Tennis - French Open - almost a lock?

[babolat2389]

roddick hurt his ankle a few days ago which is probably why he isnt a big favorite

[Ortho]

Thanks.

[Stormwolf]

"Just curious, so you guys actually think that Nadal at +100 is not a good wager? What do you think the correct line on him should be?"

I dont think that line is horrible but if there is an edge there(its hard to know for sure without some advanced algorithm) after comission and fees and taxes there might too little ev(IF at all) for you to gamble on

[Runner Runner]

Any joker with a racquet can get lucky and win the French, this has been proven in the past. Fade the hype, the overlay has to be on the underdogs, maybe in the form of some sort of a field wager. You can always buy it back when some no-name gets to the final against Federer or Nadal, and lock up a win. This is the way to go IMO, low risk, high reward.

[llabb]

Not sure why you're making this more complex than it is, or what this talk about algorithms is. It is a wager to win a tournament. From the OP:

"I like Nadal at +100 even better, although there is risk. I think the line on him should be at least -150, as he will almost definitely make the finals, and should be favored by at least that much against Federer."

I think the line should be -150, but it's only +100. This gives me a 17% edge. I can go into the math's of it, but haven't found any argumentation against the OP yet, except for "Oh, Nadal's the favorite, he must not be good value."

Not bashing, just want to get some solid discussion in, and would be very interested in any good points/counterpoints. If this line is not favorable, please give a tangible reason why. Or if you agree with the play, please state so and why.

Or if you just want to talk about any other good bets in the French Open, please post away!

[Runner Runner]

-150! Are you kidding me. Watch the kid play, this ain't no Sampras. He's winning points by the skin of his teeth, he can be broken at any time by no name players (which happened today) and he's just willing himself to win a lot of the time. IMO, guys like him and Hewitt who have to work so hard to win, should not be massive favorites to win tournaments.

[llabb]

I find the Nadal opposition here fascinating. Do you think that the 54-match win streak is a fluke?

From ESPN: "Nadal has not lost a clay-court match since April 2005 -- and it's not like he's feasted on a cupcake schedule filled with the likes of Prairie View A&M. Nadal has taken on the best the world has to offer. Thirty-three of his wins have come against players ranked in the top 50, eight against foes in the top 10, and three against the No. 1 player in the world, Roger Federer."

"For more than 12 months, this young man has simply refused to yield! If we all marvel at the precocious LeBron James leading the upstart Cavaliers in his first playoff experience, then we must also recognize Nadal, because the fact is LeBron is older than this kid!"

"What makes the streak most impressive is not only Nadal's insatiable will to win, but the physical superiority he has demonstrated over his peers. Advances in equipment technology and physical conditioning have made tennis a more athletically demanding game than at any point in its history."

-----

Any joker with a racquet can get lucky and win the French, this has been proven in the past.

Yes, if a "joker" is a top tennis player who specializes in clay. In the last decade, the winners are usually not the most recognizable top 5 type players, but they are still top 50, usually top 20 and are great on clay.

-----

He's winning points by the skin of his teeth, he can be broken at any time by no name players (which happened today) and he's just willing himself to win a lot of the time. IMO, guys like him and Hewitt who have to work so hard to win, should not be massive favorites to win tournaments.

That is what clay is all about. Again, from ESPN: "Further, the surface on which Nadal has produced this streak is the most physically demanding. Points last longer on clay because of the slow conditions. The ball also bounces higher which requires a player to exert more energy on every shot. For a player to win so many matches in a row under the most grueling of conditions is an extraordinary tribute to his physical strength and conditioning."

"However, the margin for error is so small against Nadal. He's so hard to beat that if you rush one forehand and make an error or spray one ball, then all of a sudden you become a little tentative with a shot into the open court that nobody else can get to but Nadal. He runs it down and forces you to keep playing the point."

[llabb]

roddick hurt his ankle a few days ago which is probably why he isnt a big favorite

Also, Roddick is not great on clay and sucks at the French. Has lost in the 1st or 2nd round every time, the last 4 years, and has never made it past the 3rd round in his life. Chances are he gets beat early again.

Btw, great name, "babolat." With a screenname like that, you must have more to post here, no?

[Thremp]

Troll.


If you believe this crap I hope you're taking out loans to bet Nadal at +100.

[llabb]

? Why are you calling me a troll? Unless this is the reverse psyche-out and you are the troll. What an awful post.

And yes, as mentioned in the OP, I have already wagered on Nadal +100.