*Official* Tennis Thread

[Anil]

Nalbandian might be a useful e/w, but Agassi's 66-1 for a reason.

agassi will not win...

 

[age_master]

you never know

 

[thewizard1o1]

I like Coria and Nadal for the final, but will consider putting a few lazy dollars on the defending champ.

 

[nibbs]

my money is on paradorn srichaphan. that kid has potential

 

[Simon]

my money is on paradorn srichaphan. that kid has potential

he is oh so over rated, he played some bove average tennis for about 4 months a couple of years ago, now hes very poor...

 

[Agent TBY]

he is oh so over rated, he played some bove average tennis for about 4 months a couple of years ago, now hes very poor...

He is one of Asia's best,and you know how Asians hype their stars....

 

[Magrat Garlick]

he is oh so over rated, he played some bove average tennis for about 4 months a couple of years ago, now hes very poor...

Agreed. And too damn unpredictable, too - in the last tipping comp I had him to go out in the first round, he won, so I backed him for the second round - and he lost. D'oh.

On that subject, are we having another tipping comp for the French?

 

[Slats4ever]

Nalbandian might be a useful e/w, but Agassi's 66-1 for a reason.

what reasons that?

 

[Agent TBY]

what reasons that?

agassi will not win...

That.

 

[Slats4ever]

at 66/1 though that's amazing value considering he's won more major championships than anyone else out there by a long way. He may be old and chances are he won't win. but 66/1... if you don't find that value you've got no idea about tennis

 

[Agent TBY]

at 66/1 though that's amazing value considering he's won more major championships than anyone else out there by a long way. He may be old and chances are he won't win. but 66/1... if you don't find that value you've got no idea about tennis

I never said those odds are not value.I just quoted the reason Agassi was 66/1.

 

[age_master]

he is oh so over rated, he played some bove average tennis for about 4 months a couple of years ago, now hes very poor...

hes got as much chance as anyone outside the top 2 in the french

 

[Slats4ever]

why won't he win though? sampras did the US "Open" a couple of years back and there's no way you can say that Agassi has less chance than Sampras did.

 

[marc71178]

It's only value if he's got a better than 1 in 67 chance of winning.

If not then it's not value at all.

The concept of value in betting relies on the punter being able to put together his or her own book deciding on how they think the event will go.

 

[marc71178]

why won't he win though? sampras did the US "Open" a couple of years back and there's no way you can say that Agassi has less chance than Sampras did.

The French is on clay though with numerous clay court specialists...

 

[Agent TBY]

why won't he win though? sampras did the US "Open" a couple of years back and there's no way you can say that Agassi has less chance than Sampras did.

We can,because its Roland Garros,the chances of a powerhouse underdog blowing away a top seed is quite slim,also you need real stamina to last out there.

 

[Pratters]

The French is on clay though with numerous clay court specialists...

And players who were good on hard courts didnt play when Sampras won the US Open? Not a great logic there Marc.

It would be very tough for Agassi to win it but that was the scenario with Sampras in the US Open as well. Sport is unpredictable. Never say never.

 

[Slats4ever]

It's only value if he's got a better than 1 in 67 chance of winning.

If not then it's not value at all.

The concept of value in betting relies on the punter being able to put together his or her own book deciding on how they think the event will go.

geez u're a rocket scientist. I never understood the concept of odds?

There is a better than 1 in 67 chance of him winning... that's what I'm saying... it's good value.

 

[Slats4ever]

We can,because its Roland Garros,the chances of a powerhouse underdog blowing away a top seed is quite slim,also you need real stamina to last out there.

who knows. Agassi's draw might really open up for him, if the big names go early, u'd favour someone with a lot of experience underneath their belt.

Why does Rolan Garros make any difference to a powerhouse underdog blowing away a top seed? It's the same chances as anywhere.

 

[Agent TBY]

And players who were good on hard courts didnt play when Sampras won the US Open? Not a great logic there Marc.

They played surely,but I think beating clay specialists on clay is tougher than beating players good on hard courts,on hard courts.