French/No Electricity Open
- Thread starter BleedDodgerBlue
- Start date
I prefer the WTA to the men, like you, but I like the men's too, as I'm sure you do. I think depth is about equal. I will give kick the men are probably deeper below the first few hundred, but that's just because more men are trying to become pros at it, at least until recent years.
Men's and women's - it's not like there are more than a handful of third-rate tournaments where you can't name the 3-4 who are going to win it before it starts. In men's, if Nadal plays, he almost always wins. If Djok plays, he wins. That's depth? :shrug:
It would be nice if you guys could put what you mean by depth into words. If you mean there is a vast mass of tangled nightcrawlers from, say, 200 to 2000 who are equally good/shitty/likely to win some middle of the night tournament in Timbuktu, then maybe yes. I wouldn't call that depth though. Just watch a few challengers and you can see none of those guys will ever win ATP stuff. They're just minor leaguers. That tour only exists to get the young guys on the way up a training ground. The handful that can become true top 50 elite. If you want to say that some dude ranked 220 or 450 just out of the blue can beat a top 20 or 50 even, that's just ridiculous. It almost never happens. The men's tour has a giant mass of thoroughly mediocre players. If you want to call that depth, great. It does not have depth in the sense that anyone can win at any time.
Even what I said is not really true because if you watch the challengers, the same names win most of their matches over and over.
Just so you know in the above you have about 9 points that are wrong.
You are oh so far off in what you are saying. So far off:facepalm:
She really showed her mental strength at 02 versus Kuzenetsova in third set. Only a handful could have avoided being steamrolled the rest of that set, but she turned it around and won it going away. That's why she is a great champion, although not perhaps the best person.
Kick is confuding the depth with quality. Nobody says WTA players are better than men. It's just kick's saying that 1000 ranked man would beat Serena so depth on ATP is so great LOL.
Well, if Michael Russell wins Wimbledon then I will retract my claims. :142smilie
Kick i like u really. But u have no freaking arguments everytime when u try to prove u r right. Just like the other day when u and bleed were talking about Federer.
Ah ok, that makes sense. Chris Evert said the top woman wouldn't be able to beat any good male college player; I mean, I've always assumed that. I don't compare women to men, they're two very different creatures. I'm just saying within the tours, I see a tiny elite that wins everything and a big mass of also-rans. The interesting ones, and the place I've been able to make some money, are on the rising mass-players moving from 100 to, say, top 20. Muguruza and Nishikori are two good examples in 2013, just as Goerges and Almagro were 2-3 years ago. But really, both tours have pretty clearly established hierarchies that change, but not from week to week.
It has nothing to do with comparing men and women in tennis talent.
Serena and Venus as a doubles team wouldn't even make the NCAA tournament for fucks sake. When I am talking about depth it has zero to do with a male player playing a female player.
The depth in the women's game has always been laughable, it is better now but is still hilariously awful.
Hmm i still don't see any examples. Give some with comparison where ATP is so much better than wra
I only have a passing knowledge of the wta....not really my cup of tea....
There is no depth in women's tennis at the very top...if Serena's in shape and wants to win she does...you can't dispute that.
The same can be said for top 3 in men's for last 5 years and you can ad Murray
Again we are only talking about grand slams and to some extent 1000 series... All the 250s and plenty of the 500s don't mean much to the top players...them losing isn't a shock
Depends on definition of depth. Donald young being 30 in the world last year is pretty brutal..
Sera Errani being number 5 is also pretty bad.
You could also for example use gasquet at number 9....outside the top 8 in men's tennis for now no one has a shot at winning a major. Outside the top 1 in wta no one has a shot of winning if she wants to play.
Both tours are top heavy...I guess in the smaller events a guy like nishikori or Raonic or dimitrov can pull of upsets but not in a major. Mostly because they play best of 5. The longer anyone plays the more skill becomes involved and less luck. I've never understood why the girls can't play best of 5...their sets are much shorter in general..it's not like they would die out there...
Who knows? Looking forward to tomorrow which could be my favorite day ever...I mean the 2 best players (at least in my eyes) ever face off and then Jo willy faces the guy who is probably the best to never win a major(and sadly never will)
Go go Jo willy!!!!!!!!
There is no depth in women's tennis at the very top...if Serena's in shape and wants to win she does...you can't dispute that.
The same can be said for top 3 in men's for last 5 years and you can ad Murray
Again we are only talking about grand slams and to some extent 1000 series... All the 250s and plenty of the 500s don't mean much to the top players...them losing isn't a shock
Depends on definition of depth. Donald young being 30 in the world last year is pretty brutal..
Sera Errani being number 5 is also pretty bad.
You could also for example use gasquet at number 9....outside the top 8 in men's tennis for now no one has a shot at winning a major. Outside the top 1 in wta no one has a shot of winning if she wants to play.
Both tours are top heavy...I guess in the smaller events a guy like nishikori or Raonic or dimitrov can pull of upsets but not in a major. Mostly because they play best of 5. The longer anyone plays the more skill becomes involved and less luck. I've never understood why the girls can't play best of 5...their sets are much shorter in general..it's not like they would die out there...
Who knows? Looking forward to tomorrow which could be my favorite day ever...I mean the 2 best players (at least in my eyes) ever face off and then Jo willy faces the guy who is probably the best to never win a major(and sadly never will)
Go go Jo willy!!!!!!!!
- Dec 31, 2006
- 2,937
- 12
- 0
And Nadal line is down to -155, djok +135.
Djok has never won at the French and he has dedicated this to his old coach that passed away about a week ago.
Nadal trying to get to #1 and cement his brilliant return from injury.
Going to be good stuff, I think this goes over 41-42 games, 4 sets is hardly out of the question here and that will be all it takes with some 7-5, 7-6 almost a guarantee. I don't see many 6-3 or less type sets, this ain't no WTA.
Fri.
Nadal/Djokovic O 42 -105
7.35/7
Djok has never won at the French and he has dedicated this to his old coach that passed away about a week ago.
Nadal trying to get to #1 and cement his brilliant return from injury.
Going to be good stuff, I think this goes over 41-42 games, 4 sets is hardly out of the question here and that will be all it takes with some 7-5, 7-6 almost a guarantee. I don't see many 6-3 or less type sets, this ain't no WTA.
Fri.
Nadal/Djokovic O 42 -105
7.35/7
glad jo decided to go 2nd....good for me
sitting on 13 u to win 10 on nadal winning all
sitting on 1 u to win 80 on tsonga winning all
semi #1: have nadal winning it all, so pointless to add on at this point. i do however think he wins. the two best going at it, what more is there to say.
stupid guess nadal in 4.
semi #2: i'm biased. i admit. so anything i say will be disregarded.
stupid guess jo willy in 4.
if joker wins 1st semi, putting 15 units on ferrer to win against tsonga....turns my 80 to 1 into a 60-1 in theory. if nadal wins doing nothing with my tsonga bet. ferrer has an absolute zero chance of beating nadal so will be content with picking up 8 units on futures.......will hedge final if somehow tsonga and nadal play.
g
sitting on 13 u to win 10 on nadal winning all
sitting on 1 u to win 80 on tsonga winning all
semi #1: have nadal winning it all, so pointless to add on at this point. i do however think he wins. the two best going at it, what more is there to say.
stupid guess nadal in 4.
semi #2: i'm biased. i admit. so anything i say will be disregarded.
stupid guess jo willy in 4.
if joker wins 1st semi, putting 15 units on ferrer to win against tsonga....turns my 80 to 1 into a 60-1 in theory. if nadal wins doing nothing with my tsonga bet. ferrer has an absolute zero chance of beating nadal so will be content with picking up 8 units on futures.......will hedge final if somehow tsonga and nadal play.
g
- May 3, 2007
- 1,281
- 4
- 0
12 hours and counting....do you believe
jo mo fo willy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and for my hippo friend
jo mo fo willy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and for my hippo friend
money trending in for tsonga and joker.....
it would take a lot, but that's a more winnable match for tsonga than nadal.....although neither probably are..but he does have a better shot than ferrer who has none
pinny has ferrer down to -133
and nadal down to -147
hmmmmm..
it would take a lot, but that's a more winnable match for tsonga than nadal.....although neither probably are..but he does have a better shot than ferrer who has none
pinny has ferrer down to -133
and nadal down to -147
hmmmmm..
