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.
Very good post and one to take into account for sure...thanks for your insight.
But regarding why bookies put names alone above match-ups,form etc...well,you are thinking like a bettor.Try and think like a bookie for a short while and you will find the answer
The ideea is to attract action on both outcomes as much as possible.That way,a bookie doesn't care what the result of the match will be cause they win either way.
For those who don't get it,take a 50%-50% match for example...with odds 1,85-1,85...if a total amount of 100$ is bet on 1st player at 1,85 the bookie will lose 85$,if that player wins....but if the same amount of 100$ is bet on 2nd player at 1,85,the bookie will also lose 85$...Now,the total amount bet on that match was 200$ right?But whatever the outcome,the bookie will lose 185$ so that means that they win 15$ no matter what the outcome is,AS LONG AS THEY GET EVEN ACTION ON THE MATCH FROM A BETTING POINT OF VIEW.
That is why,on many occasions,you will see a match like Roddick-Acasuso on clay,first round priced at 1,5 Roddick and Acasuso at @2,25,even though this is more like a 50-50 match...or,given the circumstances,Acasuso should be favoured.
But you see,if the odds were like 1,85-1,85 on this game,then there won't be many people backing Acasuso.Why?the reason is simple!There is no Value left...or even if it is,the percentage is low and not worth backing.So that means that a lot of money will flow on Roddick only,and if he wins,sportsbooks will lose,even though the ods were correct right?50-50 match...no?
The bookie knows that public tends to follow NAMES,while the proffesional gamblers seek VALUE.That is why they INFLATE o
r DECREASE odds for the reason i said above:TO GET EVEN ACTION.
As a conclusion,it is very good if someone who bets on tennis(but not only tennis) can think first as a bookmaker,and then as a proffesional gambler.That way you can justify why odds are in such a way on some games.Don't underestimate bookies
ps:hope i could be of some help...Cheers