[duong]

Overall looks OK, Nadal a little bit underrated, Federer overrated maybe, but Ferrer is clearly underrated here, he should be very near to Del Po.

Tsonga made a big performance here once but overall this surface is too slow for him. Too slow for Berdych as well.

[Sauletekis]

Not saying he will win, but Rafa is HUGELY underrated in the bookies. If you put 10 dolars in him, you wont lose that match and you may even win a lot, cause it wouldnt be THAT much of a shocker (not 1/11, thats for sure) if he wins the whole thing...

[Abel]

Originally Posted by djokovicgonzalez

So if I were to bet a million dollars on "not Janowicz" what'd i get?

Betting against events happening ("laying") requires a lot of money - especially at Janowicz's odds because he is 130/1 on to win but 160/1 against - for very little gain. If you wanted to lay $1m against him winning it - this is your overall liability - you'd only win around $6,300 on top of your original stake (as you have to cover it 160 times).

See below:

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Machado & Gil

Not saying he will win, but Rafa is HUGELY underrated in the bookies. If you put 10 dolars in him, you wont lose that match and you may even win a lot, cause it wouldnt be THAT much of a shocker (not 1/11, thats for sure) if he wins the whole thing...

Nadal underrated? I don't see that. Are you really expecting him to be at his best immediately after a six-month inactive period? And even at his best this is a tough tournament to win for him. He's won it once in eight tries, after all, it's not the RG we're talking about.

[Abel]

For all those going on about the bookies over/underrating certain players. Let's just say the bookies very rarely get it wrong Chances are the over/underrating is going on with posters on here.

I'm tempted to bet on both Djokovic and Murray to win as you can still make money (pre-tournament at least) that way. It's a bit of a cowardly bet as a Nole fan, though.

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Abel

For all those going on about the bookies over/underrating certain players. Let's just say the bookies very rarely get it wrong Chances are the over/underrating is going on with posters on here.

I'm tempted to bet on both Djokovic and Murray to win as you can still make money (pre-tournament at least) that way. It's a bit of a cowardly bet as a Nole fan, though.

Bookies getting it right is not the same as bookies telling it like it is. The try to make the book. If they know a large contingent of fans is going to bet on one particular player to win come hell or high water, the odds for this player will drop no matter how unlikely they think he is to win.

[Li Ching Yuen]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Bookies getting it right is not the same as bookies telling it like it is. The try to make the book. If they know a large contingent of fans is going to bet on one particular player to win come hell or high water, the odds for this player will drop no matter how unlikely they think he is to win.

And when do fans do that? When a player is showing such form that it's pretty predictable that he has the most chances to win a tournament. Remember that a lot of betters are not necessarily blind fanboys, when it comes to money a lot of people harness a surprising amount of objectivity.

All this bottled up in fewer words is: at the end of the day what bookies are laying on the table is the reality as it can be best processed at a moment in time. In rare, rare occasions have I seen bookmakers making gifts and that won't change anytime soon.

When I look at these odds I see the reality of how things might turn out come the end of January, at the time of this post and seeing how a couple of warm-up events rarely do change that I have no reason to not follow that idea.
You can make money out of sports betting by seeing enough of the unpredictable right and meshing that with bland, obvious odds like the one in the OP. Sometimes the market might fluctuate a bit and offer some openings but let's not kid ourselves those are all just flashes in the pan.

[duong]

Originally Posted by Litotes

Bookies getting it right is not the same as bookies telling it like it is. The try to make the book. If they know a large contingent of fans is going to bet on one particular player to win come hell or high water, the odds for this player will drop no matter how unlikely they think he is to win.

And I read how they made their bets, it was far from pure science.

I agree that generally they are quite fair, but it's not science either.

[Wing Man Frank]

Originally Posted by duong

And I read how they made their bets, it was far from pure science.

I agree that generally they are quite fair, but it's not science either.

It's pretty much all science!

[duong]

Originally Posted by Wing Man Frank

It's pretty much all science!

really ? did I read something wrong then ? do you have a source for how they do ?

[Litotes]

Originally Posted by Li Ching Yuen

And when do fans do that? When a player is showing such form that it's pretty predictable that he has the most chances to win a tournament. Remember that a lot of betters are not necessarily blind fanboys, when it comes to money a lot of people harness a surprising amount of objectivity.

All this bottled up in fewer words is: at the end of the day what bookies are laying on the table is the reality as it can be best processed at a moment in time. In rare, rare occasions have I seen bookmakers making gifts and that won't change anytime soon.

When I look at these odds I see the reality of how things might turn out come the end of January, at the time of this post and seeing how a couple of warm-up events rarely do change that I have no reason to not follow that idea.
You can make money out of sports betting by seeing enough of the unpredictable right and meshing that with bland, obvious odds like the one in the OP. Sometimes the market might fluctuate a bit and offer some openings but let's not kid ourselves those are all just flashes in the pan.

More often than you'd think. I've spoken to a professional about this. It's a few years ago now, but the fundamentals haven't changed in any way as far as I can see.

Bookies making gifts don't come into it. A gift would be to have "correct" high odds for a fan favourite, only to see half the field betting on him. Then they'd be cruelly exposed, and bookies hate uncertainty. Ideally for them, they'll be left with the same amount of money whoever wins the tournament.

[Wing Man Frank]

Originally Posted by duong

really ? did I read something wrong then ? do you have a source for how they do ?

For pre-tournament odds specifically? Or betting in general?

This is for the latter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6FAUQ6SFKM

[duong]

Originally Posted by Wing Man Frank

For pre-tournament odds specifically? Or betting in general?

This is for the latter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6FAUQ6SFKM

thanks, I can't watch Youtube here, but I will watch later.

But yes I spoke of pre-tournament odds, all sports are different and you can't use the same methods for all of them.

[Wing Man Frank]

Originally Posted by duong

thanks, I can't watch Youtube here, but I will watch later.

But yes I spoke of pre-tournament odds, all sports are different and you can't use the same methods for all of them.

Of course not, but everything is based on statistics and whatnot.

I'm really not smart enough to explain it but I've spent years listening to those that can and betting is a form of science. By that I mean the way in which everything is broken down to the nth degree, such as checking forecasts for upcoming tournaments etc.

There is practically no guess work involved anymore. With regards to pre-tournament odds there is a wealth of stats out there for people to use to price things up.

[duong]

Originally Posted by Wing Man Frank

Of course not, but everything is based on statistics and whatnot.

I'm really not smart enough to explain it but I've spent years listening to those that can and betting is a form of science. By that I mean the way in which everything is broken down to the nth degree, such as checking forecasts for upcoming tournaments etc.

There is practically no guess work involved anymore. With regards to pre-tournament odds there is a wealth of stats out there for people to use to price things up.

I'm a professional statistician and have worked on economic forecast for several years with some of the most educated people of my country, and I don't think it's any kind of science. There are calculations, sometimes many ones, but the starting hypotheses are much much more important for the results.