I meant 500 bucks on every match, when match is over you get back your stake with profit and can do it again in next round. You dont have to have 11 K free money to spend.
That's true, my bad. I was being ridiculously thick
, which suits this particular thread.
Of course there is always risk to lose your stake like happened against Ferrero, but as long you dont put your previous profit in, it should work.
Well, don't say it should work, because just look at jig's thread. It worked up to a point, and then bust. How many players can you pick out over the course of a season that are likely to have the sustained run Nadal can have on clay?
None. On the men's or women's tour. So really all we are talking about here is backing Nadal from Monte Carlo to Roland Garros, and given that he has now won 4 French Open's and given that the prices are now very, very short, even against better opposition - the chance to play with this kind of experiment has gone. In my view, obviously.
As for books adjust to players success.. they do, but I dont think we`ll see Rafa @1.05 against Fed in clay final any time soon. Rafa won in Monte Carlo and his odds in Hamburg final were not significantly shorter. Rafa won in Hamburg and his odds in RG final were still around 1.5-1.6.
Are you thinking 2007 rather than 2008?
Nadal was a little bigger this year for Hamburg because the books figured the fatigue factor may catch up with him, we saw that it hadn't. At Roland Garros he was 1/4 in most places for the final, not 1/2 as you claim, at least as I recall it.
Rafa destroyed Fed in RG, won in Queens and he was still underdog in Wimby final.
He was a marginal dog for the Wimbledon F and in most places by the time the first ball was hit it was a pick 'em.
The argument against betting in the way you suggest for this short period of time is the same as the argument against for the duration - because backing that short, consistently, will eventually kill you. And for the period or time that you get away with it is not actually worth the risk factor, again, just my view.