# fed will be 3.40 odds against rafa in final

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Halba, May 28, 2010.

1. ### HalbaProfessional

Joined:
Aug 29, 2006
Messages:
1,355
assuming rafa/fed make it and both in good form he will be 3.40 odds

rafa will be around 1.30, lower if he shows spectacular form/

Joined:
Mar 23, 2010
Messages:
2,236
Location:
TN

3. ### slicefoxBanned

Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
Messages:
1,275
Location:
the hood
and... who are these noobs to call out the odds?

Joined:
Apr 3, 2009
Messages:
2,307
Professional odds makers. Just face it, your idol sucks on clay.

5. ### abraxas21Professional

Joined:
Mar 27, 2010
Messages:
1,136
That's not possible. It would generate arbitrage oportunities (winning with no risk at all).

Suppose you bet 100 on Rafa and then bet 100 on Roger. By those odds, you'd win (130-100)=30 if Rafa wins and win (340-100)=240 if Roger wins. You'd win in any case and that's not possible.

That unless i'm interpreting the betting payoffs the wrong way.

6. ### Cup8489Legend

Joined:
Jun 26, 2007
Messages:
9,727
Location:
Silvis, IL

Yeah, Federer's terrible on clay.

Joined:
Sep 29, 2006
Messages:
1,189
Location:
NV, USA
^^ LoL....

8. ### OKUSAHall of Fame

Joined:
Mar 23, 2010
Messages:
2,236
Location:
TN
i'm guessing these are the odds of straight set victories

9. ### StrateonNew User

Joined:
Jan 31, 2008
Messages:
90
I'm not getting you.

If you bet 100 on both, means you spend 200 in total right?

First case scenario, if rafa wins, you spend 200 to gain 130 bucks. So 130-200= -70. Not exactly a profit right?

Second case, if fed wins, you spend 200 to gain 340, so u earn 340-200=140 right?

10. ### OddJackLegend

Joined:
Jan 1, 2009
Messages:
9,889
Location:
South
bookies set the odds based on previous performances. There are other variables that they dont know about, or dont care. e.g. Nadal injuries in last year's FO. Nobody knew he was injured till he lost.
Its the same for this year.

11. ### Ray MercerSemi-Pro

Joined:
Apr 4, 2009
Messages:
793
Federer's the greatest but I wouldn't take him over Nadal in a 5 set match on clay at 5 to 1 odds.

Joined:
Apr 3, 2009
Messages:
2,307
I should reiterate - Federer sucks on clay compared to Nadal.

13. ### sh@deHall of Fame

Joined:
Feb 1, 2009
Messages:
2,979
You mean correct yourself? You never said Fed sucks on clay compared to Nadal, you just said Fed sucks on clay. So you can't have been reiterating anything.

14. ### KingOfTennisProfessional

Joined:
Feb 8, 2007
Messages:
869
Location:
earth
bahahahaha *********. anyone is good on clay if they can reach atleast the quarters consistently

15. ### [osu]ilovecowsRookie

Joined:
Feb 6, 2007
Messages:
170

Apparently you forgot that it actually cost \$200 to bet on both players? How is that so hard to understand?

16. ### zagorTalk Tennis Guru

Joined:
Sep 13, 2007
Messages:
27,284
Location:
Weak era
I guess all those Nadal's RG and clay masters titles don't mean much then given that he beat such a crappy claycourter in the final most of the time? Thank you for opening our eyes to how overrated claycourter Nadal is and how this is such a weak claycourt era to have guy who sucks on clay reach 4finals in a row and win a title.

17. ### angiebabySemi-Pro

Joined:
Feb 27, 2010
Messages:
709

Wait, you didn't know that already?

:twisted:

In all seriousness, Fed isn't a bad clay courter by any stretch of the imagination. He's just not as good as Rafa. But is anybody really?

18. ### zagorTalk Tennis Guru

Joined:
Sep 13, 2007
Messages:
27,284
Location:
Weak era
Of course Nadal is a much better claycourter than Fed but Fed is still a pretty damn good one.Saying that a guy who has FO title,reached 4 FO finals in a row and has 5 masters on clay "sucks" on that surface is completely clueless.