июля 2014 ~ Betting is life

четверг, 31 июля 2014 г.

Everton FC: Is it time to get stuck into the Toffees?

Roberto points the way forward

These are good times to be an Everton fan and the Merseysiders might just be a bit of value to continue on the upward curve under Roberto Martinez, says Joe Dyer...

What a few days for Everton fans.

First Bosnian international Muhamed Besic signs up to a five year deal on Monday.

Then, 24 hours later, future England star Ross Barkley does what Wayne Rooney failed to do 10 years previously and pledges his future to the club when the big boys were making eyes.

And proving that good things come in threes, Wednesday saw Romelu Lukaku follow Barkley by shunning Juventus, Atletico Madrid and Wolfsburg as the Belgian striker chose Everton as his permanent location for the next few seasons.

A club record fee paid for a 21-year-old who has scored 32 goals in two Premier League seasons; the retention of one of the most promising English midfielders of his generation; the capture of a hugely talented German-born midfielder named best foreign player in the division following his first season at Hungarian side Ferencvaros. What a statement of intent ahead of a big season for the Merseyside club.

Critics may point to the lack of 'new' arrivals with Barkley, Lukaku and Gareth Barry - who signed up in early July - all playing for the club during last season's fifth-placed finish.

But continuity can be an under-rated commodity in football and why wouldn't this young squad improve under the management of the effervescent Roberto Martinez?

The club's head honcho certainly sounds enthusiastic ahead of the season, saying: "It excites me when I see the team I have."

The Betfair markets are not convinced though. Everton are the odd one out among the top-flight's elite clubs, always the longest price of the top teams. That makes sense when comparing the Merseyside club against the riches of Manchester City for instance, but less so when set against those of nearest rivals Tottenham.

Michael Lintorn has already flagged Everton's claims for a Top Six finish and I can only endorse his advice though the temptation could be to play bigger odds with the Toffees available to back at 7.613/2 for a Top Four finish. If nothing it could be a bet you can trade.

A more canny approach might just be to get with Martinez's men in matches against the big clubs. The team enjoyed a string of good results against the big teams during the Spaniard's first year, doing the double over Manchester United, and enjoying wins against Arsenal and Chelsea last season, alongside notable draws with Manchester City, Liverpool and Spurs.

They certainly look a tempting bet to get the season started with a win at Leicester, an option that can currently be backed at 2.427/5.

Will there be a post World Cup hangover in the Premier League?

By Mark Taylor Jul 31, 2014

With just 34 days between the World Cup final and the start of the Premier League there is inevitable speculation that teams will suffer a dip in form due to player burnout. This soccer betting article uses the 2010 World Cup as an example to see how Brazil 2014 may impact on the 2014/15 season.

Naturally it will be the leading clubs that will have the largest number of returning World Cup players, with Chelsea’s stars having amassed around 4,000 minutes of World Cup football, although this headline number will change with transfer activity.

The conclusion of the World Cup coincided with the start of pre-season training for many Premiership teams, causing disruption, as players were given more time to rest both physically and mentally from their summer exertions.

Transfer activity is also hectic in the summer window so newly signed players, fresh from the World Cup, will also have a shorter timeframe to adjust to their new surroundings and team mates.

Therefore, we have all the ingredients to create a narrative, whereby poorer than usual early season results can be attributed to burnout. Examples of such enticing cause and effects, should they occur, are difficult to resist. However, the complex interactions that go towards deciding the result of a football match are rarely determined by a single cause.

A World Cup campaign may have hindered the preparation of England’s best club teams or, alternatively, a positive experience for their most talented players may spur them on to greater deeds. But attempting to extract the size and direction of an effect is likely to be hidden by more universal causes of fluctuating fortunes in small runs of results.

The 2010 World Cup as an example

The 2010 World Cup in South Africa had the same 34-day gap between final and opening day in the Premiership, so in lieu of mere speculation we can at least use data from the 2010/11 season as a pointer towards 2014/15.

Virtually every Premiership team during the 2010/11 season had players returning from the World Cup in South Africa, although there was also a certain amount of player movement during the summer break.

Manchester City saw nine of their registered players travel to South Africa, but that number was supplemented when they acquired such players as Yaya Toure, David Silva and James Milner in the summer window.

Liverpool also boosted their overall number of World Cup participants by signing Raul Meireles, Poulson, Joe Cole and Jovanovic, with Mascherano departing for Barcelona after a single appearance. As a consequence, Liverpool’s players experienced the largest accumulation of playing time at the tournament of the big five clubs, followed by Manchester City, Chelsea, Arsenal and finally Manchester United.

Playing time

One of the simplest ways to attempt to track player performance is to look at playing time. If a player is performing well and is injury free, then he will likely be a regular choice and so his playing time will increase.

Chelsea’s returning World Cup stars participated in 70% of the total Premiership playing minutes available to them during August and September of 2010. So they were regular and presumably productive members of a club that often operates a squad rotation policy.

Both Manchester clubs and Liverpool were repaid with 60% of available playing time and only Arsenal dipped below 45%, primarily due to an injury sustained in South Africa by Bendtner and a subsequent injury to van Persie in late August at Blackburn.

These figures remained broadly similar over the course of the 2010/11 season, once movement in the January window is allowed for. Manchester United and Arsenal benefitted from their World Cup players being slightly more involved over the season as a whole compared to their participation levels over the opening six matches.

Shooting

The number of shots attempted at the World Cup by each side’s group of players and over the opening months of the Premiership may not be directly comparable. The levels of competition, quality of team mates and tactical requirement will differ. However, it seems likely that the players were performing at least at similar levels on their return to Premiership duty.

Manchester City’s newly assembled group of World Cup participants attempted a shot once every 99 playing minutes at the finals, but threatened the goal once every 55 minutes once they were back in early Premiership action.

Four of the highlighted teams recorded higher shooting rates in August and September compared to their players efforts for their countries a month earlier in South Africa. Only Arsenal saw a decline, mainly due to van Persie’s absence through injury.

Tackling

World Cup players, as a group, also tackled more frequently back in the Premiership and while this may be because of the different demands of international football, it may also indicate high levels of physical effort, even after a challenging World Cup tournament.

Points

The bottom line for performance for many will be a side’s points total. After six matches in 2010/11, Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal and Manchester City occupied the top four spots. Positions they would sustain, although not in that order, to the end of the season.

Liverpool, alone of the traditional big five was becalmed in 16th spot with just six points from the same number of games, although they had faced both Manchester teams and Arsenal. There had been a recent managerial change, along with an influx of new additions and the side had also started a Europa League campaign that included six matches before the end of September. Each of these factors could also contribute toward a slow start.

However, a much more common experience is a side merely producing atypical results in a short period of time simply through random chance. Liverpool could still be a top five team and yet expect to gain just a point a game from their opening six matches over 14% of the time.

Sixteenth spot was slightly less likely, occurring in 8% of simulations using actual match day odds from 2010/11, but Liverpool were placed just a point below 10th at the end of September. So the table in late September was still relatively fluid from halfway downwards.

We may be using imprecise tools and results from a single league, but 2010 provides little, if any evidence that a team may suffer early season disruption or longer term decline in a season immediately following a World Cup tournament.

Four of the most heavily involved club sides at the 2010 World Cup dominated the early season, enjoyed good use of their stars and maintained their form over 38 games. Returning players were both productive and physically involved in matches.

Some sides, most notably Arsenal, lost important attacking options, but coped well and early season injury is not unique to post World Cup domestic campaigns. The poor start by Liverpool could have had multiple causes or simply been an expected, if relatively uncommon consequence of judging a team over a handful of games.

In addition, teams can rotate their squad with little loss of quality and increasingly appear able to balance the needs of pre-season fitness and rest. So betting on a dip in performance from the stars of Brazil 2014 or their clubs appears to have little substance.

Mark Taylor is a freelance soccer and NFL writer who, along with producing expert content for Pinnacle Sports, also runs his own soccer analytics blog, the Power of Goals.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Football Bet of the Day: Weaver makes magic in Singapore

Wake Up, Wake Up: Set an alarm to be sure you don't miss tomorrow morning's S League

Warriors FC know that they have to take some shots to land some shots, says Tobias Gourlay

The Fire did not rage, but the Whitecaps still melted.

Chicago 0 Vancouver 0 in the MLS overnight.

Such a disappointing result that we're getting as far away from it as we possibly can.

There's not much happening football-wise on Thursday, so we've got time to go all the way to Singapore for Friday's early kick-off in the S League.

It's Warriors FC versus Albirex Niigata which, as you'll know, is fourth versus fifth.

Alex Weaver's Warriors have the best home record in the league (W6-D1-L1) but Albirex Niigata don't tend to lie down on the road (W3-D3-L2). The visitors have scored (and conceded) in all eight of their away games so far this term.

At Choa Chu Kang Stadium, the Warriors have scored at least once in 12 straight, so there's little doubt they can notch at least once against leaky Albirex. At the other end, the Warriors have failed to keep a clean sheet themselves in 8/12, raising the prospect of excitement all over the park this time.

Recommended Bet: Say 'Yes' to Both Teams to Score? @ 1.758/11 in Warriors FC v Albirex Niigata

2014 P/L (1pt per bet)

Staked: 3pts
Returned: 1.5pts

P/L: -1.5pts

Is there a tennis betting edge to gain by considering surface differentials

Is there a tennis betting edge to gain by considering surface differentials

By Dan Weston May 30, 2014

This tennis betting article explains how to find an edge on grass courts. Read more to assess the abilities needed for grass court success, and details of which players have strong and weak grass court records on the ATP Tour. Knowing this information could be the difference between making a profit or not.

What are the characteristics of a good grass court player?

As mentioned in previous articles, the surface characteristics of grass are very different to that of clay, and as a quick refresher, some comparable ATP Tour statistics are detailed below:

Surface

12 Month Service Hold

12 Month Opponent Break

12 Month Aces Per Game

12 Month Break Points Per Game

Clay

75.6

24.4

0.35

0.59

Grass

82.4

17.6

0.61

0.49

Overall

78.6

21.4

0.49

0.55

As can be seen from the above table, the average ATP player holds serve 6.8% more on grass than clay, achieves 0.26 more aces per game and faces 0.10 fewer break points per game.

Based on the above statistics, as well as knowledge of the players, it’s logical to assume that grass courts, being the fastest surface on tour, benefit those players who have a big serve. Good net skills, with the serve/volley style predominant on grass, are also very desirable, as well as the ability to play good drop shots.

These qualities are often quite alien to the traditional clay courters who have weak serves and tend to prefer playing from the baseline on slow surfaces. On that basis, it’s reasonable to assume that a large number of these players struggle to play on grass, and the appearance statistics of numerous top 100 players bear that out, with some rarely featuring on grass in the European summer months.

The likes of Federico Delbonis, Joao Sousa, Pablo Carreno-Busta, Alejandro Gonzalez, Dusan Lajovic, Blaz Rola and Victor Estrella Burgos can probably be excused not playing frequently on the surface due to their fairly recent ranking rises, which previously would not have seen them eligible for main draw matches in recent years. Having said that, it’s fairly likely that none of these players have the necessary tools to be successful grass courters.

Players such as Albert Montanes (3 grass matches in the past 3 years), Nikolay Davydenko (3), and Filippo Volandri (4) have less excuse. It’s clear they have a dislike for the fast surface, and Davydenko – after his first round French Open exit to Robin Haase – has already said he will skip the entire grass court season.

However, there are a number of players who are much more adept on grass, and show considerable improvements on their overall stats on the surface. The following table details the players who have strong grass court records, compared to their overall records, in the last 3 years (data correct at 28th May, 2014):

Player

Rank

3 Year All-Surface: Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

3 Year Grass Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

Difference

Kubot

74.3

22.5

96.8

83.3

22.4

105.7

8.9

Mahut

80.9

19.7

100.6

86.8

22.5

109.3

8.7

Mannarino

19.7

92.7

79.2

21.9

101.1

8.4

Becker

74.8

17.3

92.1

100

7.9

Hewitt

75.9

24.6

100.5

24.7

107.7

7.2

De Schepper

82.3

10.3

92.6

86.8

99.8

7.2

Lopez

84.8

15.7

100.5

92.4

14.9

107.3

6.8

Janowicz

83.7

100.7

91.4

15.7

107.1

6.4

Tomic

79.7

17.5

97.2

86.5

16.2

102.7

5.5

There were nine players in total in the top 100 that had a grass court combined hold/break percentage more than 5% bigger than that across all surfaces.

Leading the way is Lukasz Kubot, who has very strong grass court stats for his current ranking. He made the quarter-finals of Wimbledon last year, and his conqueror, Jerzy Janowicz, also made this list. Both Poles can consider this their best surface.

Nicolas Mahut, whose serve/volley playing style makes him a very strong player on the surface, had the second biggest difference on his way to two grass court titles, whilst Adrian Mannarino, who is defending last 16 points at Wimbledon, was third.

Veteran Lleyton Hewitt was also impressive in 2013, reaching the semi-final of Queens and losing the final to Mahut in Newport. With a 38-12 record in his last 50 at Wimbledon, he will be one of the unseeded players that no seed will wish to face, along with Mahut. Eastbourne champion Feliciano Lopez also made the list, and also has compiled an impressive record (32-18) in his last 50 on grass.

The following table details the players who have poor grass court records, compared to their overall records, in the last 3 years (data correct at 28th May, 2014):

Player

Rank

3 Year All-Surface: Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

3 Year Grass Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

Difference

Andujar

68.8

25.3

94.1

55.7

12.4

68.1

-26

Matosevic

63.6

16.5

80.1

-14.9

Nadal

86.1

34.4

120.5

85.4

23.3

108.7

-11.8

Gimeno-Traver

74.6

15.8

90.4

73.3

6.2

79.5

-10.9

Hanescu

77.6

18.5

96.1

72.6

13.2

85.8

-10.3

Berlocq

73.2

28.3

101.5

79.6

94.6

-6.9

Wawrinka

83.6

24.8

108.4

84.4

17.3

101.7

-6.7

Gulbis

82.9

21.6

104.5

87.6

10.6

98.2

-6.3

Mayer L

78.8

18.6

97.4

76.9

14.4

91.3

-6.1

Robredo

79.2

23.9

103.1

82.8

14.3

97.1

-6

Nieminen

75.6

23.1

98.7

81.3

11.7

-5.7

Ebden

70.8

19.2

71.9

12.4

84.3

-5.7

Simon

76.2

27.2

103.4

78.2

19.7

97.9

-5.5

What is immediately obvious is how many clay courters make this list.

Andujar, Nadal, Gimeno-Traver, Hanescu, Berlocq, Mayer, Robredo and Simon can all consider clay to be their best surface and clearly do not enjoy playing on grass. Andujar, who by some distance was the worst player on the list, has failed to win a match in seven attempts on the surface in the last 3 years.

What may be of some surprise to readers is the appearance of Nadal on the list, at third. The king of clay has two Wimbledon titles (2008 and 2010) to his name in the last ten years and has also been runner-up three times. However, in recent years he has unimpressed on grass, losing at Wimbledon to Steve Darcis priced at 1.011 in 2013. In 2012 he was defeated by Lukas Rosol priced at 1.008, as well as losing in Halle to Philipp Kohlschreiber, at 1.149. What is also worth mentioning is that Nadal failed to play a warm-up grass event prior to Wimbledon last year, and was clearly under prepared for the surface change from his beloved clay.

Also worth mentioning is Stan Wawrinka, who finds himself at 7th in this list. This article illustrated that the Australian Open champion clearly has a distaste for fast surfaces, and his individual grass court stats seen above back that point up well. The Swiss player could be vulnerable as a heavy favourite on grass this season.

The above statistics clearly show that detailed research of surface records is something that a successful bettor needs to have in their armoury and is a vital facet of a balanced betting strategy.

Dan Weston is a freelance tennis writer who, along with producing expert content for Pinnacle Sports, also produces his own tennis rating system, and trading analysis, which can be found at www.tennisratings.co.uk.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Colombia progress as expected

By Charlie Rowing Jul 4, 2014

Colombia, who began the tournament as favourites to qualify from Group C, did so in style by winning all of their group games. Although Los Cafeteros had been rocked by the loss of star striker Radamel Falcao before the start of the World Cup, they showed that they didn’t miss his presence with three wins out of three. Read this 2014 World Cup Group C betting review for an insight into how the group turned out and how accurate the pre-tournament odds were.

2014 World Cup Group C betting review

2014 World Cup Group C final table

Nation

Points

Colombia

Greece

-2

Cote d’Ivoire

-1

Japan

-4

Colombia qualified from the group in emphatic style, winning all of their games. Their qualification wasn’t a major surprise as odds of 1.278 gave them an implied probability of 78.25% to reach the knockout stages.

The main surprise of the group came from runners-up Greece, who qualified with a last minute win against the Ivory Coast on matchday three. The Greeks’ odds of qualification were 3.420 – an implied probability of 29.24%. Which suggests that they were the least likely team to qualify from the group.

2014 World Cup Group C pre-tournament implied probability table

Position

Nation

Odds

Implied probability

Actual finishing position

Colombia

1.278

78.25%

Japan

2.070

48.31%

Cote d’Ivoire

2.160

46.30%

Greece

3.420

29.24%

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Outsiders Costa Rica surprise all by finishing top

By Charlie Rowing Jul 4, 2014

Costa Rica, the team considered least likely to qualify from Group D managed to not only qualify, but finish top of a group containing three former World Cup winners. Read this 2014 World Cup Group D betting review for an insight into how the group turned out and how accurate the pre-tournament odds were.

2014 World Cup Group D betting review

2014 World Cup Group D final table

Nation

Points

Costa Rica

Uruguay

Italy

-1

England

-2

Costa Rica literally defied the odds to finish top of their group and qualify for the knockout stages for the first time in their history. Prior to the tournament they were 8.220 to get out of the group – an implied probability of 12.17%.

They did so in a convincing manner, after going a goal down to Uruguay they came back to win 3-1, they then went on to record a 1-0 win over 2006 champions Italy which qualified them for the Last 16 with a game to spare. A goalless draw against England ensured that they would finish top and without a single defeat.

Italy again flattered to deceive, although they also went out at the group stages in 2010, the Azzurri were the 1.400 favourites to qualify from the group – an implied probability of 71.43%.

2014 World Cup Group D pre-tournament implied probability table

Position

Nation

Odds

Implied probability

Actual finishing position

Italy

1.400

71.43%

Uruguay

1.541

64.89%

England

1.769

56.53%

Costa Rica

8.220

12.17%

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Germany & USA make it out alive from the group of death

By Charlie Rowing Jul 4, 2014

Germany made it out of Group G alongside the USA at the expense of both Portugal and Ghana. Read this 2014 World Cup Group G betting review for an insight into how the group turned out and how accurate the pre-tournament odds were.

2014 World Cup Group G betting review

2014 World Cup Group G final table

Nation

Points

Germany

USA

Portugal

-3

Ghana

-2

Germany started their World Cup with a convincing 4-0 win over Portugal, but they were then held by Ghana 2-2 in an open game. However they finally got the job done with a 1-0 win over the USA.

However the revelations of the group were the USA, whose pre-tournament odds of qualifying at 3.770 – an implied probability of 26.53% meant that they were seen as unlikely to qualify. Portugal on the other hand greatly underperformed as reflected by their odds of 1.513 – an implied probability of 66.09%, and could only manage to win a single game.

2014 World Cup Group G pre-tournament implied probability table

Position

Nation

Odds

Implied probability

Actual finishing position

Germany

1.100

90.91%

Portugal

1.513

66.09%

USA

3.700

26.53%

Ghana

3.850

25.97%

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Premier League Pre-Season Friendlies: Chelsea, Man City and Liverpool to all net

Man City are more fancied than Liverpool to deliver in 2014/15

There won't be a clean sheet in sight when Vitesse face Chelsea and Man City meet Liverpool, argues Michael Lintorn...

Vitesse v Chelsea
Wednesday, 18:30
Live on Chelsea TV

Match Odds: Vitesse 7.413/2, Chelsea 1.4740/85, The Draw 4.84/1

Chelsea have headed to the Netherlands to check in with feeder club Vitesse - who currently house Blues players Bertrand Traore and Wallace - in the latest phase of their pre-season preparation.

It has been a productive period for Jose Mourinho and co with Cesc Fabregas, Diego Costa, Filipe Luis and Didier Drogba signing and Thibaut Courtois' integration confirmed. On the pitch, they have won three and drawn one of their four friendlies to date. Both teams scored in the latter three and that trend is 1.865/6 to continue.

The decision to restrict their activity to Europe as their top-seven adversaries flew out to USA or the Far East may also reap rewards, with Louis van Gaal expressing concern over Man United's schedule. Indeed, the west Londoners are judged 2.982/1 favourites in the Premier League winner market.

Man City v Liverpool
Thursday, 00:00
Live on Sky Sports 1

Match Odds: Man City 2.01/1, Liverpool 4.03/1, The Draw 3.9n/a

This is the most interesting pre-season fixture yet from an English perspective, as last term's Premier League top two clash at a not-obscenely-antisocial hour on a widely-available channel. If the contest is of a similar standard to their two 2013/14 showdowns, it should be every bit as engrossing as it is glamorous.

Man City have enjoyed a far more fruitful summer, recruiting Willy Caballero, Bacary Sagna and Fernando for the loss of only Costel Pantilimon and Joleon Lescott, whereas Liverpool have waved off Luis Suarez and spent more than they received for him on six men unproven at the highest level.

The perception that the Reds haven't quite kept pace with their rivals is reflected in the Premier League winner market where, despite their second-place finish, Brendan Rodgers' men are distant 14.013/1 fifth favourites. By contrast, the champions trail Chelsea alone at 3.55/2.

Back to this International Champions Cup spectacle at New York's Yankee Stadium, top spot in Group B is at stake for the victors. Both teams to score is the preferred punt again though at 1.635/8, having been a feature of Man City's last three friendlies and the duo's previous five head-to-heads.

Atletico Madrid set to swoop for Arsenal, Chelsea & United stars

Santi Carzola is being linked with a move back to La Liga again

Atletico Madrid won La Liga last season and made it to within seconds of Champions League glory and now they are looking to the Premier League to retool their squad. Alex Johnson reports...

Manchester United could be set to offload midfielder Marouane Fellaini to Serie A outfit Napoli, according to the Daily Star.

The agent of the Belgium international has reportedly met with officials in Italy and personal terms have already been agreed but the Red Devils are still holding out for the 18million price-tag on the former Everton star's head.

Fellaini's expected exit could start a massive exodus at Old Trafford with manager Louis Van Gaal also set to axe Shinji Kagawa, Nani and Anderson in a big shake-up.

At Newcastle, Alan Pardew's efforts to land Alexandre Lacazette look to have hit a major stumbling block after the Newcastle Chronicle believe the striker is set to sign a new contract with the French club.

The Magpies have been a long admirer of the forward and reportedly made a fresh 10million offer for the 23-year-old, but Lyon are said to be close to extending the Frenchman's stay.

There looks to be some positive news for Atletico Madrid with the Daily Star reporting that manager Diego Simeone is lining up a triple 30million swoop for Santi Cazorla, Fernando Torres and Javier Hernandez.

The latter has added to speculation over his future at Manchester United by saying "only God knows" where he will be next season, while the two Spaniards look to have dropped down the pecking order at respective clubs Arsenal and Chelsea.

Tottenham are expected to make an improved offer for Southampton ace Morgan Schneiderlin, according to the Times, after the midfielder has reportedly asked for a transfer.

Saints chairman Ralph Krueger insisted that the Frenchman would not be joining the Saints' summer exodus - comments which were met with anger by the 24-year-old.

Spurs boss Mauricio Pochettino is now hoping to take advantage of the relationship breakdown and swoop with a bid believed to be in the region of 10-12million.

Finally, Arsenal look to have moved back into pole position for Real Madrid midfielder Sami Khedira after Bayern Munich are hoping to land the German on a free transfer, according to the Daily Mirror.

The 27-year-old's deal at the Bernabeu is due to expire next summer and the Champions League holders are keen to bring in some money rather than potentially lose him for nothing to Bayern in 12 months. So, with the Gunners set to offer 27million this summer, a deal could be on.

Manager Arsene Wenger is said to be very keen on signing the German as Arsenal look to add some much-needed steel to the heart of their midfield.

Against All Odds: Dodgepots Sao Paulo to be taken on

Which Sao Paulo will turn up tonight?

It's Copa do Brasil action for Paul Robinson tonight as he thinks that Sao Paulo can't be trusted at odds-on for their trip to Bragantino.

Bragantino v Sao Paulo
Thursday July 31, 02:00 BST

Bragantino have made a poor start to their Serie B campaign as after 13 fixtures they are second from bottom with only 10 points. The worst part about that is the fact that they earned most of those in their opening eight games. The Sao Paulo based club come into this match on the back of four successive league defeats and they will have to raise their game to achieve a positive result tonight.

Interestingly though, Paulo Csar Gusmo's side managed to do just that in the last round of this competition as they knocked out Figueirense on penalties eight days ago. It is also worth considering that they have lost just three of their last 14 at their home of Nabizo.

Sao Paulo are one of the biggest clubs in Brazil and, on paper at least, they should cruise through this tie - even winning the away leg tonight. Betting is all about value though and the best rule to use involving Sao Paulo is to back them when they're a big price and lay them when they're odds-on.

A frustratingly inconsistent team, Muricy Ramalho's men have already achieved some cracking results this term - most notably beating Gremio and drawing at Cruzeiro. However they've also thrown in some shocking performances, including a 5-2 defeat at Fluminense and an appalling 1-0 loss at home to Chapecoense.

It is also worth noting that they've lost their last two in a row, and in the last round of this competition, they were beaten in the first leg 2-1 at minnows, CRB.

It wouldn't be the biggest surprise in the world if Sao Paulo won tonight, but they certainly aren't value. That's why, at around the 1.491/2 mark, I have to make them my lay of the day.

Recommended Bet
Lay Sao Paulo v Bragantino @ 1.491/2

2014 P/L (1pt each bet)

Wagered: 201 pts
Returned: 208.59 pts
P/L: + 7.59 pts (after commission)
(2013 P/L: + 3.80 pts)
(2012 P/L: + 9.60 pts)

Can Williams return to the top of her game at Wimbledon?

By Dan Weston Jun 10, 2014

WTA tennis bettor’s attention should turn towards the third major of the year, Wimbledon. This WTA Wimbledon betting preview looks at the openness of the draw compared to the ATP, and analyses the main women contenders.

As previously mentioned in WTA tournament previews, it is vital that bettors treat the WTA version (best of three sets) as a completely different betting proposition to the ATP version (best of five sets). Whilst the men’s competition is a supreme test of fitness, the women’s tournament is no different in match duration to normal events.

Interestingly, the lower number of sets appears to lead to more shocks in the women’s Grand Slam events, and the current French Open has been no different, with Serena Williams, Na Li and Agnieszka Radwanska (three of the top four seeds) exiting the event early.

Wimbledon, historically, has also shown this to be the case. This is the polar opposite to the men’s event, which has been traditionally dominated by the elite players.

The top seed in the women’s event at Wimbledon has only been won by the top seed twice in the last ten years (Amelie Mauresmo, 2006, and Serena Williams, 2010). Indeed, the top seed has only been runner-up twice as well, with Williams achieving this in 2004 and Lindsay Davenport doing so in 2005.

Seven players ranked outside the top ten have been finalists, with an incredible four winners coming from outside the top ten seeds. Last year’s final between Marion Bartoli – now retired – and Sabine Lisicki, consisted of two players outside the top ten.

On that historical basis, Serena Williams may not be the automatic choice for the title. The dominant American’s statistics across all surfaces have declined slightly in 2014, but it’s worth pointing out that they are still far superior to her competition. What will encourage her backers is that she has won the title three out of the last five years, with sister Venus also taking three titles from 2005-2008. With a 52-6 venue record, she will still be the player to beat.

With such an open history of winners, a longer priced pick may well have a good chance to be a winner. The following table illustrates the grass court stats for the WTA top 20:

Player

Rank

24 Month Grass W-L Record

24 Month Grass Service Hold %

24 Month Grass Opponent Break %

24 Month Grass Combined %

Williams S

10-1

87.6

37.3

124.9

6-3

74.7

44.6

119.3

Radwanska A

11-4

76.8

37.7

114.5

Halep

6-3

68.9

44.9

113.8

Azarenka

6-1

81.7

54.2

135.9

Kvitova

8-5

78.2

31.8

110

Jankovic

4-4

69.3

100.3

Sharapova

8-2

37.5

117.5

Kerber

11-4

78.3

40.1

118.4

Cibulkova

6-4

60.6

40.6

101.2

Errani

2-3

58.7

41.7

100.4

Ivanovic

5-3

68.5

30.6

99.1

Pennetta

4-4

58.8

36.6

95.4

Wozniacki

4-4

64.1

38.5

102.6

Suarez Navarro

6-4

41.4

102.4

Bouchard

2-2

25.5

95.5

Lisicki

12-5

76.8

30.5

107.3

Stosur

4-4

76.6

35.4

112

Stephens

6-2

70.2

34.7

104.9

Vinci

11-5

71.3

37.4

108.7

What is immediately apparent is the extreme mediocrity of a large proportion of the WTA top 20 on grass.

Is Williams losing her edge?

Jelena Jankovic, Dominika Cibulkova, Sara Errani, Ana Ivanovic, Flavia Pennetta, Caroline Wozniacki, Carla Suarez Navarro, Eugenie Bouchard and Sloane Stephens all have combined surface hold/break grass stats of below 105, although several promising young players – Bouchard and Stephens – have the potential to improve these.

It is also clear that Williams enjoys much less superiority over the competition than she does on either hard court or clay, with her grass court hold/break stats being much more in line with her peers. Indeed Victoria Azarenka has better 2 year grass stats, although it’s highly likely that the Belarusian will miss this year’s Wimbledon with injury.

The statistics indicate that Williams’ main competition will come from Na Li, 2014 French Open winner Maria Sharapova and as an outsider, Angelique Kerber. All three have strong surface stats, including very high service hold percentages, which is vital on grass, with there being fewer breaks on the surface.

Interestingly, Li has never made it to a Wimbledon final, despite solid surface stats. However, she has experience of Grand Slam finals and the world number two has to be a strong contender here.

Undoubtedly, Sharapova is also a big threat to the title, after her shock exit to Michelle Larcher de Brito (priced at 1.020) last year. The Russian also, surprisingly, has a mediocre record in SW19, requiring seven years after her 2004 victory to get to the final again, losing to Petra Kvitova in 2011.

Kvitova’s strong serve will get her many free points on the fast grass surface, but her propensity to play three set matches means that she will struggle to achieve the consistency required to win seven matches in two weeks to prevail in a Grand Slam. However, it can be argued that grass is her best surface, and on a given day, can beat any WTA player on the surface.

As has been highlighted, Kerber’s stats indicate that she could be a viable choice as an underdog at Wimbledon. The German world number nine is yet to compete in a Grand Slam final, and this will be a big issue for her. However, she will be a tough opponent to any player and if she gets an open draw, could possibly emulate Lisicki’s (who has been struggling with injury in recent months) achievement in making the final.

The best of the rest

Also worth considering are Agnieszka Radwanska, Simona Halep and Sam Stosur.

Stosur, in particular, has the strong serve beneficial for success on grass and despite doubts over her mental strength, could have a good run in the tournament.

Radwanska and Halep have plenty of experience at the business end of tournaments but both have little late-stage Grand Slam experience. However, what is without doubt is that their statistics indicate they have the quality required to make a big impact, and in the case of Halep, it’s reasonable to assume that with the strides she has made in the last year, she can improve her stats further and be a big player at Wimbledon.

The women’s event at Wimbledon promises to be a very open contest and bettors would be well advised to research players’ capabilities on the surface, which is unique to any other.

Click here to see the latest 2014 WTA Wimbledon odds.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Is Recency Bias creating value?

By Gary Wise Jun 11, 2014

On Saturday June 14th, the UFC returns to Canada for UFC 174 where Rory MacDonald is the underdog in his co-main event fight against Tyron Woodley. This article looks at a number of UFC 174 betting indicators that suggest that status is unearned.

On recency and showcase knockout bias

At the UFC on FX held in January 2012, Nic Denis locked up with opponent Joseph Sandoval and viciously elbowed him five times in a row, knocking Sandoval out. Denis’ odds closed at 1.49 against his next opponent, Roland Delorme. Delorme submitted Denis in the first round of their fight and Denis retired from the sport.

That same month, at UFC 142, Edson Barboza scored a phenomenal spinning back kick that knocked opponent terry Etim back in time. With that memory entrenched, bettors piled on Barboza for his UFC 146 fight against Jamie Varner. Barboza closed at 1.20 and promptly got knocked out 3 minutes into the fight.

These are two examples of how the flash of a spectacular knockout can lodge itself in the minds of sports bettors. We may be seeing the effect at work again, this time in Saturday’s co-main event between Tyron Woodley and Rory MacDonald.

On July 27th, 2013, Rory MacDonald won his 5th consecutive fight in the UFC’s Welterweight division, a run that included wins over mainstays Nate Diaz, BJ Penn and Jake Ellenberger. He was considered the division’s heir apparent to Georges St. Pierre, who he hadn’t been paired with because of MacDonald’s stated refusal to fight his teammate.

McDonald’s streak came to an end after a lackluster performance resulted in a split decision loss to Robbie Lawler, who’d go on to come within a hair of the title in his next fight against Jonny Hendricks. He’s since defeated Damien Maia despite being dominated in the first round of their three-round bout, a triumph that had critics declaring MacDonald back.

Woodley, meanwhile, has gone 3-2 over the last two years, but it’s the way he achieved his last two victories that may have bettors over-valuing him for UFC 174. Woodley knocked out UFC mainstay Josh Koscheck, buckling the older man’s knees with one punch, then flattening him with another.

On the back of that glorious win, Woodly was paired with former champion Carlos Condit, whose knee gave out from the damage Woodley’s kicks administered, forcing retirement from their fight. The wins were vicious, powerful and memorable.

While the market considers many factors, in this case it may be feeling the pressures of recency bias. Lingering images of MacDonald involve Lawler and Maia doing damage, while lingering images of Woodley have him standing over fallen opponents. While there’s no question Woodley is capable of administering that damage, those images have a lasting impression. This is just one factor that suggests there may be value in betting MacDonald, who is at 2.210.

Home field advantage

While MacDonald isn’t a resident of Vancouver or even British Columbia, he is a Canadian, a reality that virtually assures a uniform crowd will be backing him at UFC 174. Canadian cards are routinely built to feature Canadians in as many fights as possible to add entertainment for patriotic fans.

It is well established in sport that a) HFA does exist and b) is generally heightened by proximity of fans to competitors. In MMA, the best seats are situated so those paying premium seating prices can actually hear the contact being made by the competitors. Therefore, it stands to reason MacDonald’s nationality in this case will prove to be a marked advantage.

The match-up

On paper, the fight appears to be a good one for MacDonald. Carrying a three-inch reach advantage, and can boast of having only been knocked out once, with seven seconds left in his fight against Condit in 2010. This is a result of MacDonald’s penchant for controlling fight pace, which could force Woodley out of his aggressive comfort zone.

The two pugilists bring different striking styles, with MacDonald throwing 50% more strikes than Woodley but landing a lower percentage as he uses his reach to maintain distance with opponents. It’s that distance that sees MacDonald out-land his opponents by some 60%; Woodley absorbs as many as he lands.

Both fighters bring wrestling pedigree to their fights and their grappling games profile similarly*:

MacDonald

Woodley

Takedowns Average/15 min.

2.7

2.43

Takedown Accuracy

57%

46%

Takedown Defense

77%

94%

Submission Average/15 min.

0.7

0.6

* Statistics courtesy fightmetric.com.

It’s not surprising then that their respective means of victory (MacDonald/Woodley KO wins: 6/4, sub wins 6/5, decision wins 4/4) are also similar, even if they take different paths.

Conclusion

With both wary of the other’s takedowns, this looks to be a battle of MacDonald’s control vs. Woodley’s power. As good as Woodley has looked in recent fights, MacDonald has age, reach and the crowd on his side. Throw in recency bias and Woodley’s flash and you have a line that’s likely skewed towards the ‘visitor’. That’s not to say MacDonald is assured the victory, but that there may be value in backing the Canadian Saturday.

Agree or Disagree? Bet UFC 174 here.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

France & Switzerland make it through

By Charlie Rowing Jul 4, 2014

Former World Cup winners France, finished top of Group E to make it to the Last 16, they were also joined by their neighbours Switzerland. Read this 2014 World Cup Group E betting review for an insight into how the group turned out and how accurate the pre-tournament odds were.

2014 World Cup Group E betting review

2014 World Cup Group E final table

Nation

Points

France

Switzerland

Ecuador

Honduras

-7

There weren’t too many surprises in Group E as each team qualified in the exact same positions as our odds pre-tournament implied.

Former winners France were the first in the group to seal qualification after two very convincing displays against Honduras and Switzerland, winning 3-0 and 5-2 respectively. Switzerland then followed suit after beating Honduras on the final matchday 3-0.

Ecuador came close to qualifying, but a late goal conceded in their opening game against Switzerland, to give their opponents a 2-1 win, ensured that the rest of the group stage was going to be an uphill struggle. However their odds of qualifying at 2.110 – an implied probability of 47.39% reflected that they would always find things difficult.

2014 World Cup Group E pre-tournament implied probability table

Position

Nation

Odds

Implied probability

Actual finishing position

France

1.328

75.30%

Switzerland

1.746

57.27%

Ecuador

2.100

47.39%

Honduras

5.410

18.48%

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Which ATP players perform in the first round of events?

By Dan Weston Jul 8, 2014

First round matches in Tennis tournaments are often considered by bettors and the media to be potential ‘banana skins’ for big players, with players often having various levels of preparation for their opening matches in an event. This tennis betting article assesses how efficient the market is in the first round for ATP top 30 players in the last 12 months.

A first round match is often a difficult proposition for bettors. Players will regularly have different levels of preparation and fitness coming into a tournament. Many situations exist where one player might trying to back up a strong showing the week before – which then requires a further opinion on whether they are fatigued or not – and their opponent could be in a completely different position, either coming back from injury, switching surface or on a bad run of defeats.

The variety of scenarios that can apply to a first round match mean that detailed research is complex and in cases like these, it’s much more difficult for the market to be efficient. There are often cases where a big-name player is often a bigger price than expected in the first round of a tournament, particularly in a 250 level event where player motivation isn’t often as big, due to the lower financial and ranking point incentives.

Due to this, for the purposes of this article, a sample was created of the top 30 ATP players from 3rd July 2013, to 3rd July, 2014. The sample comprised of first round ATP and Grand Slam matches, not including instances where the player received a bye – only genuine first round matches were included. A hypothetical 100 bet was placed in all cases and all prices used were Pinnacle Sports’ closing prices. Only matches where at least one set was completed were included in the sample.

The following table indicates the results of the sample, by player:-

Player

Rank

Matches

Wins

Win %

P/L

ROI

Worst Defeat

Nadal

100.00

3.7

N/A

Djokovic

100.00

1.5

N/A

Wawrinka

55.56

262

-29.1

Roger-Vasselin, 1.13

Federer

100.00

2.7

N/A

Murray

100.00

5.7

N/A

Berdych

80.00

122

-12.2

Karlovic, 1.22

Ferrer

100.00

245

22.3

N/A

Del Potro

83.33

-4

0.7

Devvarman, 1.07

Raonic

100.00

133

16.6

N/A

Gulbis

70.59

179

-10.5

Haider-Maurer, 1.05

Isner

71.43

0.5

Klizan, 1.14

Nishikori

75.00

1.0

Evans, 1.10

Dimitrov

72.22

1.0

Sousa, 1.07

Gasquet

70.00

194

-19.4

Pospisil, 1.20

Fognini

75.00

133

8.3

Ram, 1.18

Youzhny

72.22

-58

-3.2

Querrey, 1.53

Tsonga

100.00

296

37.0

N/A

Anderson

66.67

-32

-2.1

Lacko, 1.30

Dolgopolov

73.68

668

35.2

Gimeno-Traver, 1.57

Haas

63.64

0.1

Garcia-Lopez, 1.50

Monfils

75.00

105

-6.6

J Pospisil, 1.07

Robredo

84.62

271

20.8

Fognini, 1.47

Bautista-Agut

91.30

954

41.5

Tursunov, 1.18

Verdasco

62.50

-81

-5.1

Przysiezny, 1.27

Janowicz

50.00

382

-31.8

M Gonzalez, 1.08

Lopez

80.95

701

33.4

Benneteau, 1.96

Almagro

60.00

136

-13.6

Dolgopolov, 1.33

Kohlschreiber

83.33

381

21.2

Matosevic

Cilic

92.31

284

21.8

Matosevic, 1.16

Granollers

57.14

421

20.0

Copil, 1.25

Merely looking at the individual player stats on this table makes for fascinating reading, with the likes of Stan Wawrinka, Ernests Gulbis, Richard Gasquet and Jerzy Janowicz all looking very vulnerable when playing first round matches.

Quite interestingly, none of the four players highlighted have stellar stats for breaking opponents or recovering break deficits, so it’s logical to assume that in these cases, motivation is an issue when a match isn’t going their way, or their preparation for these matches isn’t ideal.

Seven players managed to achieve a 100% record for winning in the first round, with six of these in the top ten. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga was the solitary player outside the top ten to achieve this feat, and it will be fascinating to see if this continues despite his general decline in 2014. If this is the case, he would look to be an excellent betting proposition in first round matches.

It was interesting to see that Alexandr Dolgopolov had a superb record in first round matches over the last 12 months, which is in contrast to other periods of his career. Joining him and Tsonga with excellent first round records include Tommy Robredo, Roberto Bautista-Agut, Feliciano Lopez, Philipp Kohlschreiber, and Marcel Granollers (who despite a low win percentage managed to win first round matches as an underdog).

Matches

Wins

Win %

P/L

ROI

Top 10

86.21

-98

-1.13

11-20

141

103

73.05

851

6.04

21-30

163

122

74.85

2308

14.16

Overall

391

300

76.73

3061

7.83

The table above illustrates the statistics by ranking. As can be seen from the stats, blanket backing top 10 players in the first round produced a very small negative return (-1.1%). However, backing players from 11-30 had superb returns, particularly from a blind-backed scenario. This would indicate that in the last 12 months, the market was highly inefficient pricing top 30 players in the first round of events, with a positive return of investment of 7.83% generated from a decent sample of 391 matches.

It would therefore indicate that if a player’s price appears ‘too good to be true’ in the first round of a tournament, it’s probably a mistake by the market as opposed to any other factor that isn’t immediately apparent. Taking this into account as part of a balanced betting strategy is highly recommended.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

ATP US Open winner expected to be in top 10

By Dan Weston Jul 28, 2014

The Tennis betting focus now turns to the Canadian and US hard courts with players looking to get quality preparation in for the final Grand Slam of the year, the US Open. Read this ATP US Open betting preview for an insight ahead of the tournament.

Conditions at Flushing Meadows tend to be close to average. In 2012, the men’s event had 79.1% service holds, and this figure decreased to 76.4% in 2013. With the ATP hard court mean fluctuating just above the 78% mark, it is clear that last year’s conditions were a little on the slow side of average. This wouldn’t have a huge positive or negative impact on players and, a month in advance of the event, it’s unlikely court conditions will be a significant factor on an individual player’s chances.

As has been made in previous Grand Slam previews, it’s vital that players avoid early five set matches. It was very apparent that Andy Murray – who as a top player should be best equipped to deal with this – had big issues with this against Rafael Nadal in the French Open, after several prior five set matches against Philipp Kohlschreiber and Gael Monfils. This then extended to a very lacklustre display against Radek Stepanek in the subsequent tournament at Queens, which is a tournament that the Scotsman has traditionally performed well in.

As with the majority of men’s Grand Slam events, the five set format favours the ‘better’ player as it has lower variance than the typical ATP three set format. Looking at the winners of the last ten years, only Juan Martin Del Potro (world ranked 6th) has won from outside the top three, and there has been no player ranked above 9th (Andy Roddick managed this in 2006) that has made the final.

Therefore our main focus when looking at contenders has to be on the top ten players and based on history, it’s highly unlikely that a player outside the top ten will make the final.

Splitting the last ten years down into two brackets (2004-2008 and 2009-2013) is very interesting – from 2004 to 2008, Roger Federer took all five titles and the Swiss legend was also runner-up in 2009. However, he’s failed to make the final in the last four years.

Four different players have won since 2009, with the aforementioned Del Potro, Rafael Nadal (twice), Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic all claiming titles. Djokovic has made the final in the last four years and it would be a brave man to back against the world number one achieving at least that feat again this year.

The following table illustrates the 12 month hard court statistics of the current ATP top ten as of 24th July 2014 (less the injured Del Potro):-

Player

Rank

Current Price

12 Month Hard Court Service Hold %

12 Month Hard Court Opponent Break %

12 Month Hard Court Service Hold %

Djokovic

2.53

89.5

33.7

123.2

Nadal

4.80

89.1

31.1

120.2

Federer

9.60

89.1

28.2

117.3

Wawrinka

17.70

87.1

24.5

111.6

Berdych

56.60

88.3

28.8

117.1

Ferrer

86.91

78.4

31.1

109.5

Raonic

34.36

91.1

16.5

107.6

Dimitrov

20.21

85.6

18.5

104.1

Murray

6.57

83.3

32.7

116.0

It is immediately apparent from the table that the top two in the world rankings and the betting market – Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal – are two best players on hard court in the last 12 months. They have combined hold/break percentages of over 120 and this is elite level on any surface.

With supreme fitness and a superb record against top ten players on hard court (41-9 in his last 50 matches), it’s extremely difficult to see Djokovic having great difficulties against anyone but elite-level opponents. Furthermore, it’s worth noting that the Serb has only started one match as underdog on hard court since January 2012 – in his loss against Nadal at 2.236 in last year’s US Open final.

However, there is clearly a tier of players slightly below this level with Roger Federer, Tomas Berdych and Andy Murray all boasting combined hold/break stats between 116.0 and 117.3. With the worst stats of this trio but the shortest price, and persistent doubts about his fitness, it’s very hard to make a case for Murray in the outright betting.

Roger Federer is an interesting prospect at 9.60 in the outright betting and there’s no doubt that he has upped his level in 2014 after a disappointing 2013. On hard courts in 2013, he held 88.6% and broke 25.0%, but this has increased to 89.9% and 29.9% in 2014. Furthermore, in 2014 he has won 86% of matches on hard court, compared to a disappointing 74% last year.

Having said this, it’s noticeable that Tomas Berdych’s hard court stats are very close to Federer’s, despite being available at a much bigger price. The primary reason for this is the Czech’s poor record against top ten players (16-34 in his last 50 matches) and when priced as an underdog on hard court against top ten players, this record worsens to 8-28 in his career.

It’s also worth noting that both Berdych and Federer have poor long-term records against left-handers and avoiding Nadal in the draw will be key to both players’ chances.

Australian Open champion Stan Wawrinka and David Ferrer have better hard court stats than the younger Milos Raonic and Grigor Dimitrov although it’s difficult to see any of these four players featuring in the final.

Wawrinka has been in a run of mediocre form (17-8) following his first Slam victory. This includes defeats when priced below 1.20 against Guillermo Garcia-Lopez (in the first round of the French Open), Tommy Haas, young prospect Dominic Thiem, and also Andrey Golubev in the Davis Cup.

Ferrer’s 2014 stats have stayed fairly constant compared to 2013 but the Spaniard – traditionally superb at picking up low level titles – has just one tournament win to his name in 2014, in Buenos Aires on clay.

This year he’s also suffered many short priced defeats, losing when priced below 1.20 against Daniel Brands, Yen-Hsun Lu, Teymuraz Gabashvili, Andrey Kuznetsov, Carlos Berlocq and Leonardo Mayer. Furthermore, winning just 16 out of his last 50 matches against top ten players on hard courts, he is another that struggles against high-level opposition.

Raonic and Dimitrov are the youngest players in the top ten and this factor, along with their recent semi-finals on the grass of Wimbledon, are likely reasons why they have market support. It will be interesting to see Raonic’s build-up to the US Open in particular, with several events in Canada, his home country. As has been discussed in several previous articles, big servers such as Raonic tend to be hampered in Grand Slams due to accumulated fatigue, generally playing more sets and games than average.

Based on the hold/break stats and the fact that Dimitrov can boast just one quarter-final and one semi-final in Grand Slam events in his career, justifying his status as 6th favourite for the US Open will be a big ask for the 23-year-old Bulgarian.

As always, it is worth stressing that betting on ATP Grand Slams is a different proposition to normal 3-set matches. It is vital that bettors do their research and make the necessary adjustments if they are to profit at the 2014 US Open.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Don’t rule out a big-priced WTA US Open betting winner

Don’t rule out a big-priced WTA US Open betting winner

By Dan Weston Jul 28, 2014

As is the case in other Grand Slams, the WTA US Open betting event promises to be much more open than the ATP equivalent, and a bigger priced winner, or finalist, is more likely in the women’s tournament than the men’s. This article assesses the statistics behind the main contenders for the women’s title.

Whilst the ATP event historically favours the players at the top of the betting market, this is less the case in the WTA US Open. While Serena Williams has won the last two tournaments, defeating Victoria Azarenka in both finals, the world number one has just one runner-up spot (2011) and one other title (2008) in the last ten years. It’s fair to say that represents a poor return for Williams given how dominant she has been statistically over the competition, and also considering it is a tournament in her home country.

Interestingly, Williams’ 2011 appearance in the final came as a 28th seed and Mary Pierce (12th seed, 2005) and Kim Clijsters (wild card, 2009) also made the final when ranked outside the top ten.

However, it could be argued that both Williams and Clijsters were top ten level in all but ranking at those times, and with 17 out of 20 finalists in the last ten years coming from inside the top 10, it’s very likely we will see the two finalists come from that ranking bracket.

Williams leads the market currently at 3.220, and this is quite a bit bigger than in recent Grand Slam tournaments, where she has started the event either odds-on, or around even money. This reflects the decline in the 32-year-old world number one, which can be evidenced in the table below:

All Surfaces Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

Hard Court Service Hold %

Break Opponent %

Combined %

Williams, 2013

83.5

53.4

136.9

83.6

50.9

134.5

Williams, 2014

82.7

46.3

129.0

83.2

42.4

125.6

Williams’ serve hasn’t declined much, showing a 0.8% drop across all surfaces between 2013 and 2014, and a 0.4% drop on hard court. However, she’s broken opponents much less, doing so 7.1% less on all surfaces and 8.5% less on hard court. These statistics show that unless she can reverse this trend, her time in the WTA stratosphere is over, and her level will be much closer to other players than in the last couple of years.

The table below illustrates the 12 month hard court stats (correct at 24th July, 2014) of the top 10 in the WTA, and several other notable players near the top of the outright betting market, currently priced at under 50.00:

Player

Rank

Current Price

12 Month Hard Court Service Hold %

12 Month Hard Court Opponent Break %

12 Month Hard Court Combined %

Williams S

3.22

83.2

49.1

132.3

16.92

73.1

47.3

120.4

Halep

9.40

66.6

50.4

117

Kvitova

11.63

71.4

37.4

108.8

Radwanska A

27.48

69.6

117.6

Sharapova

7.17

69.1

42.3

111.4

Bouchard

7.99

65.6

43.7

109.3

Kerber

38.06

70.6

113.6

Jankovic

80.34

65.5

47.2

112.7

Azarenka

10.50

64.6

50.7

115.3

Ivanovic

38.06

70.1

42.9

113.0

Cibulkova

45.99

67.3

44.6

111.9

Wozniacki

48.62

72.7

43.6

116.3

Stosur

38.06

74.4

33.6

108.0

Stephens

38.06

66.4

36.4

102.8

Keys

48.62

70.3

36.5

106.8

Muguruza

27.48

65.6

44.1

109.7

Lisicki

40.69

70.8

37.2

108.0

As can be seen from the table above, Williams’ stats over the last 12 months are well above the other top WTA players. However, her 2014 combined hold/break stats of 125.6 isn’t a huge amount better than the likes of Li, Halep, Radwanska, Azarenka and Wozniacki, who all boast combined stats of over 115.

Second in the market is Maria Sharapova. The Russian may not be flattered by her hold/break stats with most of them coming as she made her return back from injury to the tour earlier in the season. If she can get back to her 2012 hard court level of 73.9% holds and 49.2% breaks she will be a major contender.

Simona Halep and Eugenie Bouchard make up the list of players priced below 10.00 and it’s hard to make a case for Bouchard at these prices, given her hard court stats, even with likely improvement considered. Certainly based on the stats above, Halep has a better chance this year, with her superb return game, breaking opponents 50.4% in the last 12 months on the surface.

Of all the other players, only Victoria Azarenka can boast that she breaks opponents over 50% on the surface but the Belarussian has been struggling with injury, playing just one match between January and June. She clearly looked far from fully fit on grass in June, losing when priced 1.368 to Camila Giorgi at Eastbourne and at 1.178 to Bojana Jovanovski at Wimbledon. Assessing how Azarenka fares in the warm-up events is crucial.

Wimbledon Petra Kvitova and Australian Open champion Li Na are next in the betting and the statistics favour Li when comparing these two, with the Chinese player holding 1.7% more on hard court in the past 12 months and breaking 9.9% more. Statistics show that Kvitova thrives mostly on grass and on indoor hard – the two quickest surfaces on tour – as opposed to outdoor hard. Li will be looking to avenge a very disappointing Wimbledon, where she had a surprise 3rd round exit against Barbora Zahlavova Strycova.

Radwanska, Kerber, Jankovic, Ivanovic, Cibulkova and Wozniacki all have combined hold/break stats over 110 and form the basis of the rest of the main contenders. As previously mentioned, Radwanska has big issues against top level players and if any of these players are to make the latter stages of the tournament, they will need to get victories over top ten players. The following table assess the recent records of these six players against top ten players:

Vs. Top 10 – 12 Months

Last 50 Matches

Radwanska

5-11

20-30

Kerber

5-7

16-29*

Jankovic

5-10

16-34

Ivanovic

5-9

15-35

Cibulkova

5-8

19-31

Wozniacki

1-6

23-27

*Kerber has not yet played 50 matches against top 10 players

Radwanska actually has the worst record of all these players against top ten players in the last 12 months, with the exception of Caroline Wozniacki. However, it is interesting to note that Wozniacki has the best record against top players in her last 50 matches.

With these statistics borne in mind, Angelique Kerber and Dominika Cibulkova appear less overawed against top ten opponents than the other four, and could provide options for those bettors keen to find a player with a little bigger price than the main contenders.

The WTA US Open promises to be a great tournament, with a number of young players looking to prove they belong in elite company, Azarenka and Sharapova looking to show they are at elite level after injuries and Serena Williams looking much more vulnerable here than in recent other Grand Slams. Surface research and assessment of the warm-up events will be crucial to achieve successful betting.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Dan Weston Q&A Transcript

By Gary Wise May 30, 2014

On May 28th, 2014, Pinnacle Sports handed the reigns for its official twitter account over to tennis columnist/analyst Dan Weston. A professional who’s been referenced in numerous mainstream media outlets, Weston took questions from our followers to help share his practices and contribute to their education. Below, find the transcript of what transpired (with multiple-tweet questions and answers consolidated into one, and hashtags/excess account names removed):

Dan Weston (DW): Hello everyone, I’m ready for your questions! Anything in tennis, betting and trading in-play is good for you to ask. I’ll take some article suggestions too!

Q1. from earlier in the week: Recently, a follower suggested of tennis betting “Stats mean little compared to who brings their game & better adjusts to opposition strength/weakness.” How do you respond to that assessment?

DW: First of all, it’s very player dependant. There are some players who, when they have an off day, are still good enough to win. A player like Carla Suarez-Navarro has an excellent record of winning when a heavy favorite, so she’ll get the job done against an inferior player, while some other players aren’t as good in those situations.There are a lot of situational factors there to investigate. Match-up issues, how players deal with left-handers, big serve etc. It’s not as black and white as the questions suggests. It’s about getting objective analysis rather than subjective. #pinnacle

Q2. from @_GreekWay_: You are involved in trading so do you thing you can trade on @PinnacleSports ? Also do stats always say the truth?

DW: The stats always say the truth. Stats are the best means of analysis IMO. They give a strong overview of a match-up.

Q3. from @frankbutcher76: Apart from your own Dan, which are the best sites for getting stats and the latest news?

DW: I actually find the ATP website is very good for general stats. Much better than WTA. I also find Twitter excellent for news because you can search for a player and come up with all the info you need.

Q4. from @Jdemz: Do you ever live trade off watching a match and have a feel on how it’s going to play out. Or is it all stats?

DW: The simple answer is no. I don’t want to bias my view and find stats are the best way to get a fair assessment.

Q5. from @FootyBetproTips: What is the best live scoreboard to use for trading tennis ? I find I am always way to far behind.

DW: The best one I’ve found is Flashscores. It’s still not super quick. I’m always looking for something faster, though Flashscores’ point by point histories are great.

Q6. from @Dennis7menace: Some times the odds don’t reflect the ranking of the players and their history? What is the reason behind that?

DW: I find ranking is useful as a benchmark, but you need to understand ability varies greatly from surface to surface. Someone like Pironkova can play player X on clay, but be a favourite on grass.

Q7. from @cartermoore100 Dan. Are there any really good sites out there you would recommend for stats like matchstat or heavy topspin.

DW: I use so many sites its hard to endorse one. Amongst those I use are Tennis Insight, Flashscores and oddsportal.

Q8. from @dboy03: What makes clay courts so diff from the rest? Are great clay court players an even higher favorite than normal?

DW: Good question. Simple answer is yes. Clay exaggerates the difference; slowing the game down lowers variance. You may have just inspired a future article:)

Q9. from @Cartermoore: Are there certain handicappers or writes on tennis you read.

DW: I don’t have a set list, I like to listen to broad opinions, but ultimately trust my own.

Q10. from @Frada_Felcher: what % hold do you guys try to keep in your futures market for majors? Is it smaller than regular ATP/WTA events?

DW: My analysis isn’t Pinnacle’s and Pinnacle’s isn’t mine. You’ll have to ask them that:) #Pinnacle

Q11. from @FootyBetProTips: Thanks, who is your fav for the woman’s french open title now then ? Pretty wide open now Serena has gone out.

DW: Good question:) Based on numbers, the top two favs in the market are justified. Tough to look past Sharapova.

Q12. from @_GreekWay_: If you follow stats how much more likely it is to come a profitable bettor or trader?

DW: As long as it’s the right stats and the right analysis, it has to help. Stats eliminate bias.

Q13. from @bendjaminwright: What data do you look at when compiling hold % on a per match basis?

DW: I look at service, hold and break %s for each player on a given surface.

I also look at court speed and service hold %s from events at that venue.

Q14. from @AlexvanWrinkled: Dan, Do you prefer pork scratchings or crisps with a pint? #Pinnacle

DW: I’m on a diet, so neither:) #Pinnacle

Q15. from @MarbleousQ: I accept that Pinnacle’s moneyline tennis rules are first set complete. Would Pinnacle consider offering a choice of rules (similar to in baseball with listed pitchers or action)?

DW: The short answer is that bookmakers in general should be consistent and offer the same rules. I like Pinnacle’s best because I find them the fairest solution and the most commonly accepted.

Q16. from @bendjaminwright: Do you use Oncourt or a similar database?

DW: I don’t use Oncourt (nothing against it)…just don’t need it for what I do. A lot of the stats I use are available there though. I’ve harvested all of my own in-play data.

Q17. From @_GreekWay_: How easy is it to oppose one of the top 5 players when stats suggest so? I find it hard.

DW: No, not if the numbers are there to do it. Trust the math:)

Q18. From @cartermoore100: do you trade in other markets besides tennis?

DW: No, tennis takes up too much of my time to focus properly on other sports. Research is serious business.

Q19. from email: The tennis (and betting) world was rocked today with Serena’s early #FrenchOpen exit. Did you see it coming?

DW: Truthfully, no. She probably hasn’t played at her usual level, but she’s usually so much better than everyone else that even when not playing at her fittest, she’s usually reliable. Still, I took another look and found some interesting stats:

2013: 83.5% hold, 53.4% break 136.9% combined, 95% W-L%

2014: 82.6% hold, 48.5% break 131.1% combined 87% W-L%

Clearly, from these numbers, we see that she’s already declined this season.

DW: Many thanks for all the questions! It’s been a lot of fun chatting with everybody! Good luck betting French Open. If you have any article requests, let me know at @tennisratings. Always looking for fodder:)

Want to ask our experts similar questions to help get ready for World Cup? Now’s your chance! Read how here: http://www.pinnaclesports.com/online-betting-articles/05-2014/world-cup-twitter-chat.aspx

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

Do the handicap underdogs offer good value in the opening World Cup games?

By Mark Taylor Jun 3, 2014

The World Cup opening games are stereotyped as cagey contests, this article examines whether this holds true and examines whether handicapping the World Cup opening games, can offer value.

Handicapping the World Cup opening games

Qualification for the knockout stages of the 2014 World Cup is determined firstly by the number of points each team acquires in their three group matches. Should two or more sides be tied on points at the conclusion of the group phase, the next criteria is goal difference, with the top two sides moving onto the knockout stages, thereafter head-to-head performances.

Therefore, whilst winning the opening game of the group campaign is obviously the ideal scenario, there are other considerations – particularly concerning the margin of victory, or potential defeat in the initial game – and how that might impact on the likelihood of a successful qualification.

The opening game of the tournament will see Brazil take on Croatia, with the hosts understandably strongly favoured in the match. FIFA rankings, which are an imperfect, but useful indicator of the talent gap between countries, unsurprisingly indicate that Brazil are the better team, ranked at 4th – which is 16 places above Croatia. The Brazilians also have home field and continent advantage over their European rivals.

This opinion is reflected in the current match odds, where Brazil are quoted at 1.325* to win the game. The odds of 1.990* available for Brazil overcoming a 1.5 goal start for Croatia may be more appealing, where in order to “win” the handicap, Brazil must win the game by at least two clear goals. (Read more about how to bet on the World Cup here)

However, the quotes for the outright match odds and handicap odds would appear to fully reflect the historical relationship that exists between a team such as Brazil hosting Croatia and to attempt to gain an edge bettors often need to look into aspects of a match that may be unusual and therefore not fully accounted for in the odds.

A side will not shun a scoring opportunity when they already lead. However, there is good evidence that the priorities change depending on the prevailing score line. The trailing team increasingly takes more risks in trying to score, possibly leading to the risk of conceding on the counter, while the leading team may become more defensive.

These changes of emphasis usually relate simply to the chances of ultimately winning the match, but in the case of a short round-robin competition, especially one which may be decided on goal difference, the wider objective of qualifying for the knockout stages also begins to become important.

Brazil vs. Croatia example

On the plot below we’ve charted the effect on their overall qualifying chances of Brazil winning the opening game against Croatia by increasing margins, as well as merely drawing the game. The results are drawn from 50,000 simulations of Group A.

Brazil, as hosts are in a stand out position before a ball has been kicked and as such, even a draw, which would likely be described as disappointing will still give them a greater than 90% chance of qualifying from the group.

Beating Croatia by a single goal margin would naturally increase their qualifying chances, in this case to just over 98%. But an additional margin goal, taking the difference to two, which would be required to secure the -1.5 goal handicap would only advance their qualifying chances by another 0.5%. Therefore, the reward of actively seeking further goals can be measured against the risk of conceding and possibly being held to a draw.

The question here is whether these probabilities are universally understood and equally acted upon by all teams. Other unique World Cup dynamics are less universal and may skew modelling e.g. are teams already eliminated ahead of their final group game who have yet to register a goal, more likely to take an open, reckless attacking approach just to get on the scoresheet? Is the Golden Boot award a significant enough incentive to make leading contenders more goal hungry and thereby altering goal expectation?

The wider group dynamics within the opening match also applies to Croatia at different score lines throughout the encounter.

A draw would leave them more likely than not to progress. But defeat is by far the most likely outcome and the various margins by which they may find themselves trailing during the match leave them with similar risk/reward scenarios as those open to Brazil.

The potential reward to be gained from drawing level from trailing by a single goal is certainly worth Croatia’s risk, which in turn may present Brazil with an increased opportunity to overcome the handicap as the visitors over commit.

Hence the likelihood that Brazil will overcome the handicap may improve when they lead by a single goal, even if they themselves aren’t actively seeking to do so, due to the subtle change of approach that takes place within a match.

The group interaction is probably most clear when Brazil lead Croatia by 2 goals and shade the -1.5 handicap. A further Brazilian goal again improves their already considerable qualification chances by very little, while Croatia by getting the game back to within a goal gain slightly less than the percentage points they lose if their risk taking allows Brazil to increase the margin to three goals.

In raw figures, at a losing margin of 2 goals, Croatia has around a 38% chance of qualifying if this remains the final result. This falls to 34% if Brazil increases the winning margin to three and rises to just over 41% if they do indeed pull a goal back and end the game by losing by a single goal.

So goals that appear merely consolation ones, although they may dramatically alter artificial handicap results, also have real and measurable worth to the losing side in the wider context of the group. There is often a real, quantifiable incentive for losing underdogs to reduce the margin by which they may still ultimately lose the game.

It is probable that all sides are aware of these scenarios, at least in the broadest terms. If Brazil lost the first game, their likelihood of qualifying would slip to 75%, still more likely than not, but a not inconsiderable fall from the over 90% associated with a draw. Reiterating that a Brazil/Croatia draw is not necessarily a poor result for the host country in terms of outright qualification for the knockout.

So the stereotype of opening matches being tight cagey, low scoring and therefore, less conducive to handicaps being covered by the strongest teams may continue when short priced favourites begin their group campaigns.

History suggests opening games are tight

It was wise to side with the underdogs on the handicap lines in the opening 2010 matches, where eventual winners Spain lost outright by a single goal against the Swiss, Brazil sneaked past North Korea by a single goal margin, Ivory Coast held Portugal, as did Paraguay and New Zealand against Italy and Slovakia, respectively. Japan and Ghana caused single goal upsets and England and France were held respectively by USA and an initially underrated Uruguay.

These examples are inevitably small in number, but the underlying secondary importance of goal difference within the group may be a credible reason to drive this apparent opening game phenomenon. Whereby goals may be scarce, draws an acceptable ambition, even for the best and trailing sides often pursue a consolation goal.

Click here to see the latest World Cup odds.

Mark Taylor is a freelance soccer and NFL writer who, along with producing expert content for Pinnacle Sports, also runs his own soccer analytics blog, the Power of Goals.

*Odds subject to change

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

How will weather conditions & travel affect teams in Brazil?

By Michael Gales Jun 3, 2014

To make a World Cup betting profit bettors should understand the nature and variety of playing conditions and travel demands teams will face in the world’s fifth largest country. Knowing which teams are favourably or adversely affected could provide an important edge.

Inhumane conditions due to early kick off times

Every World Cup tournament comes with its own set of unique conditions and characteristics that produce performance bias. These range from the design of the football – in 2002, theFevernovaball was blamed – the referee, the pitch, the noise of vuvuzela (in 2010) and more often than not, the weather. In Brazil – more than any other World Cup since USA 1994 – the weather could have serious implications on the outcome of games, and tournament fatigue.

Despite the previous four South American World Cups – Uruguay (1930), Brazil (1950), Chile (1962) and Argentina (1978) – being held on the continent in the winter months of June and July, this years World Cup sees two major differences; the venue locations and the kick off times.

While Brazil 1950 was primarily hosted in the mild Southern Eastern cities of Rio and Sao Paulo, 2014 sees the World Cup spread across the nation with a large proportion of games being held in Northern, tropical cities like Salvador, Fortaleza, Natal, Recife, Manaus and Cuiaba – which all boast year-round tropical heat and humidity.

The 2014 World Cup in temperature terms will therefore be similar to the three North American World Cups – Mexico in 1970 & 1986, and the USA in 1994 – where matches were played in extreme heat and humidity, and perhaps not coincidentally where the Europeans have also failed to win.

The heat perhaps wouldn’t be such an issue if games were played late evening. However, such is the pull of the European audience three games will be played per day – with 24 matches at 1pm Brazilian time.

Players will have to deal with be energy sapping humidity. Take Manaus for example, which lies in the middle of the Amazon rainforest and has an average high temperature of 31C and 82% humidity in June and July.

In venues located in the south and south east of Brazil this won’t be a problem. But to the north east the later kick off times are still expected to be very uncomfortable for the players. This was evident when Spain played Italy in the 2013 Confederations Cup semi-final, the game ending 0-0 as players struggled throughout.

Bettors should consider how these conditions, which have been described as inhumane and merciless, could impact not only the immediate result, but also a nations chance in the later stages of the tournament if they have been exposed to these conditions for a prolonged period of time.

One team who the draw fell kindly on was Argentina. Not only were they drawn alongside Bosnia, Iran and Nigeria, they also play their entire tournament without having to confront the heat of the north east. Which could be a deciding factor in the latter stages of the tournament, while it will be easier for their fans to travel across the border to games, which may create a Home Field Advantage.

Germany and Italy in comparison are exposed to the full brutality of the mid-day Brazilian heat. The Germans who have reached the semi-final in the last three tournaments not only have a tricky group, but will play two games in the 1pm heat of Salvador and Recife, and a third game at 4pm in Fortaleza. Italy will also face difficult conditions – after they play England in Manaus they travel to Recife and Natal for 1pm kick offs.

If, as predicted by the odds, Italy and Germany progress safely out of the group stage, predicting the lasting physical and mental affect these games could have on the squads more accurately than the oddsmakers, could lead to an opportunity to gain an edge.

How will the football be affected?

Given these conditions, bettors should expect to see different styles of play dependent on where the game is being hosted. The pace will be slower, particularly later on in games; which was evident in the Confederations Cup.

The humidity will be draining, so employing a high intensive strategy will sap energy levels quickly. When Italy labored to a 4-3 victory over Japan at the Confederations Cup, manager CesarePrandelliwas quick to make his point “Westruggled like crazy tonight. The humidity is really difficult to deal with.”

Nations who are more tolerable to the conditions should be able to maintain energy levels for longer, and it may become apparent that certain teams perform better late in games as their opposition tire. Managers will play a key role, as they gauge when and who to substitute – read this article on the importance of substitutions.

Possession of the ball will be paramount, so it could be viable that each team has long passages of play, while the other sits back and conserve energy. Of course this style of play will suit certain teams over others, and identifying this before betting will be advantageous.

At USA 1994, Italian midfielder, Roberto Donadoni, neatly outlined the kind of dilemma teams face in extreme conditions. Push up and press into the opposing half, and risk not be able to get back again. Sit deep and risk conceding the initiative.

Fitness and conditioning could be crucial

Historically, nations who have won the World Cup have been well conditioned, but fitness could prove more pivotal than ever in 2014.

So much so that hosts Brazil have re-employed renowned fitness coach Paulo Paixao, who worked with manager Luiz Felipe Scolari when the Brazilians last won the World Cup in 2002.

To gauge the impact of playing in such high temperatures and the importance of fitness and conditioning, we can look back at recent World Cup tournaments in America.

In 1994 Italy played Brazil in the final, losing on penalties, and were marshaled by captain Franco Baresi, who had remarkably undergone knee surgery after picking up an injury at the start of the tournament. Baresi returned to win man-of-the-match in the final, with both managers remarkably stating it was better to be injured than tired in such conditions.

In addition at Mexico 1986 England striker Gary Lineker reported losing more than half a stone (in excess of 3 kg) per game and how players felt faint and dizzy.

Travel difficulties

Aside from the heat, travel will affect a number of nations chances of winning during the World Cup.

The chosen format will see many nations criss-cross across South America’s largest country, with the additional burden for those nations who have chosen to be based far away from venues. Bettors should understand the impact the travel will have on certain teams and how they may be handicapped. After all, some teams will not be affected as much as others.

The USA perhaps have the toughest task of qualifying for the knockout stages of all 32 teams. They will have to travel further to play their matches than any other team. For the group stage, it has been estimated that the squad could record as many as 11,500 miles from their base camp in just 10 days – compare this to Belgium, who have just 435 miles to travel for their three games, and it is clear that the draw has been far luckier to some than others.

When betting on the 2014 World Cup it is clear that bettors should gauge both the impact of extreme heat and the affect travelling large distances will have on each squad. Handicapping teams accurately before each game will give bettors an opportunity to notice when bookmakers may have misjudged the affects, presenting an opportunity to earn an edge.

Click here to see the latest World Cup betting odds.

If you have feedback, comments or questions regarding this article, please email the author or send us a tweet on Twitter.

BetFair	BetFair online BetFair site
Pinnacle	Pinnacle Sports site
BWIN	Bwin site
Unibet	Unibet site

четверг, 31 июля 2014 г.

четверг, 31 июля 2014 г.