Tennis - French Open - almost a lock?

[llabb]

The French Open starts on Sunday. If you know tennis at all, you know that Nadal dominates on clay, and Federer dominates everywhere else. The draw was this morning, and they both have relatively easy draws until at least the quarterfinals.

It would seem that the French Open winner will definitely be either Nadal or Federer, and most likely, that will be the final matchup. It is extremely difficult to see Nadal not making the Finals. Federer is not as much of a lock, but should make it to the semi's. His only real challenge there is probably if he faces Nalbandian. And neither Nalbandian nor anyone else have much chance to beat both Federer and Nadal.

Pinny was offering "Will either Nadal or Federer win the French Open" for -550. Yes, it is a steep, steep price, but it seems to be almost a lock for it to be one of these two. This is close to Taylor over Kat (and has similar odds) for anyone who followed AI and knows how strong that was.

That being said, I am taking a smaller risk for larger return, and only wagering on Nadal at +100 for now. I just see him making the finals, and if he faces Federer, I may hedge some then, at a better price. If you took Nadal plus a Federer hedge right now, though (by betting on both, less on Federer), it would be -350.

Nadal is simply the best claycourt player of this generation, and turning into a real rival for Federer, as he not only beat him twice this year on clay, but once on hardcourts as well. Nadal, at only 19, holds not just the current world record on clay, but the all-time historical record of most consecutive matches ever won on clay, at 53 straight. Tennis is not as popular as the major team sports, but this feat is being compared to Joe DiMaggio's record 56-game hitting streak, that has stood in history for 65 years.

[Stormwolf]

Everybody is going to the favorites, and the crowd is usually wrong in terms of ev(or they just want a gamble a lot of money with the favorite). I really think there is +EV for going with the underdogs here

[llabb]

I had Nadal last year pre-French to win at +400, and my expectations were pleasantly met. It's not just about him being the favorite right now, it's that he is absolutely dominant. Think DiMaggio, Babe Ruth, and Bonds. Their records are who Nadal's clay record is being compared to.

Federer is probably the only one with a chance, as he has been getting closer and closer, down to a thrilling 5-setter in their last one. I still think Nadal beats him, but it is reasonable to see Fed finally getting over the hump. The risk that Fed gets ousted pre-finals is much more than Nadal, though.

I really like Nadal + Federer at -550, and think there is very little risk. Probably greater injury risk than someone beating both of them outright. 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.

If you want an underdog, I think Nalbandian is a good play at +2000 or better, and have a little bit on him, mainly for the chance that he beats Federer.

I like a lot of the first round matchups on the favorites, even at insane odds on some of them. I am playing them to only risk 1 unit, not to win 1 unit. So there is little risk, and most likely will win a bunch of small amounts, adding up to a unit or two.

Ferrer -400
Nadal -4000
Federer -4000
Mauresmo -1500
Sharapova -1300

Risking half a unit:
Monfils -120
Grosjean -300
Nieminin -500
Davydenko -800
Rochus -550
Stepanek -500
Ljubicic -500
Blake -700
Haas -275

[llabb]

Risking 1 unit:

Henin-Hardenne -3500
Kuznetsova -2000
Hingis -4000
Clijsters -2000

Risking half a unit:
Williams -1200
Myskina -350
Dementieva -750
Nalbandian -450

Also, Federer's opponent changed and my wager was cancelled, so I am taking Federer again, vs a worse opponent at a worse line of -8000.

[Mr_J]

Bookies love this type of reasoning. They have made alot of money of it over the years.

[Stormwolf]

I agree. If you add all fees and commisions I dont think there is any edge betting on federer or nadal for the next years, if they are coming back from injury or 'running bad' if you guess when they will be back to their normal form you might have a edge big enough to gamble on. Yet at lot of people feel temptated to gamble a lot of money on them, till one day...

[llabb]

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?

Personally, I think it is a great wager, and that Nadal is not valued as strongly as he should be. The magnitude of his record is being overlooked, because tennis is not as popular a sport. If Joe DiMaggio were at the peak of his 56-game hitting streak, he would be a heck of a lot more favored than even money, to hit in his next game.

[Runner Runner]

Llabb, to be fair you should compare DiMaggio being even money to get a hit in each of his next 6 games, and also being up against better then average pitchers for most of those games....because that is what Nadal is going to have to do.

He will need to win 6 straight, with the last 3 against probably hot players and all the games against players and fans who will be rooting against him. Also,all the games being played on what's widely regarded as a crapshoot surface. IMO, Nadal has been VERY fortunate to win 56 straight, and I would not lay that much chalk on him or Federer to win.

[llabb]

Yeah, I know. I knew the second I made the analogy that there would be problems with it, as there are with any analogy. My point stands. Nadal dominates clay, and only Fed has a good shot at beating him, although of course huge upsets, injuries, whatever could occur. But I think the line is favorable.

What do you all think the right Nadal to win line should be? I am amazed you think +100 is so horrible.

Regarding clay, it's a very specialized surface, and not at all a crapshoot. There are very strong reasons why certain players dominate on either clay or grass, not going to get into them all. But it's safe to say that the advantage is much, much larger than a homefield/homecourt advantage in any major sport.

[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