Originally Posted by mini bad gambler
I want to know why?
Ok, here goes.
Bear in mind I am saying this from the perspective of someone who should know their tennis (specifically mens, as womens tennis early rounds prices are not competitive).
Tennis is a sport less open to be disrupted by other factors other than the players themselves. Sure, from time to time an Umpire will intervene and make a correction on a far baseline that he/she should not have done, but by and large tennis matches are not affected by poor lines people, and now with hawkeye in, it enables the players to sort it out themselves.
Compare this factor with say Basketball or NFL. We know officials like to get busy in both of these sports, and for example an official might give a holding call against an OL where there was none. A case of seeing something that wasn't there which may very well have an impact on the drive. And with respect to instant replay, that's still open to a subjective opinion by the guy in the box and I'm sure we've seen many incidents where IR got it wrong (for example Polamalu interception v Indy in Playoffs last season).
This kind of thing can't really happen in tennis. The ball is either in or out.
The individuality of tennis also makes it a plus point. If you follow tennis, you know the state of mind on court of many players. You know those likely to serial tank (Gaudio for example), you know those who will pretty much always fight till the end and give you a run for your money (Hewitt for example). You know the serial chokers (Mathieu for example).
You know who plays well on what surface, who is in good form and should be backed, who is in poor form and should be left alone. Form book and history counts for alot in tennis.
Team sports rely on you prediciting the performance of a greater number of individuals, with differing mind sets and abilities. It's all very well backing the Colts because Peyton is a good QB and their O can put up points, but they can't help their D stop being gashed on the ground.
Tennis doesn't suffer from these differences, and thus makes it easier to predict. The officials are largely out of it, the weather is not a factor in the sense that play stops for rain. Of course, there is the consideration of the weather making conditions heavy and that favouring one player or the other, but you should be on top of that within reason.
You take the over in an NFL game outdoors with 2 teams who can eat up yards quickly, and then it starts pissing down, the game changes, here come the drops and both start to utilise a ground game. The pattern of the match is directly affected by the weather. Whereas this doesn't happen in tennis so much, other than how players may react to delays. Where again, you have the knowledge of which players have experience of these situations and evidence as to who is likely to deal with such circumstances better.
Take a match from a couple of days ago, Nadal v Davydenko. For me this was a no brainer to pick Nadal. Why? On mentality alone. Just that. Davydenko has proven that he beats who he should, and loses to who he should. He showed v Blake that there were things going on in his head with regards to taken further steps up the ladder. Nadal, although not playing particularly well of late, has more than proven he is up there when it comes to mental strength and a battle of wills. In their match, Davydenko ended up getting the slight edge in more rallies, but when it came down to it, when the big points were to be played, it was the champion mentality that pulled Nadal through in a tight contest, and Davydenko made simple errors at the most crucial times (that he would not make during other parts of the match).
Nadal at 8/13 was a great price, because you just won't get him at those kind of prices on clay or most of the season, so you have to eat it up. Davydenko is not Berdych or Blake with the ability to blow Nadal off court and put aside any mental deficiencies, so that was the kind of match I feel you can back just on mentality, as there are players out there who have a problem taking names down.
Bookies quite often don't take all the facts into account, and this is why they are vulnerable against the knowledgeable tennis gambler. They put names alone above match ups, form and H2H. They don't particularly adjust their prices in such circumstances. Which I have never understood, someone has not been doing their job.
For example, we all know Roddick is a dud on clay, and yet in Masters events or at RG he is always made a fav in the past for example against the likes of Massu or Acasuso. Players who have played on clay their whole lives up against a player whose biggest weapon is his serve (which is to an extent nullified on clay)? You have to take advantage of the times where the bookie puts name or ranking above what really counts which is surface, match ups, form, and history.