Men's Wimbledon Early Prices

[mmbt0ne]

If you could guarantee me that Blake would never have to face Roger, he'd be a steal [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[llabb]

As I wrote in the French thread, we are seeing once in a generation players before us. Federer is not just a favorite, he is perhaps the best of all time. Anywhere near -200 is a good price on him to win Wimbledon imo, and I've already picked him up at that price. Sure, we could wish for -150 or +100, but those would be almost free gifts for the books to give away. -200 is good enough imo.

Mike and Freewheeler make good points in this thread. Will you guys be posting and giving any picks throughout Wimbledon? It would be nice to have other solid tennis cappers on this board. Some other points to respond to from this thread.



* Federer's career tracks comparably to Sampras', but Fed is far superior on clay, and in general faces much weaker competition than Sampras on other surfaces. Sampras won 8 out of 9 straight Wimbledons, losing only 1 match in 9 freaking years. This points to similar dominance to be expected from Federer.

* In '03, Fed dropped only 1 set in the entire tournament. In '04, he dropped only 2 sets in the entire tournament, one of them being in a tiebreaker. In '05, he again dropped only 1 set in the entire tournament, in a tiebreaker. That is 21 straight wins for 63 sets won and only 4 dropped in 3 years.

By comparison, in Sampras' first 3 Wimbledon victories, he dropped 3 sets in '93, 1 in '05, and 6 in '05. That is 10 sets dropped. So even in comparing dominant champions, we see that Federer is clearly superior to Sampras compared to their relative competition.

* As Freewheeler said, you cannot just spread the odds evenly across the matches and do the math. It doesn't work that way. In the early rounds, there is virtually no risk of the other players beating Federer on their own merits. There is basically just injury risk on the first couple rounds combined.

* Ortho, where did you find odds on last year's opening prices? I'd appreciate any sort of link, as it would be very interesting to see historical odds for the last several years. There should have been odds on Roddick last year, shorter than Hewitt. Competition is worse this year than last year.

* Nadal on grass to win is not a good play, even at long odds. He himself does not think he even has a shot at challenging for several years, but simply wants to get better and better so that he can eventually have a chance.

* Federer dropping sets in the Weber is nothing new, as he is perhaps tired and adjusting from the French. It is simply a tuneup to readjust to the grass game. He dropped 2 sets last year, one of them in the very first round, and also dropped 2 sets in '03, one of them in the second round. I expect him to win the Weber again, but he is a little more tired and emotionally drained after going much further in the French this year but losing a historical match. I would not be shocked if he did lose this tournament, though, and would still expect him to win Wimbledon and be comfortable at a -200 price.

* Just as Nadal broke the claycourt record and is perhaps the best ever on clay, Federer is likely to soon break the grasscourt record and be perhaps the best ever on grass, although Sampras is a tough comparison. This ESPN article shows the current record, with Fed equaling it with 2 more wins. If he wins the Weber as he has done the last 3 years, he will almost certainly break the grasscourt record by a wide margin, as he is virtually certain to win the first several rounds of Wimbledon. As noted in the French thread, when playing on specialized surfaces and when considering the historical dominance of the current players, the favorites are actually undervalued imo.

[Ortho]

I had real trouble finding old tennis odds. The 2005 odds I quoted were from a bbc preview article from last year. I was unable to find 2004 prices.

Nadal is now unbackable in any event, since he's not played that well at Queens and who knows how serious his shoulder injury is.

I am more concerned that you are about Federer's performance over the past couple of days, though I am probably biased by wanting to look for chinks in his armour as my initial instinct was to fade him at that price. However, there's simply no one to take him on with. Roddick's too short, imo, and Hewitt/Nalbandian don't look particulary dangerous.

I've come around to the thinking in this thread, that -200ish is probably fair, but I won't be backing at that price. I doubt he's going to get much shorter before the draw. I am watching to see if he loses this weekend with a view to backing him if the odds loosen up, but I doubt they will move very much.

Also, thanks for giving more analysis than "Federer's really good." I think we can all agree on that. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[llabb]

[ QUOTE ]
If you could guarantee me that Blake would never have to face Roger, he'd be a steal [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds reasonable. Since he made the finals of the Queen's Club, Blake's come down from +3700 to +2800. Depending on the draw, he could still be a decent value to make the quarters or semi's. (By taking him to win, then hedging out once he makes the quarters or semis. Does anyone know a better way to do that? Other than also betting each individual game.)

Even without having the draw yet, I'm putting a little on Hewitt at +1500. It's come down from +2000 since Hewitt won the Queen's. Hewitt seems to be coming back to form, and he is a former Wimbledon champion who has won out there and only lost to Federer in the last two years (16-3 in Wimbledon over the last 4 years, with 2 of the losses against Fed). If Hewitt is in a different portion of the draw than Fed (roughly 75% chance), I like him to make the semi's with a good shot at the finals. Worth putting some on him now imo, and will probably put more on him later if the draw is favorable.

Roddick looking worse, after losing in straight sets to Blake, who then lost in straight sets to Hewitt. Nadal being tied for 4th favorite is ridiculous. Current Pinny odds, posted just to see how later odds will compare.


R. Federer -246
A. Roddick +1513
L. Hewitt +1513
R. Nadal +2022
M. Ancic +2015
J. Blake +2777
D. Nalbandian +3565
T. Henman +4085
I. Ljubicic +5088
A. Murray +7798
I. Karlovic +8339
M. Safin +8883
M. Baghdatis +10533
S. Grosjean +13340
R. Gasquet +13886
N. Djokovic +15758
A. Agassi +17500
T. Johansson +17035
T. Berdych +5365
T. Dent +17035
T. Haas +10872
N. Kiefer +17500
X. Malisse +17500
D. Tursunov +13886
M. Mirnyi +17500
G. Monfils +17500
G. Rusedski +17500
M. Philippoussis +17500
M. Fish +17500
R. Stepanek +17500

[Ortho]

What are your feelings about Ancic? He seems to be the forgotten man in most analysis I've seen, yet his odds suggest he has as good a dog's chance as any.

[llabb]

No real opinion on Ancic, as I'm not all that familiar with him. On paper, he seems fine and as good a shot at the quarters as any. Could possibly go farther, although no big reasons to think that strongly.

I'm not a tennis expert, so I don't have opinions on every player. Just a recreational/former HS team player who still follows the game. And bets a lot.

As a pure guess, without the draw yet, if these guys were all in different quarters, I'd like them to make the semis: Federer, Hewitt, Roddick, Blake. Perhaps Nalbandian, Ancic, Grosjean, and Ljubicic next in line to try and beat them. But no way to say without the draw yet.

[freewheeler]

I'm a bit surprised he is as short as he is. He is the "other" Croatian. Punters and oddsmakers obviously believe his game is suited for grass, and with good reason. He's like 6'10" or something, big serve, likes to play the serve and volley style a la Sampras. I still think Ljubicic is better, even though his odds are climbing fast...

[Ortho]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a bit surprised he is as short as he is. He is the "other" Croatian. Punters and oddsmakers obviously believe his game is suited for grass, and with good reason. He's like 6'10" or something, big serve, likes to play the serve and volley style a la Sampras. I still think Ljubicic is better, even though his odds are climbing fast...

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you maybe thinking of Ivo Karlovic here? I don't think Ancic is oddly tall.

[llabb]

Probably. Karlo's 6'10" and Ancic's 6'5". Karlo's game does seem to be solid on grass; with the freakish height and big serve it's hard to break him. But I'm not sure why he didn't play the Queen's this year, after making the finals last year. Depending on the draw, he should advance several rounds, although it would have been nice to see him adjusting back to grass, since his last 5 tournaments, 12 matches, have been on clay.

[freewheeler]

[ QUOTE ]

Are you maybe thinking of Ivo Karlovic here? I don't think Ancic is oddly tall.

[/ QUOTE ]

DANG! You have now exposed me as a tennis no-nothing pretender. I love watching/betting tennis, and am a fairly avid follower, but obviously don't know my sh!t all that well, do I... Ancic is a big guy, though, and does have a big serve and volley game well suited to the grass court... A bit of an Ivanisevic protege, with the same sort of game as Goran, who also loved the grass courts.

Ahhhh remember that famous 5 set win of his over Rafter a few years back. I think he was a "wildcard" invite to the tournament that year. What a great story that was... I think that was my favourite Wimbledon...