USO 2010 Men's odds: Name the Dark Horse

[OddJack]

http://www.thespread.com/sports-bet...dds-to-win-federer-favored-by-oddsmakers.html

Men's 2010 U.S. Open Odds to Win – Aug. 30-Sept. 12 – Flushing Meadows, New York

Roger Federer 9/4

Rafael Nadal 5/2

Andy Murray 7/2

David Nalbandian 10/1

Novak Djokovic 12/1

Tomas Berdych 15/1

Andy Roddick 15/1

Robin Soderling 15/1

Nikolay Davydenko 40/1

Marin Cilic 50/1

Sam Querrey 50/1

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga 60/1

Fernando Verdasco 80/1

Ernests Gulbis 80/1

John Isner 80/1

Richard Gasquet 100/1

Gael Monfils 100/1

Lleyton Hewitt 100/1

Fernando Gonzalez 100/1

http://www.thespread.com/sports-bet...dds-to-win-federer-favored-by-oddsmakers.html

Days you could call Berdych or Sod a dark horse are over. Mardy is too tired, Isner is injured, lubi too old, Gulbis too messy.
I wanna go with sam Q

 

[Bryan Swartz]

I like Querrey but he's too much of a head case. Gulbis has a better shot, as do Hewitt and Gonzo IMO .

 

[tennisdad65]

I would go with one of the big servers.. Isner, Querrey, Fish, Soderling, Berdych

 

[Bothsidesx2hands]

I would call Nalbandian a dark horse, but somehow his odds are better than Roddicks and Djokers??

 

[decades]

verdasco 80-1? same as Gulbis?

 

[veroniquem]

Those odds are extremely weird. I mean Nadal above Murray is slightly surprising but Nalbandian in 4th position, that's insane!! Based on what exactly?
I'm skeptical about Nalby in best of 5. My dark horses would be Berdych, Soderling and Fish.

 

[rovex]

Verdasco is 80/1 yet Cilic is 50/1? lol. Not to mention Tsonga's not even going to be playing so no idea why they included him in there.

 

[TheMusicLover]

When were those odds made? Looks rather peculiar indeed.

 

[darthpwner]

I like Querrey but he's too much of a head case. Gulbis has a better shot, as do Hewitt and Gonzo IMO .

LOL Gulbis having a better shot?

 

[rovex]

I like Querrey but he's too much of a head case. Gulbis has a better shot, as do Hewitt and Gonzo IMO .

Gonzo has a better shot than Querrey? Really? He's been out since god knows how long i haven't seen him play since the french open honestly Gonzo might not even be there.

 

[yellowoctopus]

dimitrov? Kidding. Is he even qualified to participate?

 

[thalivest]

And people wonder why I and others say Nalbanadian is overrated.

 

[Mortifier]

What does exactly qualify as a "dark horse"? None of the three first alternatives I guess? But how bout Djoker and Soderling, who has been seen in slam finals before?

My three picks would actually be:

1. Djokovic - saw glimpses of his old game in both Montreal and Cincy
2. Soderling - QF last year, a good draw and we might see SF or better
3. Davydenko - showed us some good tennis last week and is clearly underrated. Can he stay fit for 5 sets?

-Fish - no thank you, he did "too well" this last week and he will let us all down
-Nalbandian - njet, fitness, and the fact that he got owned by the likes of Murray/Djoker when it really mattered

 

[Destro]

Cilic at 50/1 looks excellent value to me.

 

[veroniquem]

I disagree with Djokovic. He's more a favorite than a dark horse. He's been in the USO final, won AO and made several semis. How could he not be a favorite?

 

[Mortifier]

I disagree with Djokovic. He's more a favorite than a dark horse. He's been in the USO final, won AO and made several semis. How could he not be a favorite?

Well that was what I was wondering, there's no clear distinction between a DH and a favorite. Djoker hasn't made it to a GS final in like the ten last tries which could make him eligable for a DH, just making an argument (playing devil's advocate).

 

[tacou]

where are fishes odds

 

[samjones]

I'd take Marcos at long odds. What's the line?

 

[OddJack]

Well that was what I was wondering, there's no clear distinction between a DH and a favorite. Djoker hasn't made it to a GS final in like the ten last tries which could make him eligable for a DH, just making an argument (playing devil's advocate).

To me a DH is someone who has never been deep in a major, like SF or F, or someone who is clearly passed his prime and not expected to win a major again. So Djoker is not a Dh, Hewitt however could be.

 

[MarcusInKensington]

No point looking outside the top three ranked players for the winner.

Could be a surprise loser in the final, and if I had to choose one it would be Davydenko.

If I had to choose three, they'd be Davydenko, Berdych & Fish.


My hatred of Soderling prevents me from even contemplating the prospect of him getting anywhere near the final.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Cilic at 50/1 looks excellent value to me.

That's where I threw a few down. But that was a few weeks ago - expected him to look a little better at Toronto or Cincy. Since he didn't I don't expect that ticket to be very valuable in 3 weeks.

Odd Jack, you're definition is too restricting. Making one or two SFs shouldn't disqualify someone from being a dark horse - the oddsmakers putting Davy at 40 to 1 proves that.

 

[PSNELKE]

To me Cilic and Sod have some excellent odds..
I´ll definately put some money on both.

 

[mr_eko]

I think Dolgopolov will make a name for himself at this years open by making the second week.

 

[Bryan Swartz]

Gonzo has a better shot than Querrey? Really? He's been out since god knows how long i haven't seen him play since the french open honestly Gonzo might not even be there.

He's playing in New Haven, so I think he'll be there.

Gulbis has been far more consistent lately than Querrey(granted it doesn't take much), and Gonzo would have to get his game back in a hurry but he doesn't need to be anywhere near 100% to be better than Querrey IMO. Sam just falls apart mentally too much, espescially against quality opponents. Best of five sets there's too many chances to do that.

Wimbledon this year is the only exception, and he's done basically nothing since.