PDA

View Full Version : Why is Nalbandian in the top 10 bookies favorite for every Slam?


dandelion_smiley
01-16-2011, 10:40 AM
I just don't get it. He currently stands at 33/1 just as Berdych and Roddick. Nalbandian is a bigger fav in the bookies eyes than Tsonga, Monfils, Verdasco, Cilic or Wawrinka. Can someone explain it to me why is he so high on the list yet hasn't reached a single Slam quarterfinal in 5 years?

rovex
01-16-2011, 10:46 AM
He is overrated for sure. At the us open vs verdasco he was the heavy favourite but got spanked in the end.

svijk
01-16-2011, 10:48 AM
im with you man....no idea. the guy is alright but nowhere close to winning any tournament for that matter.....just wait till the Nalby lovers start posting

Bryan Swartz
01-16-2011, 10:51 AM
I wouldn't say 'nowhere close to winning any tournament' -- he was just in the final last week against Ferrer.

Having said that -- he's overrated but not by that much. Clearly he's on his way back up the rankings and he's #21 in the world right now.

dandelion_smiley
01-16-2011, 10:55 AM
I wouldn't say 'nowhere close to winning any tournament' -- he was just in the final last week against Ferrer.

Having said that -- he's overrated but not by that much. Clearly he's on his way back up the rankings and he's #21 in the world right now.

But still when was the last time he went deep in a Slam? He reached the semis of the FO in 2006 (that was also his last quarter as of now) which was almost 5 years ago.

I could understand him being one of the favorites in 2006, in 2007 even but haven't the bookies learned by 2008 that it's going nowhere?

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 10:58 AM
Nalbandian is one of the most overrated players of all time. I laugh at how overrated he is. Real odds to winning the tournament now would probably be 500/1 for him. Odds of winning say the U.S Open back at his best many years ago might be 33/1.

aphex
01-16-2011, 11:03 AM
I just don't get it. He currently stands at 33/1 just as Berdych and Roddick. Nalbandian is a bigger fav in the bookies eyes than Tsonga, Monfils, Verdasco, Cilic or Wawrinka. Can someone explain it to me why is he so high on the list yet hasn't reached a single Slam quarterfinal in 5 years?

Because, on a perfect day, he's one of the very few players who has the game to beat Federer and Nadal.

Li Ching Yuen
01-16-2011, 11:07 AM
Because Marin Cilic and Tomas Berdych, Verdasco and Monfils are STRONG contenders, right?

So many tools on this forum.

billnepill
01-16-2011, 11:08 AM
Probably because he has/had the game to beat any opponent on hard, but never fulfilled his potential. He also has history of being the surprise at certain masters tournaments (Madrid and Paris Masters, 2007 where he beat Nadal and Federer soundly)

I agree though that it's ridiculous to put him in top 10 favorites in this situation. Maybe his name and the good rate will lure some people to bet on him.

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 11:26 AM
Because, on a perfect day, he's one of the very few players who has the game to beat Federer and Nadal.

Many players can beat Federer or Nadal in a best 2 out of 3 if they play lights out that day, particularly on their favorite surface (eg- Nalbandian indoors). Baghdatis has even done it. It doesnt mean he is a threat to either in a slam right now. Maybe if there was an indoor slam and he was playing his best ever tennis like late 2007 he would have a shot, but that is far removed from reality.

Bryan Swartz
01-16-2011, 11:29 AM
But still when was the last time he went deep in a Slam?

Same question about every guy you object to him being ranked ahead of in the OP, with the exception of Tsonga. And even in his case, last time he made a semi was two years ago.

At the AO, he's the only one I'd clearly rank ahead of Nalbandian(and only at the AO, as Tsonga does well there typically compared to other slams).

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 11:29 AM
Because Marin Cilic and Tomas Berdych, Verdasco and Monfils are STRONG contenders, right?


Berdych and Monfils should definitely be above Nalbandian right now.

Underhand
01-16-2011, 11:31 AM
Because bookies like donuts, too.

Rhino
01-16-2011, 11:46 AM
I don't know why you all think he's so overrated, I think he's one of the most talented players I've ever watched. And together with the fact that he's not scared of anybody, that is a pretty potent combination.

He's also the only active guy apart from Rog and Rafa that has been in the semifinals of all the slams.

Bud
01-16-2011, 11:48 AM
Nalbandian is one of the most overrated players of all time. I laugh at how overrated he is. Real odds to winning the tournament now would probably be 500/1 for him. Odds of winning say the U.S Open back at his best many years ago might be 33/1.

Agreed. His results just don't justify the hype.

Perhaps it's because he's one of the few players to beat both Nadal and Federer.

Li Ching Yuen
01-16-2011, 11:49 AM
Other than the Top 5 there are no players out there with realistic chances of getting to (or at least) close to a grand slam.

The fact that Monfils is 9th and Nalbandian is 10 or whatever in the oddmaker's books of winning AO means absolute jack.

Any viewer that watches this sport with some sort of sense of judgement can acknowledge that there's a huge gap between the Top4 (and why not, Top5 with Soderling) and the rest of the field.

[Z]engin
01-16-2011, 12:04 PM
Because there's always a chance that he litteraly might eat his opponent.

Max G.
01-16-2011, 12:05 PM
Because the 10th-favorite never wins anyway. Seriously, look at the guys behind him in that - they haven't got a shot either.

Andres
01-16-2011, 12:19 PM
I don't know why you all think he's so overrated, I think he's one of the most talented players I've ever watched. And together with the fact that he's not scared of anybody, that is a pretty potent combination.

He's also the only active guy apart from Rog and Rafa that has been in the semifinals of all the slams.
And Djokovic.

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 12:24 PM
Other than the Top 5 there are no players out there with realistic chances of getting to (or at least) close to a grand slam.

The fact that Monfils is 9th and Nalbandian is 10 or whatever in the oddmaker's books of winning AO means absolute jack.

Any viewer that watches this sport with some sort of sense of judgement can acknowledge that there's a huge gap between the Top4 (and why not, Top5 with Soderling) and the rest of the field.

Berdych reached the finals of Wimbledon last year. I know he is off his game a bit lately but when on his game he can beat anyone on tour right now not named Nadal. If he can get on a hot run again and avoid Nadal and avoid an A-game Federer he can win a slam.

And Roddick certainly has an outside shot of going to a slam final. He was points from winning Wimbledon just a year and half ago.

I know you mentioned Soderling sort of, but he has been to the last 2 French Open finals.

It is simply not true nobody else outside the top 4 has any shot.

Li Ching Yuen
01-16-2011, 12:33 PM
Berdych reached the finals of Wimbledon last year. I know he is off his game a bit lately but when on his game he can beat anyone on tour right now not named Nadal. If he can get on a hot run again and avoid Nadal and avoid an A-game Federer he can win a slam.

And Roddick certainly has an outside shot of going to a slam final. He was points from winning Wimbledon just a year and half ago.

I know you mentioned Soderling sort of, but he has been to the last 2 French Open finals.

It is simply not true nobody else outside the top 4 has any shot.

Roddick can get sets off of Nadal pretty easily if he feels his serve well but I can't see him getting a win in slam match against the Spaniard.

Berdych can't win against Federer in a HC slam. Two years ago when he was playing some lights out tennis against Roger he still got overturned from 2-0 sets at the AO. He won at Wimbledon simply because he's great on grass and for some reason people seem to overlook that.

Soderling can push any of the Top 4 if he's on. I'm thinking of a night match where conditions might suit his game a little bit more. Get that serve clicking and he's gonna be one mighty wall whoever he faces not named Federer.

I forgot about Davydenko who might pull an upset if he gets the chance. He's the kind of player that if he gets victories under his belt he doesn't shy away from going the whole way thru. (ex: Shanghai and WTF)

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 12:38 PM
Roddick can get sets off of Nadal pretty easily if he feels his serve well but I can't see him getting a win in slam match against the Spaniard.

Berdych can't win against Federer in a HC slam. Two years ago when he was playing some lights out tennis against Roger he still got overturned from 2-0 sets at the AO. He won at Wimbledon simply because he's great on grass and for some reason people seem to overlook that.

Soderling can push any of the Top 4 if he's on. I'm thinking of a night match where conditions might suit his game a little bit more. Get that serve clicking and he's gonna be one mighty wall whoever he faces not named Federer.

I forgot about Davydenko who might pull an upset if he gets the chance. He's the kind of player that if he gets victories under his belt he doesn't shy away from going the whole way thru. (ex: Shanghai and WTF)

I dont think Roddick will beat Federer or Nadal in a slam again, but you cant count him out completely from any shot of doing so either if you know what I mean.

Berdych probably wont beat Federer the way Federer is playing right now anywhere, but he definitely has chances to beat him even in a hard court slam in the future. You mentioned the 2009 Australian. If Berdych who wasnt as good a player as he is now was up 2 sets to 0 on Federer and should have beaten him in a hard court slam, in addition to beating him twice last year including at Wimbledon, why wouldnt he have chances to beat him in a hard court slam in the future as Federer gets older. He also beat Federer at the 2004 Olympics, a devastating defeat for the Swiss. So when you combine 2004 Olympics, 2009 Australian Open (though Roger won), and 2010 Wimbledon, I think Berdych is definitely a big match threat to Roger.

I agree about Davydenko too.

Li Ching Yuen
01-16-2011, 12:48 PM
Both Nadal are Federer are much better players than what they were in January of last year.

Murray and Djokovic are in decent form. I can't say that Murray has improved a lot simply because he only shows off his game in the latter stages of the tournaments and Djokovic is Djokovic, he won his slam by playing some lights out tennis and that will be the only way he will win big tournaments from now on, that's his way and who knows maybe he gets hot like he did at last years' USO.

Also Soderling is the guy that has improved a lot, mentally, physically, you name it. And you can see that this guy is driven and wants to get his nose out there with the top players whereas someone like Berdych didn't do the same and simply went AWOL in the last part of the season, resting on his laurels and just losing direction altogether.


The way I see it, this slam has Nadal-Federer written all over it in the final. There's just no other way. These guys have went another level compared to the others. But we'll wait and see, if there's one slam that guarantees surprises it's this one.

jamesblakefan#1
01-16-2011, 12:53 PM
Same question about every guy you object to him being ranked ahead of in the OP, with the exception of Tsonga. And even in his case, last time he made a semi was two years ago.

At the AO, he's the only one I'd clearly rank ahead of Nalbandian(and only at the AO, as Tsonga does well there typically compared to other slams).

Well Cilic was in the SF last year, as was Tsonga, Verdasco 2 years ago, Wawa just in USO QF. I'm not particularly a fan of any of those guys but they all have done more recently in majors than Nalbandian.

NadalAgassi
01-16-2011, 12:54 PM
I was surprised with Berdych's play in the Wimbledon final. I expected Nadal to win but I expected Berdych to play alot better. It was like he was either just satisfied to be in the final or didnt ever really believe he could win. Nadal didnt even play that well for him and still won easily.

Since then Berdych has flaked out. The first half of last year looked like the new Berdych but suddenly it looks like it was just a phase and he is reverting back to an underachieving top 30 player. Hopefully he will get it together soon otherwise he will be out of the top 10 this spring.

fps
01-16-2011, 01:33 PM
Nalbandian's odds are set at a level that reinforces the myth that he might win a slam and therefore ironically the lower odds make him more attractive to bet on. He has had some great results that have lived long in the memory of some people who thus greatly inflate his ability, at this point, to win a slam, so seeing his name on the favourites board brings out an urge to bet on him.

BreakPoint
01-16-2011, 02:53 PM
Nalbandian is so highly rated and always has good odds with the bookies because he's one of the few guys on tour that has the ability to spank both Federer and Nadal.

dandelion_smiley
01-16-2011, 02:59 PM
I dont think Roddick will beat Federer or Nadal in a slam again, but you cant count him out completely from any shot of doing so either if you know what I mean.

Berdych probably wont beat Federer the way Federer is playing right now anywhere, but he definitely has chances to beat him even in a hard court slam in the future. You mentioned the 2009 Australian. If Berdych who wasnt as good a player as he is now was up 2 sets to 0 on Federer and should have beaten him in a hard court slam, in addition to beating him twice last year including at Wimbledon, why wouldnt he have chances to beat him in a hard court slam in the future as Federer gets older. He also beat Federer at the 2004 Olympics, a devastating defeat for the Swiss. So when you combine 2004 Olympics, 2009 Australian Open (though Roger won), and 2010 Wimbledon, I think Berdych is definitely a big match threat to Roger.

I agree about Davydenko too.

Berdych is no threat to Federer when Federer is playing well. 2 of his 3 wins over the Swiss came in mid 2010 when Roger was playing crap and Berdych himself was at his best. I bet Federer would've crushed him had they played in the last 3-4 months.

I agree about the 2004 Athens win tho, it's fully legit.

jamesblakefan#1
01-16-2011, 03:01 PM
Nalbandian is so highly rated and always has good odds with the bookies because he's one of the few guys on tour that has the ability to spank both Federer and Nadal.

Hasn't beaten either since 2007 though, that's ages ago in tennis terms. Reminds me of how Safin was always rated so highly in slams in the latter part of his career, even though it was obvious he was never going to do what so many predicted he could.

BreakPoint
01-16-2011, 03:10 PM
Hasn't beaten either since 2007 though, that's ages ago in tennis terms. Reminds me of how Safin was always rated so highly in slams in the latter part of his career, even though it was obvious he was never going to do what so many predicted he could.
Yeah, but how many other players have EVER beaten both Federer and Nadal badly at the same event?

AndyArodRoddick
01-16-2011, 03:16 PM
Yeah, but how many other players have EVER beaten both Federer and Nadal badly at the same event?

Thats not the point. The point is that it was ages ago and thats what counts.

Nalby is overrated for sure. Got spanked by Ferrer who didnt seem to be that impressive in Aukland IMHO. Should be 75/1 imo.

Expecting Hewitt to beat Nalby cause of the fitness and Rod Laver arena.

BreakPoint
01-16-2011, 06:58 PM
Thats not the point. The point is that it was ages ago and thats what counts.

Nalby is overrated for sure. Got spanked by Ferrer who didnt seem to be that impressive in Aukland IMHO. Should be 75/1 imo.

Expecting Hewitt to beat Nalby cause of the fitness and Rod Laver arena.
That IS the point! Nalbandian has done it before so he knows that he can do it. Confidence is everything in tennis. Most guys lose to Federer or Nadal BEFORE they even step out on the court.

Fed Kennedy
01-16-2011, 07:09 PM
nalby is a god of fitness and fed/nad destruction