Skip to main content

US Open Round 1

Had written this for a client but it wasn't used for some reason...


In Round 1 matches, the Aussie focus will be on Bernard Tomic against qualifier Michael Yani, and wildcard Marinko Matosevic opposing Juan Ignacio Chela again, in a repeat of their Wimbledon R1 clash. Tomic actually trails 1-2 on the h2h, losing both on clay, while his success came in Wimbledon qualifying on the grass. Yani is no slouch, he grinds his way through the challenger circuit with occasional ventures to the higher grade. If Tomic brings his big stage attitude onto court he'll be fine, but I foresee a longer than necessary match. Lay Tomic 3-0 at around 2.6.

The latest young American hope, Ryan Harrison, opens proceedings in Louis Armstrong Stadium against Marin Cilic. This will be an out-and-out slugfest. Harrison is the highest-ranked teenager on the tour, and typical of emerging Americans, relies heavily on his serve. Semi-final appearances in Atlanta and LA early in the North American swing boosted his ranking, and he meets a former quarter-finalist whose game is noted mostly for its inconsistency this year. Like any teenager, there has to be doubts over his ability to go five sets, but at around 3.0, a back-to-lay trade is advised.

The top seeds should all have comfortable 3-0 victories (watch that simplistic prediction go pear-shaped!) but the one seed in action on Tuesday I fancy is Mikhail Youzhny. The two-time semi-finalist here faces the enigmatic Latvian, Ernests Gulbis. Gulbis has a huge amount of hype around him, and has for a few years. But when you line up his Grand Slam form, it is simply atrocious - seven straight R1 losses! Youzhny has come out on the wrong side of this result twice, but on the big stage, he is a class above. Can't believe the price - back confidently at 1.8 and above.

Outsiders with a chance:

Stakhovsky 4.7 v Gasquet. The Frenchman has a poor record here and could face a struggle against a player well suited to the faster courts.

Johnson 9.0 vs Bogomolov Jr. I've not heard of this US wildcard before, but I do know one thing - Bogomolov just isn't that good! He should never be 1.11 against anyone.

Darcis 2.4 v Tursunov - the Belgian won this clash just last week in Winston-Salem and is on a strong run of form, mostly in challenger events. Meanwhile Tursunov has lost four of his past five and only broke his run of nine straight R1 Grand Slam losses with a win over Gulbis (seven straight) at Wimbledon!


Switching to the women, Sam Stosur flies the flag for Australia, hoping to at least repeat last year's quarter-final effort, which was a vast improvement on her previously poor record here. She starts her campaign against Sofia Arvidsson who is generally happy to receive the R1 loser's cheque at each Slam. A straight sets victory should be a safe bet.

Adopted Aussie Anastasia Rodionova is favoured against former compatriot Alla Kudryavtseva, but trails 0-3 on the h2h. Rodionova has the better recent form but a trio of three-set losses to today's opponent suggests it is more than just ability which decides these results. Rodionova is a renowned hothead and if a rival can get into her head, that spells trouble. Kudryavtseva worth a bet at around 2.5.

Outsider with a chance:

Barrois 4.0 vs Goerges. The 19th seed is on a horror run since Wimbledon with just two wins in eight. Barrois is capable on her day.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla