Tennis - Cincinnati / 2016 US Open

[BetCrimes1984]

Time to return one's attention to the finest collection of mental midgets in the world now the US Open (with a roof, finally!) is on the horizon.

-----
Cincinnati

Couple of minor bets to dust off the post-Wimbledon cobwebs.

Suarez-Navarro vs. Kerber
Kerber has done a lot of work in a short space of time recently: made the Wimbledon & Rio Olympics finals, and inbetween made the semis of the Canadian Masters. With the US Open fast looming on the horizon and the fact she's defending no significant ranking points from her Cincinnati effort last year (she lost in the 1R), I'm going to guess she really doesn't give too many fucks about how much further she advances at this tournament. To substantiate this assertion, I submit her recent outings here:

- In 3 previous hardcourt meetings against Strycova, Kerber had dropped - wait for it - all of 5 total games. In their 2R match here, she dropped 6 games in the 1st set alone. Kerber taking 2 hours to knock off a 30 year old journeywoman in straight sets is a sign that the German isn't running on a full tank of gas.

- Mladenovic's play was all over the shop early on, cue the 1st set bagel. But the moment Kerber went up 2-1 in the 2nd set on a break of serve, she had a horrible service game herself to fail to consolidate the break. In losing that service game she gave the Frenchwoman life, and suddenly faced a fight. If Kerber hadn't subsequently saved 4 break points in the 6th game of that set, she'd have likely faced having to win a 3rd set. Instead Frenchie was the first of the 2 players to blink late in the set, and Kerber ended up winning 8 of the last 9 points played. Not helping Mladenovic's cause was the fact a rain interruption forced her previous match to be finished a few hours before, which goes some way towards explaining her indifferent attitude early here.

Kerber-with-her-foot-on-the-pedal-as-usual doesn't drop 10 games on a hardcourt to Strycova, nor does she fail to hammer Mladenovic up a break in a 2nd set off a 6-0 1st set win. The signs are there for me that she's wearing down.

OK, S-N has a horrible record against the German on hardcourts (1-3), but she did win their last meeting (this year) and has a hardly unrespectable overall 3-4 record against her. I like a number of the Spaniard's recent wins, and she's over her horror form of last year. She's playing well enough to say her odds are well worth it in the instance that Kerber doesn't care to put in a 100% effort. However, if Kerber wins then my eye is on her opponent (Halep/Radwanska) in the next round. Halep beat her at the Canadian Masters, and I think Simona has a long memory re her loss to the German at Wimbledon. I don't think she'd think that Canadian win would have balanced the ledger between the 2 players. Kerber's form + Simona passing on the Olympics (= flying under the radar) should lead to the German being overpriced. But that opportunity obv. goes begging of Kerber loses this match.

I think this one comes down to how much fight S-N shows Kerber early. If the Spaniard telegraphs to the German she's there to fight all day, I can see Kerber's intent vanishing (certainly if she doesn't win the 1st set). If Kerber does care, then hopefully the Spaniard at least empty's her tank that much more for the next round. You have to go back to week 16 of this season (25 matches ago, vs. Kerber in Germany defending her Stuttgart title) to find the last time S-N failed to win at least 10 games in a match she ended up losing.

Suarez-Navarro (+270) small bet
Suarez-Navarro 2-0 sets (+500) small bet

 

[P-Unit]

wow you have to be kidding me. I had CSN o9.5 games. what a choke.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

wow you have to be kidding me. I had CSN o9.5 games. what a choke.

That's a brutal loss, I thought mine were bad enough. She broke to go up 1-0 in the 2nd, so Kerber was approaching the brink of giving up on the match, and Carla decides to drop her load. Served at 40-30 for a 2-0 lead, then served at deuce looking for a 3-3 tie. Also had 6 BP chances to get the set back on serve on 2 different occasions she was behind. Frustrating to nail exactly where Kerber is mentally and not have her opponent bury her when the door was wide open to do so.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Going to deal with the Halep/Kerber match via live betting. Halep's endured a big line move so I'm not the only one seeing Kerber being close to running on fumes at this point. The problem Halep presents was evidenced in her match vs. Radwanska: how does one explain her first 4 games? It could be that 13 straight wins have now started to exert a toll on her, Kerber might not be the only one whose tank is rapidly emptying. A slow start here by her against Kerber is a door the German needs opened for her to walk through & offer a real effort. If the Romanian hits the ground running, it should result in a nightmare outing for the German (and another great opportunity to back Halep to break her opponent's serve live. She was money against Radwanska's pop-gun, and she broke Kerber 4 times in the 1st set in their recent meeting at Wimbledon).

Muguruza vs. Pliskova
While Muguruza endured a lull in form following her French Open win (hardly unexpected, Kerber endured the same after her own maiden Slam win earlier this year; such a life changing result for someone her age was always likely going to take time to acclimatize to), the signs have certainly been there in her matches @Cincy thus far that the innate ability which saw her win that FO is reappearing again. She's endured what 3 power players have had to throw at her in the 1st set, then put them away with relative ease in the 2nd set. That Pliskova is another power player means Mugu has had the perfect preparation for what faces her here.

Pliskova on the other hand has faced a series of essentially pushers of some degree or another (Kuznetsova might argue the label, but in her older age & weakened serve that's essentially what she is now, an aggressive pusher), players incapable of presenting her with any real power to have to deal with. Pliskova suffers from the same problem that Madison Keys does when facing another accomplished player: her ground game isn't (yet) up to it. While she beat Kuznetsova (someone ranked #10), the fact is the Russian is old and past her best on any surface other than clay (& the Russian's record @Cincy was a poor 6-5 SU before their meeting). Pliskova's game, like Keys', revolves around her strong serve. As long as she's winning cheap points off the back off a heavy 1st serve % & holding her service games comfortably enough, from what I've seen she demonstrates a greater freedom to go after her opponent's own service game (aka risking UE by going for winners). Her troubles start when she faces someone who has the return ability to get deep into her serve. That pressure then starts to inhibit her own return play, where it would seem she doesn't feel like she can risk throwing away points (UE for the sake of winners) because she's finding it hard to win easy points on her own serve, thus doesn't want to hand easy points away to her opponent's serve. There's a logic to it, but it's what I've seen happen when her game has broken down. Essentially she seems to be a front runner. She knows her serve is her main weapon, and when it's functioning the weaker aspects of her game don't get her down;the confidence stemming from a functioning serve overcomes her own inhibitions about employing her own weaknesses. When her serve isn't setting her up to steamroll through her opponent, her inadequacies elsewhere start to loom large in her own mind & leave her no plan B to fall back on.

Pliskova's 1st serve percentages in her 3 matches thus far have been 44%, 53% & 46%: in her 2 previous wins over Mugu, those numbers read 66% (2-set win @Indian Wells) & 60% (3-set win @Dubai). As already mentioned, the fact that not one of her opponents has been a power player has meant she's been able to endure such average serving and not pay the price for it. In her last match before this tourney, she lost 6-3 6-3 to Halep with a 57% 1st serve percentage (anything Halep can do...). Muguruza seems to be rounding back into form in time for the US Open, while Pliskova doesn't seem to have regained her very best form since flopping at Wimbledon after a strong run at Eastbourne (her SF win at the latter event over Konta - 6-7 (5-7) 6-3 6-3 - is probably the best tennis I've seen her play this year). There's really no excuses for her not to have hammered Doi something like 3 & 2 (especially on this surface), or beaten Kuznetsova in straight sets after winning the 1st.

Muguruza's return game shouldn't let a an average serving Pliskova off the hook like her 3 previous opponents have. Either the Czech improves on that front to a degree she hasn't really shown in 7-8 weeks (her best 1st serving effort over this period, 65%, came not surprisingly against a light-hitter, Bondarenko, in a match that still required a 3rd set), or she's going to struggle to develop a front-running position on the scoreboard which sets the stage for so many of her wins. Muguruza just as to do what she's been doing: endure what her power opponent has thrown at her in the 1st, then put the knife early in the 2nd. If Muguruza is really back-on-track as her form so far suggests and Pliskova serves like she has been then this match should struggle to see more than 19-20 games played. Anything else from either and I think Muguruza ekes out a win in 2 or 3 tough sets.


Muguruza -1.5 games (+120) medium bet

(What did exist here previously were my thoughts on the nature of this line offered by my home book. I now realise what they've done, where clearly they do not at the time I write this)

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Thankfully live betting is treating me a lot kinder than the pre-match stuff. Quick review of the semi-finals and then my thoughts on the final.

Halep/Kerber
This rapidly turned into to a battle of who would run out of energy first. Kerber got off to a quick 3-1 start and from that point Halep was forever behind the 8-ball. Both players committed what was for them an unusual amount of UE in 2 sets, but where Kerber's 21 is hardly an uncommon number, Halep's 50 was just insane. Kerber limped over the line at the end, but it was obvious when the rain break came after 7 games in the 1st set that whoever lost that initial set wasn't going to have it in themselves to comeback and win in 3. The reasons for Kerber's lethargy have been obvious, but it was rapidly apparent to me early in this one that I'd undersold how much 13 straight wins had taken out of Halep. Her slow start against Radwanska was the sign that the mental & physical energy required to string together such a run was starting to take its toll, and it was only the Pole's own error-ridden play that allowed Halep the chance to to overcome that horrible start.

View attachment 41287


Muguruza/Pliskova
Pliskova served the best she had so far this tourney (of course she did), but that was on the back of her fast start which serviced her front-running psychology. Muguruza being at odds with the extremely windy conditions and never really finding any rhythm the whole match is what underpinned the Czech's early dominance. It would seem that the Spaniard is still far from reproducing her best (this was after all the toughest player she faced in the draw), which means she'll be an unbettable fave at the coming US Open. I've said it many times, that how Muguruza's bh is functioning early in a sign of where she's headed. With 2 BP chances to get the 1st set back on serve, she hit an average 2nd serve return long off her bh, and then at deuce did the same to end a rally. In her best form either of those balls that were there to be hit get put away. Once Pliskova held that service game to consolidate her own early break, that was pretty much it.

----

Pliskova vs. Kerber
I mentioned in my previous post that Pliskova's weakness is a mirror of Madison Keys, in that her ground/return game isn't yet consistent enough for her to be a constant threat to the top players. That Kerber was a 4-2 record against Pliskova (& a 5-1 one against Keys) speaks to the fact that, with Sharapova no longer around, she (along with Halep) owns the best return game in the WTA. Pliskova's opening against Kerber is Kerber's weaker serve, which allows for Pliskova's return deficiencies to be less fatal for her chances than they would be against a more powerful server. Thus Pliskova has won at least a set in their last 4 meetings, where Kerber has won a set in only 2 of them. Kerber's 2 wins lasted 31 & 35 games, so Pliskova obv. demanded a lot from her to get the W. Their very first meeting (in 2011) is the only time the German has rolled the Czech easily (2 & 2), but that result is pretty much irrelevant to me given the Czech wasn't even 20 at the time. Thus we get to the key question I have for this final: how much energy does Kerber have to be able to execute her normal ground game in order to wear Pliskova down? Because unless the Czech absolutely rolls over like a bitch, Kerber just doesn't have the natural power to see her off easily, IMO, Kerber being run down off her run to the Wimbledon F then (after a short 2-match outing @Bastad) to the Canadian Masters SF then to the Olympics F and now to this F means from my pov that she shouldn't be in a position to fully exploit Pliskova's weaknesses. In turn, if Pliskova can replicate not only her practical play but the attitude she showed against Muguruza, then Kerber will be immediately up against it. Winning the 1st set is going to be so important, which means Pliskova getting off to another good start is absolutely key. No question I like the Czech's chances (hence odds) here, but knowing how important it is she gets out in front early (and having seen her wilt almost out of nowhere against inferior talent when things haven't gone her way early) means I'll save my wagering for what's currently treating me the best: live betting.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

That was like taking candy from a baby.

Kerber made inroads into 2 of Pliskova's first 3 service games, twice forcing deuce in one and having 4 bp chances in the other. Excellent serving and a very solid ground game allowed her to hold the first of those games but Kerber finally converted that 4th bp chance. But from there the German pretty much ran out of gas. In Pliskova's next 4 service games the best return game in the WTA only won a total of 5 pts. Only on the brink of losing did she again show any fight, managing a bp chance at 30-40 before the Czech buckled down to win 4 of the final 5 pts played. In turn Kerber got broken in 5 of her 8 service games, her lack of energy proving fatal regarding her biggest weakness, a soft 2nd serve. While Kerber's lethargy is the underlying reason this match wasn't a contest, I was hugely impressed with Pliskova's consistent ground game which was probably of an even higher quality than it was against Muguruza. Obviously the fact that Kerber was unable to sustain any real pressure on her meant the issues I mentioned that arise when her ground game weaknesses are being heavily probed were never allowed to make themselves felt. Still, there were a number of poor decisions by her (especially with some shots at the net): repeatedly she passed up the obviously called for opposite court shot for the winner and instead chose to try and hit behind Kerber, where of course the German was never interested in running all day so on those shots she naturally held her ground & gave up the opposite court, resulting in Pliskova merely hitting the ball straight back her and either extended the rally unnecessarily of got beaten then & there by a passing shot.

View attachment 41288

When she won the 1st set she clenched her fist and let out an aggressive yell. Since she's basically an automaton at the best of times even when winning, that was a telling moment. These 2 results could be a seminal moment in her progression as a player, from a psychological pov at least. They're not fully 'legitimate' wins since obv. Kerber was seriously fatigued and Muguruza is still dealing with her post-FO title winning blues. But there's no reason to think, depending on how tough a draw she gets, that she can't halt her shitty run of Slam form and win her quarter of the draw/make the semis. Def. be a bet I'll be looking at closely.

 

[ScopeY]

:shake:

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Scopey:shake:

Murray follows Kerber as a Rio finalist who loses a final they made a mere week later. As soon as Cilic went up a break and was still paying +170, it was a largely a no brainer to bet on Murray following in Kerber's footsteps. It helped that Cilic looked sharp in recent matches. I think the Croat setting himself up to make a showing at his favourite Slam, def. look to see how much he'll pay to win his quarter of the draw with an eye for that bet.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

US Open - 1st Round

Of the early games Monday, there were a number of faves I was looking to fade early before I knew the draw (Doi, Petkovic, Buyukakcay, Errani & Vinci) but I can't get past their opponents' flaws. However there is one early one that caught my eye...

Sakkari (#94) vs. Duan (#103)
Maria Sakkari is only 21 years old and still at the development stage of her WTA career, and from what I've seen she's pretty much a clone of Puig: feisty game, attacking intent, not big in stature but has plenty of mental fight. At Wimbledon against Venus she was 4-1 down in the 1st set (incl. a missed BP chance to get it back on serve at 3-2) and instead of quitting & moving onto the next set she fought back to eventually lose the set 7-5. Where a lot of these mental midgets would then lose their load because their comeback fell short, Maria continued to fight and ended up winning the 2nd set (incl. breaking Venus's first 3 service games). What those efforts took out of her saw her not unexpectedly fade in the 3rd (lost 6-2), but the level of intent she showed in that match when down signals to me a chick I'm not afraid to have my money on. She also strikes me as one of those players who gets up for the big occasion because she enjoys it.

Ying-Ying Duan is 27 years old and there's nothing about her efforts that suggest she's a late bloomer. I haven't seen her play at all, but looking at her results on paper I don't see any standout scalps from her hardcourt results over the last 3-4 years that would have me think twice about backing against her: Puntintseva is the only one of note. She has notably beaten Pliskova & Bouchard at Wimbledon, but the latter's scalp was taken last year (the Canadian's horror season, going 1-9 in matches not played on HC) & Pliskova for whatever reason simply has been utter garbage in Slams (no 3R wins in 15 appearances: that's seriously wtf? stuff).

The core reasons I fancy the Greek here are...

(1) Like a lot of Chinese players, Duan pretty much plays her best on native soil. So while she has decent enough hardcourt w/l numbers for her (ITF & WTA) matches in recent seasons (13-10 for '16; 27-16 for '15; 28-13 for '14) these have predominantly been matches played in Asia. This event obviously isn't being played on that continent, and looking at her record it would seem her form doesn't really seem to travel.

(2) Sakkari's brief Slam career only amounts to 5 appearances, where she's gone 1-1 on grass (win vs. a Chinese woman ranked #79) & 1-2 on hardcourts (win vs. a Chinese woman ranked #138). Duan's made 6 Slam appearances for a 2-2 record on grass & 0-4 on hardcourts (she's also failed in qualifying on 3 other occasions: twice on hardcourts, once on clay). Both players have twice faced a player ranked 11 or higher in a Slam: where Sakkari took a set off both her highly ranked opponents while winning 25 games overall, Duan failed to win a set while winning 15 games overall.

(3) While Duan has the better overall recent form out of the 2 players (she's won 8 straight: 5 in winning a tourney @Nanchang & then her 3 qualifiers - ranked #202, #190 & #133 - to make the main draw here), Sakkari knocked off 3 players of note in qualifiers for her last tournament appearance prior to this USO: Lucic-Baroni (#56: an older journey woman but her ranking testifies to her consistency: if her opponent isn't on then she'll be there at the end), Watson (#75: prefers HC, put together a 9-1 HC run earlier this year before the tour turned to the clay/grass season) & Giorgi (#66: erratic player but her power is always a threat). That trio have a combined 80 Slam appearances under their belts (13 x 3R berths, 4 x 4R berths, 1 x QF berth, 1 x SF berth). Duan has nothing like that amount of experience to bring to bare here.

---

Duan having done nothing at a HC Slam before and not playing at a geographical venue which serves her producing her best combined with the fact of Sakkari's greater natural talent and the form she's shown to qualify make for the obvious bet at this price. If Sakkari loses the 1st set then there's always the knowledge that, in her last USO 1R match, Duan lost to a qualifier ranked #137 after winning the 1st set (6-2 2-6 4-6) to base one's hopes on a comeback.

Sakkari ml (-115) medium bet

 

[nbafan88]

Sold. Good luck.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

US Open Round 3

Recent offline calls to duty restricting my ability to deal with anything other than the occasional live bet have ceased for the moment, so on with the show. Unusual tournament in a couple of ways so far: Faves are pretty much dominating, on the back of a higher than usual ratio of dogs losing SU after winning the 1st set. A more normal ratio re the latter would've put paid to the former being the case. Anyhow, fwiw these are my thoughts on the slate of matches tomorrow (with a mind to the fact that surely we're going to get some sort of fave regression in the near future):


Bondarenko vs Sevastova
These 2 are both lighter-hitting pushers so the Dog is definitely a chance here on that basis alone. Bondarenko being off a mammoth effort (a 3 hour 5-7 7-6 7-5 win, all the worse because she lost the 1st set) and the fact she's only ever made the 4R once in 29 previous Slam appearances for me undoes the fact she has a 3-0 hth record against her Latvian opponent. My concern for Sevastova's chances are that's she's off such a big win and she herself has no great record of going anywhere near deep in Slams. All things considered the Under would normally appeal most to me here, because with both players in a letdown spot what usually happens is the 1st set loser falls over mentally in the 2nd set (I'm thinking of that recent Wimbledon match between Cibukolva & Vesnina, both players then off winning matches 9-7 in the 3rd, which followed this script perfectly). Given we're strongly in line for a fave regression...

Sevastova ml (+100) (small bet)


Vinci vs. Witthoeft
Another wily veteran pusher vs. an up & comer (though unlike above, here the stronger player is the vet). I wanted to fade Vinci in the 1R (on the basis of her poor form for a long while now matched to the fact she'd struggled in all 1R of her previous Slams this year) but on this surface Friedsam wasn't the right opponent. The Italian winning that match seems to have rekindled her muscle memories from last year because as a very slight dog she then took McHale to the woodshed. Her favourite Slam surface wise has always been HC with her best results coming at the USO, and given her final berth last year, naturally from a retaining rankings points pov her going deep here is very important for her long-term earning capacity on tour (the obv. equation: higher ranking = better draws = more earning$ potential) thus seems to be providing the impetus which has her trouncing her form in the months leading up to this event. While Witthoeft is off beating 2 pushers already, it's hard to envisage her winning this but, again, through the lens of that fave regression, Vinci's form has literally been so bad pre-USO that I could not justify betting her at these odds. Witthoeft has been troubled in 1 of 5 sets played by 2 opponents who really had no excuse for not putting up betting showings: that says to me the German is playing as well as her results suggest (I haven't seen her live here). gun to my head I'd say the Over was the play here I don't see either player trouncing the other. The fact I see a 21.5 line despite one player being so heavily favoured is something I see supporting my take.


Cibulkova vs. Tsurenko
My concern for Cibulkova going deep here I expressed in this discussion thread started by nba so I won't rehash it all here except to say I doubt the amount of fuel she has in her tank. Decent Wimbledon run followed by getting married would no doubt involve a lot of energy being spent by any person concerned, let alone this energiser bunny. Her luck on that front has been to get a decent draw early, and here's another aspect to it: Tsurenko's basically never done anything in a Slam where Cibu has made the final of a HC Slam before, so it should be her surface. However she's only won one previous 3R match at the USO (vs. 3 at the AO) and that fact says to me that, given she's a highly energentic person, that she starts to run out of steam by the time this latter part of the year rolls around. You add on the fact of her recent marriage and that she's never gone deep in the Slam following one in which she made the QF in (which she did at Wimbledon), and there's the opening I see for Tsurenko to deliver a legit upset. Speaking to this possibility is the fact that I'd have expected the Czech to be a heavier fave than she is (2-0 hth & dropping only 5 games both times, though both matches were on clay), so there's another warning sign from my pov. Not a fave I'd be interested in for the asking price.


Konta vs. Bencic
Is Bencic finally fit? If the answer is yes, then she can certainly win this in straights given she's the greater natural talent and Konta is still experiencing growing pains re her rapid rise in the rankings. Bencic most def. has the ground game (when healthy) to overcome the power adv. the Brit has here. Neither has any kind of significant venue advantage (Bencic one QF to Konta's one 4R appearance). Bencic leads 2-1 hth (winning their only HC meeting in 3 sets, but that was played before either had broken through on tour so is not really a result to weigh too heavily imo). Form through 2 matches: Konta's looked good in 4 sets, heat stroke bothering her in the one she lost; Bencic struggled first up (no great surprise) but then lost only 5 games to someone (Petkovic) who at the same stage as this coming match took 9 games off Konta in last year's USO. The Swiss Miss can def. deliver the goods to serve the soon-to-arrive fave regression, the question is will her body allow her to. But I'm not interested in Konta at the price she's tagged with. Bencic is a future Slam winner (probably multiple) if her body holds up and she keeps working at developing her natural talent, she's the real deal at her best. Konta is a lot older, could win a Slam but I'm not completely sold on her just yet. She's def. a late developer, always more difficult to get a strong read on how far such individuals are likely to go. Got the basic tools & work ethic to justify her rapid rise in the rankings, but owning the sheer natural talent a la the likes of Halep or Muguruza or Bencic? I don't see it.


Kvitova vs. Svitolina
The Czech leads this match-up 3-1 hth (all on HC), winning the last 3 meetings. Last year Svitolina bowed out @the USO to an attacking left-hander, but the difference between that opponent (Makarova) & this one is the former plays her best tennis at the HC Slams, whereas Kvitova does not. Further, not only is she on record as sayig she doesn't really like playing in New York, she's had an expecially tough time of it this year: a broken engagement, a physical problem (mono) on top of her always present asthma, and ditching her coach of 7 years (who she said felt like losing a family member). All that might explain not only why she failed to make the final at New Haven for the first time in 5 years, but exited the tourney with her biggest loss of the year in winning a total of 2 games in 2 sets, against the light hitting Radwanska no less: this latter fact is Svitolina's opening. Her game is a less polished version of Radwanska's. If the Pole can smoke the Czech (pun intended), then this Ukranian can surely beat her everything else considered. 'Everything else' includes both players struggling to put away their opponents from the first 2 rounds. Kvitova needed 7 games to win both her 1st sets, and if she'd lost either could well be out of the tournament right now, while Svitolina has lost a set in both matches to date. Early 1st set form will be key. Svitolina serving first and not being broken through her first 4 games will strongly speak to her in-game bet-worthiness. Of course Kvitova might not play well enough to force her to serve that many times in the 1st set (lol).

Fun stat #1: In matches beyond the 2R at the USO, Kvitova's wins have come against players ranked #32, #90 & #97; Her losses have come against players ranked #11, #26, #81 & #145.

Fun stat #2: Kvitova has never beaten a player ranked higher than #30 in 26 previous USO matches. Svitolina is currently ranked #19.

Svitolina ml (+180) (small pre-match bet: live betting for anymore)


Madison Keys vs. Osaka
Keys had a poor 1R effort followed by a dominating 2R one. The difference between her 2 opponents was the amount of power they had the ability to bring to bare. Osaka has at least as much power to her game as Riske does, so given Keys' weaknesses I see no reason why the Japanese player shouldn't have the ability to test her here all things being equal. I can see her being pushed hard in at least 1 set, thus imo I think this total line is 1/1.5 games low. Under 19.5 should attract people who are overly influenced by Keys previous dominating outing, but that has nothijng to do with this match-up (just like Serena's 3 hammerings at the French had no bearing on her SF difficulties or her F result). Keys is still only 21, she's still an emotional midget, and she's still only playing in her second ever 3R match with hometown pressures surrounding her: there's a lot of expectation on her that she's already got this match won. She's going to be put under pressure = if she can barely get by fellow mental midget Riske, I fail to see why someone who plays with the power & (the) freedom (of youth) that Osaka seems to (from what I've seen of her) can't do the same.

o19.5 games (-110) (medium bet)


Bellis vs. Kerber
While what I've had to say about Kerber is a broken record at this point (how much fuel does she have left in her tank?), that shouldn't be an issue here. She played all of 6 games in her 1R match, and was tested in only 1 set in her 2R match. Compare that light workload with the fact that Bellis playing here her 6th match, and you have the realities which defy this being a contest. The enthusiasm of unbridled youth should get blitzed by German efficiency. The American's only chance is if somehow she forces a 3rd set (preferably by winning the 1st, not the 2nd), thus Kerber's workload-inertia issue should then start to make things interesting. Hard not to see the German delivering all the expected outcomes (except Bellis showing for just 1 set would deliver the Over: Kerber winning the 1st too easily could see her relax too much in the 2nd, opening the door for that result. As it's the option that usually interests me the most in one-sided matches, I'd pass on lumping for either side in this one).


Niculescu vs. Wozniacki
Based on previous meetings (the Dane is 6-0 hth, never having dropped a set), previous USO efforts (the Dane has made 4 x SF & 2 x F in 9 previous appearances, against the Romanian having won just one 2R match in 8 previous appearances), and previous Slam efforts overall (the Dane's played in 16 4R matches in 37 previous Slam appearances, against the Romanian's having played in just 2 4R matches in 33 previous Slam appearances), it would be a real reach to think Wozniacki could/would/should drop this one: it would be a pretty big upset. But when a fave regression is due, that's exactly what happens: the unexpected. And Wozniacki's play in Slams since Rory fucked with her heart (a bombshell which seems to have caught up with her only after the off-season arrived, and not playing gave her time to stew in her own despair: thus, since the beginning of 2015) has been poor by anyone's standards, let alone the efforts of a former #1: before this USO she managed just one 2R win in her last 6 appearances (@Wimbledon no less, arguably her worst surface since it's the only Slam she's never made a QF at. She had a kind draw). In the 1R here she dropped the 1st set (& was down in the 2nd at one point) to a player ranked #146, and while she beat Kuznetsova in the 2R, as I've noted before the clay of the French is the surface that currently serves the Russian best out of all the Slams as she advances into older age (her USO win from 2004 is long distant memory that's never ever going near to being repeated). So a win against a decent ranked opponent doesn't do much to convince me she has that fire in the belly any more. Still, whatever Woz. has going against her, her opponent is a journey woman pusher that I'd struggle to stick a cent on in Slams at the best of times. But I'm impressed by her 1R win over Strycova, and the way she followed it up in the 2R (after a tough match, she needed to get off court quickly to have a chance in this one, and she could barely have achieved that aim any better in dropping only 1 game). The odds are what tell the tale of this story imo: how on earth is the Dane paying this much given the stats I mentioned in the first sentence? Respect the fave regression that's due is what I say, which means don't get seduced by those stats that kicked off this little novel.

Niculescu ml (+180) (small bet)
o20.5 (-115) (small bet)

 

[nbafan88]

Thanks for the writeups. I can't go against Woz after she seemed to have broken through her troubles last round. The pressure should be off her now. Haven't seen Niculescu though.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Thanks for the writeups. I can't go against Woz after she seemed to have broken through her troubles last round. The pressure should be off her now. Haven't seen Niculescu though.

Just woke up/saw the scores of the matches done to this point. I completely misread the odds on that one. I can't believe the Dane's price now with the hindsight of the final score, but then it tells me that they didn't know what to expect from her either. She was a gift at -200, and I looked a gift horse in the mouth (due to that expected regression).

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Dogs went 2-6 yesterday, with Osaka snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I truly pity anyone who had her ml because that was a brutal loss. So, no real signs of that fave regression yet which leads to the remaining slate of 3R matches...

Halep vs. Babos
Radwanska vs. Garcia
Serena vs. Larsson
Pliskova vs. Pavlyuchenkova
Venus vs. Siegemund
I'm lumping these matches together because what's to say about 1 is the same said about the other 4: The dog just doesn't have enough on paper to be worth backing imo, however they do (except in the case of Larsson) have enough to their games to pinch a set if their opponent isn't all there. That means the better paying options (total/spread) are lotteries as I see it. Difficult to believe all 5 go as expected (straight set results that go under) but picking the exceptions for me is the lottery. The Ruskie and Frenchie strike me as the strongest candidates (both have games based on power which, for different reasons in each instance, should provide difficulties for their opponents if they aren't at their best; and both have enough experience so shouldn't be moved/overawed in anyway by the occasion), but I'm just not interested.


That leaves 3 other matches where the odds at the very least paint the dog as a chance...

Zhang vs. Shvedova
Flip a coin. I know Zhang sucks, but her Slam breakthrough this year came on a HC. That she immediately slipped back into her perennial 1R-losing ways at the subsequent Slams was because they weren't played on HC. Her beating Stosur says to me she's a real chance here. Shvedova had a good Wimbledon, and frankly she has no excuse not producing much better results to this point in her career (and really had no excuses for losing to Venus). She strikes me as someone who's too easily satisfied with 1 or 2 good results, and doesn't have the work ethic to get the most out of herself, whereas Zhang has the ethic but just simply lacks the personality/self-belief to go as far as she might in Slams (which isn't that far, but a lot further than basically always fucking losing her first time up). So whatever option interests you, flip a coin. Zhang I see is a slight dog, so simply on the basis that surely one dog at least cashes today, she's as likely it as anyone else.


Konjuh vs. Lepchenko
The more talented hard hitting up & comer vs. the veteran pusher on home soil making probably the last decent Slam run she has in her (she's made her fourth 3R in her last 5 USO, and her 5th straight 3R in her last 5 HC Slam appearances here, but is 30 and thus isn't going to keep this up barring exceptional future draws). Lepchenko being off two 3-setters already (a heavy 62 games played) vs. Konjuh's solitary 3-setter (but only 45 games played) definitely plays into the Croatian's hands but this is the only the latter's second 3R Slam match & first at a HC Slam. Konjuh is most justifiably the fave, but the expectation of a regression matches Lepchenko's strong previous USO form & experience advantage. Still, the American has done so much work so early it's hard to see her winning here unless Konjuh completely falls over (which, funnily enough, she did in her last match before this USO, that being against another veteran pusher). Ugly match-up, gun to my head I'd play the Over. Konjuh has the sheer ability to destroy Lepchenko in 2 sets, but I don't think she's that developed mentally to do so yet at this stage of a Slam, not if Lepchenko continues to fight instead of giving up the ghost after losing the 1st set. I'll guess Konjuh prevails by taking a 3rd set 6-2/6-3.


Suarez-Navarro vs. Vesnina
S-N this year is back to repeating her Slam form of 2013-14, which was interrupted by a horror run last year (3 x 1R exits), which was strange from the pov that her form in non-Slam matches stayed as consistently good as it had been over the same period. Looking at her HC Slam results (both at the USO & AO) in her career thus far, what stands out to me are the nature of her positive results in HC matches played beyond the 2R: wins against players ranked #9, #23, #39, #56, #92, #109 & #141. One win against a top 20 player, that being Kerber @the '13 USO. Funnily enough I bet Kerber for that match so readily recall her choke - after winning the 1st set she shit the bed early in the 2nd (after blowing 2 BP in the opening game she then trailed 5-0 before putting in any kind of coherent effort) and in the 3rd basically just ran out of gas after getting broken twice when serving for a 5-2 lead. In other words, S-N's best result beyond the 2R in a HC Slam is down to her opponent handing matters to her almost on a plate. Her other result against a player sporting a ranking of any real note was against a fellow Spaniard (in fact 3 of her 7 wins here - all bolded - have been against fellow country women). Since Carla is without doubt more than just a bit of an emotional/mental midget, it makes sense to me that when she faces someone familiar to her that she doesn't fear, that she feels the freedom to play her better tennis. Looking at S-N's 2 matches to date: she faced a 1R opponent who frankly is garbage (was 4-18 in main draw matches this year before playing S-N) and in her 2R match faced a woman who is herself on a rapid slide (6-10 in her 16 previous matches to facing S-N, incl. a 4-8 HC run). So the Spaniard's seemingly dominant form has come against feeble opponents, even if one sported a recognizable name.

On the other side of the net we have a woman who very quietly is having the best year of her career, at the ripe old age of 30. Vesnina currently sports a 27-12 record in all main draw matches (a win rate superior to her 30-21 mark from 2009), within which she's crafted a 9-5 record in HC matches (a win rate superior to her 20-12 HC mark from 2013). That good form didn't translate into any Slam success (she failed to qualify for the AO main draw, and Rogers beat her in the 2R at the FO: a side note to that being the only person to halt Rogers run was the eventual winner) until she arrived at Wimbledon, where she finally got it together on the big stage and made the SF. In 20 previous HC Slam appearances (10 at each), Vesnina has played in only 5 x 3R matches for 2 wins (both at the AO, one over the 16th seed Vinci). Where with S-N I looked at the nature of her wins beyond the 2R, here I looked to see who Vesnina had lost to beyond the 2R at HC Slams: Azarenka (twice), Sharapova, Zvonareva & Petrova. Since the Sharapova loss was in '06 (pre-injury), that means she's typically lost to very highly ranked players, and generally harder hitters than S-N. Looking at the Russian's 2 matches at the USO to date, she had a decent ole struggle with Kontaveit, but I rate the Estonian and thought she was a shot to win that match, so I see no shame in the Russian dropping a set. She whipped Beck's behind, yet Beck was priced lower than Kontaveit was, and here we have a glimpse with what's up in this 3R match: where Vesnina is a pusher (like Beck & S-N), Kontaveit is a power hitter, thus it's no surprise that her hardest match thus far has come against the player with the tools to take her well & truly out of her comfort zone. The tools Kontaveit had to bring to bare to trouble Vesnina, S-N does not.

These 2 have met once before (earlier this year), with S-N winning 6-3 7-6 (4) @Doha. The context for that loss from the Russian's pov is she had to play qualifiers to get into the main draw, so by the time that QF rolled around she had played 5 matches to S-N's 2, and further was off two 3-set wins against Halep & Wozniacki (& a straight sets 1R win over Garcia). That sequence of opponents would be tough for anyone outside the top 10 to get through, so as far as this match goes I don't weigh it too heavily against Vesnina's chances. The fact she didn't quit in the 2nd set given her prior workload is both a sign of her toughness/maturity and the fact that S-N just doesn't possess the game to put away someone who is willing to fight it out.

Fun stat: S-N has never made the 4R in every Slam she's appeared in over a single year. She's lost in the QF, 4R & 4R so far in 2016.

Vesnina is not only having a career year but, importantly, is clearly enjoying her tennis, enjoying just being out on the court. The Spaniard is an established mental midget who only recently delivered one of her trademark meltdowns when, @Cincinnati with a tired Kerber at her mercy (up a set & an early break in the 2nd set), she proceeded to lose 12 of the final 14 games played: she can deliver shit out of nowhere, which means as long as the Russian continues to fight & put pressure on her (even if down a set), this bet will never be dead until the match is actually over. At this price I can't ignore the Russian.

Vesnina ml (+170) (medium bet)

 

[nbafan88]

Love the write up. Thank you.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

When the conditions can't but change to further help serve fave domination, it's time to cut & run. Faves went 8-0 yesterday, and there's really no reason they can't clean sweep again today. Hell, they might not lose another match for the rest of the tourney. I'm just going to sit back and see what unfolds at this point, stick with live betting.

 

[Noles4life]

well the dogs found there way today winning 2/3 matches during day sesh in womens

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Women's Final

well the dogs found there way today winning 2/3 matches during day sesh in womens

That day proved an anomaly, Noles. Only 1 dog has won since then, but what a win it was. No matter what happens in the final, this has been a Slam to remember for the 'know-little to nothing-about-tennis' squares.

-----

Fascinating final we've got coming. Pliskova's game is built round her serve, so she should be ideally made for hardcourts & grass. But I think grass, at least until now, has found out her ground game deficiencies, whereas the hardcourts playing a little slower suit her game as it stands currently down to the ground. Kerber too is built for hardcourts, so we've got basically the AO final match-up in styles all over again: the big server vs. the game's best returner. Kerber beat Serena back in Jan. because she kept her UE to an infinitesimal amount (13) while her perfectly executed return game found out Serena's inability to labour for long rallies (the American made a mammoth 46 UE). Same deal is going to apply for this final: when Pliskova thrashed Kerver @Cincinnati a couple of weeks before this Slam, Kerber didn't keep her error count down, while Pliskova played the best off the ground I'd seen of her. However Kerber was vulnerable from a physiological pov for that match since the Olympics were only just done and there was no reason for the German to treat that tourney as anything other than a USO warm-up (she wasn't defending any significant rankings points over from last year, when she lost in the 1R). She gave that final away the moment she lost the 1st set, so I wouldn't read too much into its emphatic scoreline re this coming final.

Pliskova's weaknesses to this point have been her ground game (which seems to be rapidly improving in a very short time) and her mental outlook. She shows little-to-nothing on court, but when she won that 1st set @Cincy off Kerber she let out a very rare scream. She's an introvert's introvert, and up until now she's been her own worst enemy (certainly re Slam efforts, her inability to get beyond the 3R being truly mind-boggling given her strengths, and to me that gets laid at the feet of nothing other then her mental issues).

Kerber's weakness is, as always, her less than powerful service game. She has to be good off the ground/returning, because she's never winning a match like this against an opponent worthy of the occasion without dropping her service game at least a couple of times.

I look at the opponents each player has had to play and beat to make this final...

Pliskova
1R & 2R: couple of nobodies to warm up her game
3R Pavlyuchenkova: top 20 player who has beaten Kerber 3 times in 5 HC meetings. A power player who is no slouch on her day
4R Venus W.: had a match-point against the Czech (bet both William's sisters are crying over that missed opportunity, cause you know this bitch wasn't getting in the way of her sister's chance of overtaking Graf if they met in the SF), seemed to be really amped to deliver in all the Slams this year because it's not a hard guess that this was her WTA swansong.
QF Konjuh: Croat has the talent/ability to be a future Slam winner, think it's telling that Pliskova didn't even let her get her nose into the match. This one-way affair was less about the youngster being on a too big a stage than it was about how far Pliskova's come in a short space of time.
SF Serena: What needs to be said (injury bs aside)

Kerber
1R Hercog: perennial 1R loser @Slams, retired 'hurt' after 6-0 1st set loss
2R Lucic-Baroni: old (34) journey woman, merely happy to pick up a 2R losers cheque at a Slam these days (since 2002 she's won 3 2R matches in 23 Slam appearances).
3R Bellis: might have talent, but has little control of emotions/mentally weak = no match for someone as clinical as Kerber
4R Kvitova: hates NYK & never makes any waves at the USO = same ole shit from her
QF Vinci: in the twilight of her career having a shit year, completely quit after losing the 1st set. Think she made the effort to make it this far simply because of the ranking points she had to defend from last year's result
SF Wozniacki: past her best, doesn't give a shit about tennis if the truth be told (just a job for her while she looks for the future husband of her babies)

Kerber had the tougher first couple of rounds on paper, but in reality that's not saying much. Since then there's no contest as to who's had by far the tougher road into this final, so the aspect that I saw undermining's Kerber's chances before this event got underway - the amount of fuel in her tank, so to speak - has been a factor largely both served by & hidden by the way the draw has panned out. Through the first 3 matches she only had to play 5 sets, being tested in only 1. But the danger to her not being tested is, as it always is, has it hidden from us how really low on gas she is? The problem for her, like Halep, is her game is so energy intensive. She doesn't win a lot of short points, because her plan A for winning points doesn't involve looking to hit winners, it's looking to work her opponent around in ways that lead to forced or unforced errors (she only tends to get really aggressive when plan A isn't working, and she needs to change things up. Ironically her best tennis probably gets played when plan A fails, but going for winners as of a right clearly isn't part of her comfort zone.) 8 months of playing that way successfully (= going deeper into a lot of tourneys = a lot of matches played) leads to a lot of weaar & tear, thus why Halep & herself have never really done squat at the US Open (she made the SF here in '11, but she exited the 1R in the 3 other Slams and basically had a much much lighter workload in the 8 months preceding that year's USO because she wasn't good enough to win as often to play more). This is the door though which lies Pliskova's real chance.

Pliskova's problem is almost a facsimile of the one Lisicki faced in the 2013 Wimbledon final. Lisicki had had to go through the much tougher draw (remember she beat Serena & Radwanska, the finalists from the year before, in 2 of her 3 matches prior to the final, coming back from being down in both 3rd sets), and in her first ever Slam final was the younger, less experienced power player facing the veteran pusher that was Bartoli. Change the players names and the exact same facts apply to this match. Pliskova doesn't show basically anything on court, but imo that's not because she's mentally strong in a relaxed personality sort of way. She, as an introvert's introvert, simply doesn't struggle to hide/disguise her inner turmoil. When she won that 1st set @Cincy against Kerber, she let out a scream loud enough to wake any sleeping viewers up. She was feeling the moment, because she led 5-3 and had 2 BP, so she had the knowledge she still had a service game to go to win the set even if she didn't cash in one of those 2 chances. Point being, it wasn't some crucial titanically fought service game she had to win in order to claim the set (a situation that would invite such an emotional response as a result of her coming out on top), it was largely a routine affair: that burst of energy she gave voice to was a result of the pressure she was putting on herself, it wasn't generated as a result of the way play was unfolding on the court. She will definitely be her own worst enemy out there, and the danger is she pulls a Lisicki.

So that's my take: Kerber needs all her energy reserves in order to repeatedly get deep into Pliskova's service games: if she lacks that energy then, as I've stated before, Pliskova's ground game thrives when she's not being repeatedly challenged in her own service games. When her service game gets put under real pressure, that's when she pressures herself into feeling she has to force things, and that's when her ground game goes to pieces (in my viewing experience: the best and worst she has to produce was viewable in one particular match earlier this year when Azarenka reeled off a couple of consecutive titles @Indian Wells & Miami. They met @IW and Aza won 7-6(5) 1-6 6-2. Pliskova's best was seen in the 2nd set, her worst in the 3rd). And of course kerber's weaker serve is going to provide Pliscova with BP chances, it's just a given, provided...

Pliskova needs to maintain the mental equilibrium she's shown to this point. Her ground game seems to have now reached a level that suffices to support a service game that has always had the potential to be equal to anything else going around (Serena included). The fact she survived a match-point against Venus might well prove to be the pivotal moment of her career-to-come (it certainly proved to be Kerber's touchstone at the AO after she survived the same moment against Doi in that Slam's 1R).

---

At this point in time, I'm strongly looking at either o21.5 games (I'm not fussed on the price that currently sports at my home book) or o2.5 sets; also warming to the price for o9.5 games for the 1st set. Unless Pliscova completely falls over mentally in her first Slam final - and the evidence for that happening is...what? - then I don't see Kerber on her best day hammering her (the Czech has won at least 10 games in their last 4 HC meetings). On the other side of the coin, it being her first Slam final & Kerber being the freshly minted #1, I can't see the German ever quitting her effort even if she goes down a set. @Cincinnati she wasn't invested enough in the event to care to fight on, thus the 6-1 2nd set scoreline. Kerber in a Slam final isn't going away that easily if she loses the 1st. The US Open women's final has a long recent history of not producing close contests: the last 18 finals that haven't involved Serena facing Azarenka have failed to see a 3rd set. The last 21 straight have been won by the winner of the 1st set. Only 2 of the last 16 have featured a tiebreak set. I think we have the ingredients here to buck these trends. Pliskova would much rather be facing another power player (shorter points = serve her usual rhythm). Kerber would much rather be facing another pusher: in particular her 4 straight losses to Muguruza in recent times (note: the 2 losses in Slams involved a 3rd set) shows her weakness against power players who have their serve on point. Pliskova is in many respects very much in the Muguruza mold (better serve, less polished ground game). The fact they both aren't getting in their opponent what they'd prefer here is what leads me to think neither will steamroll the other here.

As for SU betting, I'll stick with the live stuff. But I must say the fact Kerber is paying as much as she is, against someone who will basically be unknown to the average bandwagon tennis fan/bettor, does seem akin to the scenario we had at the French when Serena was paying a 'gift' price (admittedly against a slightly more well-known opponent). A Slam winning world #1 playing in her 3rd Slam final of the year, facing someone who only just got past the 3R in a Slam for the very first time, and she's not -250 at least? Heck, she's not even laying 3.5 games. On the surface, at least to me, the German's odds lie in that dangerous territory best described as 'gift-like'.

 

[nbafan88]

To me the line looks fair. People see how dominant Pliskova was in beating Serena... Will be curious to see the %s tomorrow

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Fair enough, that's just my perception. You say people will be influenced by the Czech beating Serena, but they've already seen Kerber do exactly the same in a HC Slam final this year, and that was against a woman who didn't claim any injury after said loss. I'd price Kerber between -220/-250, and I'd have her laying 3.5. Experience is a helluva advantage in this situation, and Kerber will be playing her 3rd Slam final of the year. Bartoli showed the value of having Slam final experience over a rookie finalist @Wimbledon in 2013. Pliskova paid +200 by match-time at Cincinnati against the German, so I'd think at the least the result of that recent final has influenced this line as much as the Czech's win over an 'injured' Serena, but I don't buy the fact that it should. So the fact Kerber isn't a heavier fave says to me that the workload issues she has (& were witnessed in effect in that Cincy final) & that I've harped on about dating back to Wimbledon, make her vulnerable in this final. This will be her 69th match this year compared to Pliskova's 57th (which obv. includes more travel & practice as well as actual live court time). Given her style of play is exponentially more energy-sapping than Pliskova's, it might as well be 20 more matches. It all adds up. That's why the first few games should prove pivotal in telling us what kind of final we have in store.

 

[edou1x]

i need to go on wikipedia to have the SU records for men/women first grand slam final ? i will nedd to get rid off first grand slam finals for both players like tsonga-djokovic in AO 2008 and cilic-Nishikori in 2014

 

[ScopeY]

Don't remind me of that lisicki final...ugh....(may be in the same situation after today as I have my last future remaining on monfils), thanks for the write ups however (all of then that is)

 

[nbafan88]

BC it's likely that after last night the #1 ranking finally sank in for Kerber. So Pliskova definitely has that going for her. I just cannot go against Kerber with a player like Pliskova who has a clear fault in her game. Serena started out yesterday like absolute shit and then just struggled with an apparent injury. Pliskova does not move well enough IMO and is coming off the biggest win of her life. She showed nerves yesterday and that'll happen again tomorrow.

 

[gunner4ever]

Thanks for the write up BC, I think I like the over as well, especially if Pliskova doesn't crumble under the pressure of a 1st big final, if this is the case I like her to upset Kerber she has no reason to feel too much pressure she is not the favorite and was not feeling much pressure yesterday vs Serena let's hope it will be the same tomorrow, but no way to know for sure how she will be mentally in this new situation for her.

I would just add about Kerber, that both her parents are polish so I'm sure her family must not have much sympathy for the Germans.

 

[BetCrimes1984]

I would just add about Kerber, that both her parents are polish so I'm sure her family must not have much sympathy for the Germans.

Of that I was aware. My use of that term in relation to her is completely flippant.:shake2:

-----

In the end I'm not willing to pay the price my book has tagged the full-match Over with, and a little digging into first time Slam finalists has put me off thoughts of backing the 1st set Over. Just gonna stick with the live stuff for this coming final. GL to all.

 

[gunner4ever]

No problem :cheers3:

Interested to know if you give Stan a good chance to create the upset again tomorrow!

 

[BetCrimes1984]

Impossible to think Stan isn't a decent chance to win. From what I'm reading the conditions hurt Novak in the SF & nothing indicates they're going to be much different tomorrow. Stan will obv. take a ton of confidence into this final considering the past history between these 2, and frankly justice surely demands the player who has had to play twice as many full matches to make the final takes the title, at least in my book.

 

[gunner4ever]

Yes I'm confident Wawrinka will be ok with the same conditions again tomorrow, he said he was feeling fine after the semi-final and not really tired anyway plenty of energy left in the tank. Let's go Stan rayer