All Forums | Tennis

You think Murray - Verdasco was rigged?

...
Participants:
Search
Views: 3528
Posts: 100
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 22502
Posted: #51
And games are fixed for syndicates to make money, not for McDonald's to get more business from viewership.

Who benefits from higher ratings?  Commercial sponsors.

Well, I guess BP, Mercedes, and McDonald's are guilty of match-fixing now.

This is so damn asinine.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #52
Quote Originally Posted by HeadOverHeart:



You obviously don't understand stress in sports.  Any one with a brain can understand the basketball example.  And you obviously didn't see Verdasco imploding UNDER OBVIOUS STRESS AND PRESSURE.

Yeah, no pressure on Verdasco.  He didn't want to win.  He was happy being up 2-0 as you said.  Good enough for him.  Even if he lost he could say, well, I was up 2-0 and I am happy with that.  I mean, I was a 10-1 underdog and I won two sets, so I am happy with that!  COME ON MAN!

STILL WAITING FOR YOU PROOF OF A FIX. 

Kubot v. Janowicz.  WOW!  Fixed for ratings!  HAHAHA!

Lisicki v. Radwanska!  What a ratings champion!  HAHAHA!

Bartoli v. Flipkens!  Whoa!  The ratings fixers really did it this time!  HAHAHAHA!



So, let's make your next post the proof of the fix.  Can you do it?


Nope, u could argue that it would make tennis more popular in those countries so that its good for them 

Kubot v Janowicz is a good example, makes Tennis more popular in Poland, do you know how crazy they are going over there about Tennis right now? U cant watch a news stream not having some slight of Tennis over it. 

And u cant seem to read, theres not much difference between having flipkens in the semi final vs having a for example bartoli in the semi final or having a cetkovska in the semi final etc, but having Murray in the final vs NOT having him in the final is a huge deal u can probably not imagine how big of a deal we are talking about. We are talking about millions of dollars that may move around if he doesnt make it there, which he obv. will. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #53
Quote Originally Posted by HeadOverHeart:



So why did Verdasco win the first two sets?

That creates too much attention on a possible fix with Murray coming back.



Because everyone expected "this would just be one of many upsets, so now its not really a surprise to us" and then he managed as the only one to come back which nadal and fedex didnt. Now he can say "im better than u Nadal coz i got back, u didnt" "im better than u Federer coz i got back in the game, u didnt". Can u not read when ive said this to u 7 times?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #54
Quote Originally Posted by HeadOverHeart:

And games are fixed for syndicates to make money, not for McDonald's to get more business from viewership.

Who benefits from higher ratings?  Commercial sponsors.

Well, I guess BP, Mercedes, and McDonald's are guilty of match-fixing now.

This is so damn asinine.



Basically every company that has something to do with Tennis benefits from it. So yeah, pretty much all big companies and big role players in the world. 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 22502
Posted: #55
OK, agree to disagree.

So you say Joker wins the Final.

But we both agree it would be better for everyone, fixers and tennis, if Murray won at home.

So why won't he?

Yes, I know you already said he has done enough already, but why not go even further?
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #56
Because he can be more than satisfied with his wimbledon, Djoko cannot be satisfied if he doesnt win. Its good for murray if he grabs a set for Djoko whom have not dropped a set. So to create a win-win situation Djoko will win 3-1 or 3-2. If Murray won, it would be a win-lose situation. But this is going to end up as a win-win. Watch it.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2007
Posts: 22502
Posted: #57
Quote Originally Posted by BostonCelticFTW:

Because he can be more than satisfied with his wimbledon, Djoko cannot be satisfied if he doesnt win. Its good for murray if he grabs a set for Djoko whom have not dropped a set. So to create a win-win situation Djoko will win 3-1 or 3-2. If Murray won, it would be a win-lose situation. But this is going to end up as a win-win. Watch it.


But it's not about who is more satisfied, or who is satisfied period, it's about what is better for ratings, right?
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 5704
Posted: #58
If henman never won wimbledon neither will Murray. Henman should've win Wimbledon 2 or 3 times he's from England, Murray isn't from England. No way Murray ever wins Wimbledonm.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #59


Because he can be more than satisfied with his wimbledon, 

aside from calling fix on a match that clearly wasn't, you show how stupid you are with this comment. 

anything other than winning Wimbledon will be a failure for Murray. 

it doesn't matter whether he won every match in 5 from 0-2 down to the final or whether he didn't drop a set.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2012
Posts: 343
Posted: #60
Damn....this thread was a waste of time
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2010
Posts: 2532
Posted: #61
Quote Originally Posted by SwishSwish1234:

Murray's Wimbledon is a success now? 


The public over here thought he would steam roll Verdasco and to have won it 3-2 was nothing special, If he loses to Janowicz he will be Scottish again.

If he wins it all or loses the final to Djokovic 3-2, Then he can walk away with some pride, Any less and it will be deemed a failure. 

lmao


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #62
Quote Originally Posted by HeadOverHeart:



But it's not about who is more satisfied, or who is satisfied period, it's about what is better for ratings, right?


Maybe i should stop posting since u cant read.

The ratings will not change nomatter what happens, its not like people are all of a sudden buying a ticket to wimbledon because Murray is losing or because Murray is winning, its only a question of who is in the final. 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #63
Quote Originally Posted by aaronh91:



Because he can be more than satisfied with his wimbledon, 

aside from calling fix on a match that clearly wasn't, you show how stupid you are with this comment. 

anything other than winning Wimbledon will be a failure for Murray. 

it doesn't matter whether he won every match in 5 from 0-2 down to the final or whether he didn't drop a set.

Since Murray was at +350 to win the tournament, the implied chance of him winning was around 22%. 

Do you think some1 with 22% chance of winning is dissatisfied if he doesnt? If thats the case, then Janowicz should be pissed if he loses today.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #64
Hey, maybe it's not all about betting odds 

I can explain it in easier terms for you if you find it too difficult to understand why Murray's tournament to date is nothing to be satisfied about..
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #65
Quote Originally Posted by aaronh91:

Hey, maybe it's not all about betting odds 

I can explain it in easier terms for you if you find it too difficult to understand why Murray's tournament to date is nothing to be satisfied about..

Its almost always about odds. 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #66
Yeah, I imagine Murray's looking at the odds.

"Oh, hey the oddsmakers don't have me as favourite, it's okay if I don't lose" 


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #67
Quote Originally Posted by aaronh91:

Yeah, I imagine Murray's looking at the odds.

"Oh, hey the oddsmakers don't have me as favourite, it's okay if I don't lose" 



you think Murray would think this is a disaster of a wimbledon if he doesnt win? 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #68
1. Grass is his best surface
2. He is a Wimbledon finalist in 2012 and then beat the champion in the Olympic Final in straight sets easy, as well as the likely finalist this year in the match before. Getting worse than last year is obviously good enough 
3. He skipped the French Open to heal up and recover fully to play the grass season. This is the one tournament he wants to win more than any other.
4. The pressure in the UK is crazy. For years, it was HOPE that he could win one. After the US Open, he's shown he is capable of it and now there is EXPECTATION that he will win.
5. The draw has opened wide for him to make the final - no Tsonga, Federer, Nadal and he should be happy with making the semi final? 
6. He's made 5 straight semi finals, and as NUMBER 2 SEED he should be making the final minimum

And if you can't see the difference with Janowicz and Murray - EXPECTATIONS - then I don't think I can help you any further
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #69
Quote Originally Posted by aaronh91:

1. Grass is his best surface
2. He is a Wimbledon finalist in 2012 and then beat the champion in the Olympic Final in straight sets easy, as well as the likely finalist this year in the match before. Getting worse than last year is obviously good enough 
3. He skipped the French Open to heal up and recover fully to play the grass season. This is the one tournament he wants to win more than any other.
4. The pressure in the UK is crazy. For years, it was HOPE that he could win one. After the US Open, he's shown he is capable of it and now there is EXPECTATION that he will win.
5. The draw has opened wide for him to make the final - no Tsonga, Federer, Nadal and he should be happy with making the semi final? 
6. He's made 5 straight semi finals, and as NUMBER 2 SEED he should be making the final minimum

And if you can't see the difference with Janowicz and Murray - EXPECTATIONS - then I don't think I can help you any further

aha ure a funny little one, he will probably cry when he loses in the final i guess 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #70
And i will probably be right about Djoko 3-0 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2012
Posts: 1142
Posted: #71
Its over already, 3-0 Djoko :D
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #72
Honestly, why should he be satisfied with his Wimbledon right now?
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #73
The idea that a semi final for Murray is a success 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 5704
Posted: #74
There is no pressure. He's not even from England. It should be either Stakhovsky or darcis in semis along with Verdasco. not Murray or Djokovic.
 
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2010
Posts: 401
Posted: #75
Quote Originally Posted by Moose6836:

There is no pressure.

yeah, you might wanna tell the press here that 
All Forums | Tennis
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gambling
Betting Sites
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
21+
Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER
Help Privacy Terms of Service Cookies Sitemap Forum
Covers is verified safe by:
Evalon Logo Logo GPWA Logo GDPR logo Logo GeoTrust logo Logo PCI DSS logo Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 Genius Sports. All Rights Reserved.
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.