 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Every sport has its dominant force - Australia in cricket, Tiger Woods in golf. In terms of betting, there are numerous examples. But can and will they always win? A 'percentage' punter will subscribe to a strategy of "simply buying money" and back the sporting Goliath to slay David everytime. But remember, Australia lost the Ashes and Woods threw away the US Open last year. Strange things can happen in any event. There's a second school of thought who purposefully avoid backing a favourite because they perceive it as having too little or no value. Are you watching Federer? This 24-year-old Swiss player has emerged as the most accomplished player of his generation and was one win away last year from equalling John McEnroe's 21-year performance record. (McEnroe went 82-3 in 1984, Federer lost December's Masters Cup final in Shanghai to finish on 81-4). He started this year's Australian Open as a prohibitively priced favourite, after another master-class in Qatar last week, although he was recently defeated in the Kooyong Classic. So, if Federer is one of the sporting dominant forces then debating the disadvantages of his entry in the Australian Open could occupy us for the whole two weeks of the upcoming tournament. What about the advantages to betting a field containing a sporting phenomenon? Well, they could lie with the shrewd operator who might see the angle and doesn't just take a random punt on some over-priced underdog in the hope of getting lucky. The key is working the markets and draw pairings to your advantage. Bragging rights with your mates are all well and good: "backed Federer for the US Open, different class, only dropped three sets". But, the guys who backed runner-up Andre Agassi each-way at 33/1 took home five times the amount you did. Who's the clever one now? Tennis, unlike most other sports, gives backers the blueprint with which to work such schemes: a pre-determined draw, which plots the potential course of each player through the event. Wait for the draw, then you can begin your homework to see who the sporting Gods have been kind too, and indeed whose draw looks (on paper anyway) somewhat more fraught. So wait for the draw, study the pairings and, only then, place your bet. And don't be afraid to go each-way or get involved with the place markets. Here, the dominance of Federer may actually work to your advantage. Would Agassi have been 33/1 at Flushing Meadows but for the dominance of the Swiss maestro? 'To be placed' betting in tennis may have its critics. At roughly 1/2 odds for the first two places it can seem frugal, for example, compared to golf's typically 1/4 odds for the first five. But this can be worked around either by betting on each individual quarter of the draw on the exchanges or hedging your bet once your player makes the semis (if you wish). However, one advantage you do lose in the Grand Slams, such as Australia, is down to the size of the draw. A field of 128 requires a player to win five matches before he makes the semis. In most weekly ATP events the field is a mere 32. In a regular ATP if you back a player at 20/1 and he only has to negotiate the first three matches before you're guaranteed a profit with a semi-final hedge. And should he make the semi, or better yet even win the final- you really are in the money! Furthermore, each-way betting provides extra room for manoeuvre. Back Federer to win and he has to win for you to collect, simple as that. Back a decent 20/1 chance each-way and you can be re-evaluating your options once he makes the last four or last eight. Support a player to win one of the three other quarters of the draw - the ones without Federer - and you have your own mini-tournament with a less forbidding favourite. Things can happen too quickly in football, rugby and even cricket and golf for you to remove yourself from the action to take stock. However, in tennis, the matches themselves last for hours and then you have a day in between to study how the draw is shaping up. Applying this approach to Melbourne Park over the coming fortnight should provide you with a decent run for your money on a player available at a fair price. Look first to the opposite half of the draw to Federer, and if no ready option presents itself then to the other quarter within Federer's half. Who knows, you may even be lucky and find somebody takes out the world No.1 along the way. Federer's record in the Australian Open (R3-R3-R4-R4-W-SF) isn't as good as his perceived domination of the sport would have you believe. The Australian Open is notorious for its unpredictability: Andre Agassi has been over-doing his festive preparations (nobody matches the four-time Aussie champion in his off-season fitness regime); Nadal withdrew on Tuesday; and Safin pulled out a day later. So the draw is even more open. Johansson, Korda, Clement and Schuettler have all overturned the formbook in recent years to make the final at big prices (and, in the case of the first two, win it). This year it would be no surprise to see another similarly unfancied name make the Sunday final. The list of potential big priced 'live runners' includes players like Ljubicic, Berdych and Gonzalez. None have made a Slam final yet, but all have produced enough form, on occasion, to suggest that a favourable draw could see them provide each-way, place or quarter backers, with a decent alternative to the 'jolly', Roger. KEY STAT - Number 1 seeds have a poor record in Australia. No top seed has won the men's tournament since Andre Agassi in 2000. |
|
 |
 |