Nishikori wager was terrible - Paire is super talented and has easy top 10 talent. Might even say he is a better player than Nishikori if he can just get his head straight.
Nishikori wager was terrible - Paire is super talented and has easy top 10 talent. Might even say he is a better player than Nishikori if he can just get his head straight.
5-5, +3 units. With the juice, it's probably a minor loss.
Coco is pathetic; all these women with huge back swings are so inconsistent that they can easily lose to anybody. It just amazes me the swings in inconsistency on a day-to-day basis.
Allow me to rant for a bit. Women's tennis is such a joke and I keep getting roped into wagering on it. How anybody believes women deserve equal prize money as the men is beyond me - quality of men's tennis far exceeds women's tennis and men play longer (best out of 5). For the former, the frequent upsets we see in women's tennis does not breed excitement, it breeds inconsistent play and low quality tennis. For the latter, equal work should be equal pay.
5-5, +3 units. With the juice, it's probably a minor loss.
Coco is pathetic; all these women with huge back swings are so inconsistent that they can easily lose to anybody. It just amazes me the swings in inconsistency on a day-to-day basis.
Allow me to rant for a bit. Women's tennis is such a joke and I keep getting roped into wagering on it. How anybody believes women deserve equal prize money as the men is beyond me - quality of men's tennis far exceeds women's tennis and men play longer (best out of 5). For the former, the frequent upsets we see in women's tennis does not breed excitement, it breeds inconsistent play and low quality tennis. For the latter, equal work should be equal pay.
While I agree with your point that women's tennis (beyond the top few ladies) is a complete crapshoot, I don't see how that relates at all to them getting paid the same? Just because they suck and lose serve every time and the quality isn't that pleasing doesn't mean they shouldn't be worth as much? The NFL isn't going to take away part of the Jaguars $$ just because they suck and hand it to the Patriots or Seahawks because they/re fun to watch?
However, I agree with equal work leading to equal pay. They play 2 more sets (have to win one more) than women. Put more much stress and physical exertion into a match than women do because of the longer matches. ONE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND is why tournaments like Wimbledon have a extreme heat policy for women and not men. Pretty sure we both get equally as hot but I'm no doctor. I
While I agree with your point that women's tennis (beyond the top few ladies) is a complete crapshoot, I don't see how that relates at all to them getting paid the same? Just because they suck and lose serve every time and the quality isn't that pleasing doesn't mean they shouldn't be worth as much? The NFL isn't going to take away part of the Jaguars $$ just because they suck and hand it to the Patriots or Seahawks because they/re fun to watch?
However, I agree with equal work leading to equal pay. They play 2 more sets (have to win one more) than women. Put more much stress and physical exertion into a match than women do because of the longer matches. ONE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND is why tournaments like Wimbledon have a extreme heat policy for women and not men. Pretty sure we both get equally as hot but I'm no doctor. I
I think the NFL analogy is inaccurate. Everyone in the NFL is men - some players get paid more than others. The better analogy is WNBA versus NBA. There is no doubt NBA players get paid exponentially more than WNBA players. Why? Because it is a better product and is proven by revenue generated from TV deals and arena attendance- more people pay more money to watch NBA than WNBA.
I don't have any data to prove this but I believe there are more people interested to watch men's tennis than women's tennis and are willing to pay more money. It's difficult to be objective for the Grand Slam tournaments because they all play on the same courts. I'm guessing here on how ticketing works in the US Open but I assume you pay 1 price to watch all the matches on Arthur Ashe stadium which consists of men's and women's tennis. Now, think about it...if all men's tennis was played on Arthur Ashe and all women's tennis was played on Louise Armstrong, do you think people would pay more money to watch the matches on Arthur Ashe or Louise Armstrong? I'm in Asia so I only get 1 channel for US Open and I cringe when it shows women's tennis and much prefer they show men's tennis.
Apple to apple: Serena vs any top 5 player or Djokovic vs any top 5 player. Who would you want to watch? I'd rather watch 2 top 10 men's tennis players duke it out rather than watch Serena vs any player.
Quote Originally Posted by WeWantTebow:
While I agree with your point that women's tennis (beyond the top few ladies) is a complete crapshoot, I don't see how that relates at all to them getting paid the same? Just because they suck and lose serve every time and the quality isn't that pleasing doesn't mean they shouldn't be worth as much? The NFL isn't going to take away part of the Jaguars $$ just because they suck and hand it to the Patriots or Seahawks because they/re fun to watch?
However, I agree with equal work leading to equal pay. They play 2 more sets (have to win one more) than women. Put more much stress and physical exertion into a match than women do because of the longer matches. ONE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND is why tournaments like Wimbledon have a extreme heat policy for women and not men. Pretty sure we both get equally as hot but I'm no doctor. I
I think the NFL analogy is inaccurate. Everyone in the NFL is men - some players get paid more than others. The better analogy is WNBA versus NBA. There is no doubt NBA players get paid exponentially more than WNBA players. Why? Because it is a better product and is proven by revenue generated from TV deals and arena attendance- more people pay more money to watch NBA than WNBA.
I don't have any data to prove this but I believe there are more people interested to watch men's tennis than women's tennis and are willing to pay more money. It's difficult to be objective for the Grand Slam tournaments because they all play on the same courts. I'm guessing here on how ticketing works in the US Open but I assume you pay 1 price to watch all the matches on Arthur Ashe stadium which consists of men's and women's tennis. Now, think about it...if all men's tennis was played on Arthur Ashe and all women's tennis was played on Louise Armstrong, do you think people would pay more money to watch the matches on Arthur Ashe or Louise Armstrong? I'm in Asia so I only get 1 channel for US Open and I cringe when it shows women's tennis and much prefer they show men's tennis.
Apple to apple: Serena vs any top 5 player or Djokovic vs any top 5 player. Who would you want to watch? I'd rather watch 2 top 10 men's tennis players duke it out rather than watch Serena vs any player.
Quote Originally Posted by WeWantTebow:
While I agree with your point that women's tennis (beyond the top few ladies) is a complete crapshoot, I don't see how that relates at all to them getting paid the same? Just because they suck and lose serve every time and the quality isn't that pleasing doesn't mean they shouldn't be worth as much? The NFL isn't going to take away part of the Jaguars $$ just because they suck and hand it to the Patriots or Seahawks because they/re fun to watch?
However, I agree with equal work leading to equal pay. They play 2 more sets (have to win one more) than women. Put more much stress and physical exertion into a match than women do because of the longer matches. ONE THING I DON'T UNDERSTAND is why tournaments like Wimbledon have a extreme heat policy for women and not men. Pretty sure we both get equally as hot but I'm no doctor. I
I lost a ton on that coco/ sands over. With both woman being from the U.S. I just thought it would of been a lot more competitive. The only time I really bet women's tennis is when I find a good spot to take Serena live like when she was down 2 match pts in the 1st set I believe she was -130 to win the 1st set or something
I lost a ton on that coco/ sands over. With both woman being from the U.S. I just thought it would of been a lot more competitive. The only time I really bet women's tennis is when I find a good spot to take Serena live like when she was down 2 match pts in the 1st set I believe she was -130 to win the 1st set or something
I think Federer vs. Murray vs Djokovic vs Nadal are all matches I'd watch. I'll gladly watch Serena dominate anyone as well. Whenever she steps on the court she puts on a show (not to the level of Kyrgios however)...
I think outside the top several places in both men and women rankings it becomes more of a bore. And because of this your point is made. Because I bet on it, I was watching the Pavlyuchenkova and Kontaveit match. It was absolutely terrifying tennis, both players either hitting a perfect shot up the line or a terrible unforced error. No rhythm to the game and just sloppy. This is what MOST of women's tennis is outside the top couple. (hell even Serena has long spells of playing this way).
Whereas I was watching the Haase-Brown first round match and even though these aren't world-beaters by any stretch of the imagination it was just great 5-set tennis. Back and forth play and just an overall fun match. I can't see the women's game getting any different, just girls trying to hit the cover off the ball every time. Serena's first round opponent might have set tennis back 300 years...
I think Federer vs. Murray vs Djokovic vs Nadal are all matches I'd watch. I'll gladly watch Serena dominate anyone as well. Whenever she steps on the court she puts on a show (not to the level of Kyrgios however)...
I think outside the top several places in both men and women rankings it becomes more of a bore. And because of this your point is made. Because I bet on it, I was watching the Pavlyuchenkova and Kontaveit match. It was absolutely terrifying tennis, both players either hitting a perfect shot up the line or a terrible unforced error. No rhythm to the game and just sloppy. This is what MOST of women's tennis is outside the top couple. (hell even Serena has long spells of playing this way).
Whereas I was watching the Haase-Brown first round match and even though these aren't world-beaters by any stretch of the imagination it was just great 5-set tennis. Back and forth play and just an overall fun match. I can't see the women's game getting any different, just girls trying to hit the cover off the ball every time. Serena's first round opponent might have set tennis back 300 years...
Funny thing is that I actually enjoy watching midranked men's tennis players, definitely much more than midranked women's tennis players. I know a lot of people that feel the same way. The quality of tennis is just so much better.
Let's be real. Serena is currently (ever?) the best female tennis player because she has a complete game. But the one thing she has that nobody else can even do decently, is a great serve - 1st and 2nd. I think the 2nd best is probably that German girl, Lisicki. Azarenka is ok. Can't think of anybody else. But don't you find that absolutely pathetic? Nobody else can have their serve become a weapon. How often do we watch top 10 women's tennis players serving and you just know that a double fault is coming or they will just toss that 2nd serve in and get it whacked back. A lot of people will say this unpredictability is what makes women's tennis exciting. I say get that crap out of here...I don't want to watch it unless I'm forced to.
Even after all this ranting, still looking for some quality women's tennis bets. Lol.
Funny thing is that I actually enjoy watching midranked men's tennis players, definitely much more than midranked women's tennis players. I know a lot of people that feel the same way. The quality of tennis is just so much better.
Let's be real. Serena is currently (ever?) the best female tennis player because she has a complete game. But the one thing she has that nobody else can even do decently, is a great serve - 1st and 2nd. I think the 2nd best is probably that German girl, Lisicki. Azarenka is ok. Can't think of anybody else. But don't you find that absolutely pathetic? Nobody else can have their serve become a weapon. How often do we watch top 10 women's tennis players serving and you just know that a double fault is coming or they will just toss that 2nd serve in and get it whacked back. A lot of people will say this unpredictability is what makes women's tennis exciting. I say get that crap out of here...I don't want to watch it unless I'm forced to.
Even after all this ranting, still looking for some quality women's tennis bets. Lol.
Didn't see anything yesterday so didn't force the action. Today, let's go a little aggressive.
Cilic GH -5.5, 9 units. Kukushkin battled for 5 long tiresome sets with Dimitrov and should be fatigued here. Think Cilic take this in 3 sets with 1 set a double break by finishing off points at the net, something that Dimitrov seemed allergic to do.
Paire SH +1.5, 12 units. Paire got game, momentum on his side, and his H2H is great with Robredo.
Chardy SH +1.5, 8 units.
Chardy GH +3.5, 8 units. Chardy is in great form having lost to only Nadal and Djokovic in this hardcourt season. Ferrer is coming back from a long layoff and has had cookie opponents. Could be an upset on the cards.
Lopez SH +1.5, 18 units. Raonic is still struggling with form after a long lay-off and fully expect Lopez to take advantage, especially after beating him in straight sets just a few weeks back. Should be a couple tiebreakers that Lopez takes with Raonic faltering in the big pressure moments.
Nadal GH -5.5, 8 units. Nadal's previous opponent, Schwartzmann, is one hell of a competitor. I believe Fognini doesn't have half the will and determination of Schwartzmann. Should be comfortable straight sets.
Didn't see anything yesterday so didn't force the action. Today, let's go a little aggressive.
Cilic GH -5.5, 9 units. Kukushkin battled for 5 long tiresome sets with Dimitrov and should be fatigued here. Think Cilic take this in 3 sets with 1 set a double break by finishing off points at the net, something that Dimitrov seemed allergic to do.
Paire SH +1.5, 12 units. Paire got game, momentum on his side, and his H2H is great with Robredo.
Chardy SH +1.5, 8 units.
Chardy GH +3.5, 8 units. Chardy is in great form having lost to only Nadal and Djokovic in this hardcourt season. Ferrer is coming back from a long layoff and has had cookie opponents. Could be an upset on the cards.
Lopez SH +1.5, 18 units. Raonic is still struggling with form after a long lay-off and fully expect Lopez to take advantage, especially after beating him in straight sets just a few weeks back. Should be a couple tiebreakers that Lopez takes with Raonic faltering in the big pressure moments.
Nadal GH -5.5, 8 units. Nadal's previous opponent, Schwartzmann, is one hell of a competitor. I believe Fognini doesn't have half the will and determination of Schwartzmann. Should be comfortable straight sets.
Nadal loss was disappointing after being up 2 sets and a break but Fognini was just too good. Although the Cilic cover was just plain lucky in a lopsided 5th set.
Nadal loss was disappointing after being up 2 sets and a break but Fognini was just too good. Although the Cilic cover was just plain lucky in a lopsided 5th set.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.