the Aussie's lack of success ever since). No surprise that it's all about her headspace. That isn't to say the beast can't or won't hammer her here, but if she does it'll again be about Keys headspace being responsible. There's no reason Serena rolls here if Keys plays to her capabilities. I love the fact Keys demolished Radwanska (6-3 6-2) last round not long after losing a very tough 3 set match to her at Wimbledon (7-6 3-6 6-3), along with the fact she hammered her 1R & 2R opponents: progress & consistency are the operative words (no let-down sets vs. opponents who were capable of taking advantage of any such lapses on Keys part). I like the fact she took Serena to a tb in the SF at this year's AO because that's a huge experience factor to have in her bank to call upon here, and she's progressed since then with the help of Lindsay Davenport's knowledge & experience in her ear. For her to have no previous HtH experience against the beast, let alone at the big stage of a Slam, would've made believing in her chances here more difficult.

Since I've got live betting, I see no point in pre-betting the ml. I don't like the spread because Keys could win a set & still lose that bet (7-6 3-6 2-6), so it's to the total I go.

small bet on Over 20.5 games
 
Just got in. Makarova's leg issue (how much of an injury it is I have no idea, might've just been severe cramp that bothered her last round, but USO radio said it had hampered her earlier this year) is what makes this one difficult to call. If she was/is 100%, then I'd say the same thing of Mladenovic that I said of Svitolina: on a HC Slam surface, she's not developed enough at present to my mind to take down Makarova given the Russian's normal HC Slam effort. I have no pre-match bet because only live play will tell where Makarova actually is physically. Still, Mladenovic is not a pusher like Svitolina is, so even if Maka's OK this should be more of a match than Svitolina gave her.
 
Day 8

Pennetta vs. Stosur
My thoughts on this ugly match. Let's start with the Italian. Pennetta is 33 & a half years old. For any quality of talent that's getting on, and the toll father time takes is on a player's consistency. Cue Pennetta's results this year in Slams: in 2012 she suffered for a wrist injury that needed surgery at year's end, so excluding that year due to injury reasons then 2015 is the first time she's been knocked out of the 1R in 2 of the first 3 Slams in 8 years (2007). Cue also her going 16-15 on the year before this USO started, 2-5 since the French Open. Entering this USO she wasn't only in poor form bu also underdone. We've already more than once seen what being can mean for a player meeting a dogged opponent who asks severe questions of them (Muguruza vs. Konta, Makarova vs. Mladenovic: both higher ranked players easily lost their 3rd sets, paying the price for lacking match play as fatigue took its toll). To me these factors severely undercut the 2 big positive stat-facts that no one can fail to miss in considering to take the Italian here - her 6-0 HtH record vs. Stosur, and the fact she's made the QF stage in 5 of her last 6 USO appearances. Finally, in considering her efforts on court here so far: Pennetta is usual USO form wouldn't have dropped a set to Gajdosova, and wouldn't have lost a set to the tune of 6-1 vs. Cetkovska: just more alarm bells.

But the question naturally has to be asked: what is headcase Stosur doing to indicate she can take out the Italian before her favourite losing scene of the QF stage...
(1) Her form since Wimbledon (grass hardly her best Slam surface) has been impressive by any standard. Won a tourney at Bad Gastien, hammered Mladenovic (6-2 6-2) in her first match of her very next tourney before dropping a couple of easier matches (presumably happy just to get match play in close to the USO, a typical scenario to explain such losses. Sans those 2 losses she's gone 9-2 since Wimbledon).
(2) She's dismissed opponents she should have so far at this USO (beat Babos comfortably after losing to her just before this Slam started, one of those warm-up losses just mentioned; hammered Rodina in the 2R when otherwise advancing through the early rounds have been a mental hurdle for her in Slam appearances since her '11 USO win: 66% of them by the 2R stage, all 12 of them by the 3R), and beat Errani via a comprehensive 3rd set effort (the Italian having won their previous meeting on HC via a 6-0 3rd set herself). This is her best string of efforts at a Slam since that night she shocked Serena & New York.
Confidence & consistency are on show from the Australian.

Still, the question will remain re how will Sam fare mentally. If she holds it together, she'll beat Pennetta imo. Despite that HtH record, she has the weapons. It's all about her headspace. The SU odds tell me Sam's expected to show. I've got live betting, that's my route into the match.
 
Pennetta vs. Vinci
Went back and looked at the stats since the Open era started, was able to only find 2 instances of both finalists playing in their first ever Slam final (2004 & 2010 French Opens). Both ended in 2 sets, totaling 15 & 23 games (the latter needed a tiebreak to manage so many). I then expanded the parameters of my search, and looked for Slam finals involving 2 women who had each never won a Slam before. Surprisingly, this only added another 11 results to the 2 just listed. Still, a strong theme emerges from those stats.

Of the 13 Slam Finals involving players with no previous Slam titles to either of their names...

(1) None totaled more than 23 games. The average tally for such finals to date is 19.53 games. For finals before 1980 it's 20.00 games; 1980 onwards it's 19.25 games.

(2) The average length of a 1st set has been 8.69 games, with only 1 totaling more than 10 games (7-5, at the 1977 AO).

(3) Only 1 Final has gone beyond 2 sets (1976 FO: 6-2 0-6 6-2).

Regarding the question of the paucity of 3 set matches, I'd suppose that the person winning the 1st set (in keeping with the stats, 1st set results simply haven't been close affairs = only 1 totaling more than 10 games) isn't liable to have a 2nd set letdown when obv. at such a point they can taste their first Slam success and aren't in anyway intimidated by the player across the net who they know doesn't have the experience to draw upon to come back & deny them. That only 3 of 27 sets have been tiebreakers and 10 have totaled 8 games or less, says to me such finals usually find out one player. One of the non-Slam final participants is usually a bit of a fraud, routinely unable to live with their opponent.

The weather/heat is much more amenable to the players today according to what I'm seeing (the heat imo made for so many of the 3-setters these 2 & other players produced in previous rounds), and the USO womens final has a long recent history of not going the distance: 21 of the last 25 finals have been decided in 2 sets. The historical stats above just feed into this, so it's obvious that if these numbers hold up that there's only a very small window that Over can come through by. Which means...


medium sized bet on Under 21.5 games
 
Great write-up, deserved winner!

Any thoughts on the mens' final BC? I'm itching to back Federer myself, but it's solely because I think it's a toss up, which isn't actually a good argument.
 
Wikeman said:
Any thoughts on the mens' final BC? I'm itching to back Federer myself, but it's solely because I think it's a toss up, which isn't actually a good argument.
Click to expand...

I'm delving into the historical stats for the USO right now. But I remember my pre-Wimbledon final thoughts very well, and despite the change in surface there's no change in the basic tenor of those thoughts from then to now: If someone likes Roger to win, then they're better off IMO backing him to win the 1st set. Then (1) that bet can cash and yet see Roger lose the match, because (2) Roger isn't winning this final if he loses the 1st set. His stats against the Joker say it (he's only managed it once in their 41 HtH meetings vs. Novak managing it seven times, including twice at the USO), and the stats from the Open era of this Slam say it (1st set winners have gone 21-1 the L22 finals, and 37-5 the L42 finals). The sole exception over those L22 finals is Federer winning the 1st set but losing in '09 to Del Potro, his last USO final appearance before the one coming later today. Roger also only lost this year's 1st set at Wimbledon in a tiebreak (as he broke first for a 4-2 lead in that set says he really should've won that 1st set as well, but he immediately got broken for the first time in that tourney in failing to consolidate that break, not even managing to get that service game to deuce). I see no reason to back Roger SU over backing him to win the 1st set. The upside for the latter is far greater than the former. He's much more likely to lose this match after winning the 1st, than he is to win the match after losing the 1st (the scenario obv. being the death knell to this advice). If he managed the latter after you bet him to win the 1st, you'd just have to tip your hat to having run into a mini version of a Vinci beating Serena-like outcome.
 
US Open era stats

Somehow managed to switch of my alarm, missed my wake-up call. Anyway, later than intended here are some stats that I think make for interesting reading, and certainly should provide one road into pre-game/live betting. My legend for the stats:

(1) - Finals in which both players already had at least 1 Slam title to their names
(2) - Finals in which at least 1 player (if not both) had not yet won a Slam title.

Obviously we have (1) applicable here, and the experience factor difference between the two leads to some interesting contrasts.


5-setters
(1) - 1 of 25 finals has gone to 5 sets
(2) - 7 of 22 final have gone to 5 sets

You'd think the finals involving 2 past winners would be far more likely to go the distance, but not so.


1st Set winners
(1) - 19-6 SU ... 76.0%
(2) - 19-3 SU ... 86.3%

No surprise the finals with more experience have involved a few more more comebacks, but even so that is still a significant winning percentage.


Match tied 1-1 after 2 sets vs. seeing a 2-0 scoreline
(1) - 14-11 in favour of 1-1 after 2
(2) - 15-7 in favour of 2-0 after 2

Previous winners finals are much more likely to have been tied after 2 sets, yet the rate for 1st set winners winning SU (posted above) is still relatively close despite the disparity here.


Tiebreakers (first used in the 1970 final)
(1) - 13 of 24 finals have had at least 1 ... 54.1%
(2) - 9 of 21 finals have had at least 1 ... 42.8%

Previous winners finals have been significantly more likely to involve a tiebreak (since 1985, 9 of 15 such finals have, a 60.0% rate).


1st set thrashing (6-0/6-1/6-2 scoreline)
(1) - 9 instances in 25 finals
(2) - 2 instances in 22 finals

Counterintuitively, the previous winners finals are much more likely to have started with someone stomping all over their opponent than their counterpart finalists.
 
Interesting.. seems to point to a 4 setter. But the last two times Fed and Joker met in USO they played 5 sets.
 
Wikeman said:
Interesting.. seems to point to a 4 setter. But the last two times Fed and Joker met in USO they played 5 sets.
Click to expand...

I wonder if, with the delay here moving the players out of the height of whatever afternoon sun there would have been, a 5-setter is now more likely aka whether this delay suits Rogers chances of lasting longer than he otherwise would. At Wimbledon he ran out of gas badly towards the end in the 4th set (Nole broke him twice over his last 3 service games of that set, as many times as he had over the previous 3 1/2 sets).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BetCrimes1984
A walk back into the past: 2023 Women's US Open
Replies
46
Views
1K
BetCrimes1984
BetCrimes1984
mrpickem
FIGHT NIGHT - LEWIS VS NASCIMENTO
Replies
7
Views
213
mrpickem
mrpickem
Wiretowire
MLB Thursday 7/11
Replies
5
Views
161
inZane
inZane
Wiretowire
MLB Monday 7/8
Replies
5
Views
132
KJ
KJ
mrpickem
Fight Night 227 ~ Noche
Replies
5
Views
344
mrpickem
mrpickem
Back
Top