Skip to main content

Wimbledon preview - women

Unfortunately this year I don't have the time to write comprehensive Slam previews anymore so I'll sum this one up pretty quickly - it's all about Serena.

1 - Serena Williams. In incredible form. Since bombing out in R1 of the French Open last year, she has lost just three times - to Kerber (Cincinnati QF), to Stephens (Aus Open QF) and to Azarenka (Doha final). She has won three of the last four Wimbledon finals plus the Olympic gold last year where she dropped just 17 games in six rounds, against opponents which included four former world #1s.

All that considered though, I can't have her at 1/2 (1.50) on Betfair. She just has to be opposed. I can't put a finger on who is going to beat her, but I have to side with her prospective opponents.

If you want a smokey to put some small change on, try Maria Kirilenko. Her record in the Slam isn't so great but it has been improving - a best result of R4 last year beaten by finalist Radwanska 7-5 in the third, and beaten the previous two years by Serena and Clijsters. Last August she reached the semis of the Olympic tournament, losing to Sharapova (and Azarenka in the bronze playoff) after beating former champion Kvitova. She's in Serena's quarter, and faces Robson first off so it won't be easy for her, but at 200 on Betfair, it's worth a gold coin or two.

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