Week 26/27 - Wimbledon women's main draw - grass

philwrig · Hall of fame

RE: Week 26/27 - Wimbledon women's main draw - grass

tony_orient · ATP qualifying

WD40 wrote:
I also have never said any such thing............and just to add to what tony has said she has also never beaten a seed in the first round of Grand Slam (as far as I am aware).

True. I was think of writing this as well be as it is I didn't need to smile

Laura will hopefully take note that the grand slam draws are going against her and make sure it doesn't happen again by getting into top 32. She was agonisingly only 40 points short this time after withdrawals.

blob · All-time great

If Laura can get past Makiri, her draw looks pretty good.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Tough draws, but we've had our fair share of good ones so we were due a bad one:
Laura actually has a shot against Kiri, as the Russian has knee and wrist niggles, and if she plays like I saw her at Eastbourne Robbo has a decent shot.
Hev's probably 50/50, Keys hasn't quite hit her straps yet on grass, but has a big game.
Bally again has a decent shot against Pennetta.
Sadly the remainder will need minor miracles to win.
If we get 2 wins I will be very very happy.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Sorry, Tony Orient, if I was being a bit flippant - not 'everyone' was saying that Laura only played well against the better players, and obviously not you. (But quite a few were, and it seemed a little strange because, as you say, I wasn;t sure that it was borne out by the statistics).

Maria came on the stage quite young but has spent a lot of time (about 7 years) as a top 30 player and only really broke into the top 20 last year. If her knee is still a bit dodgy, Laura certainly has the game that could cause an upset.

NB I rather liked Laura's outburst at Eastbourne - I know the press were rather shocked that she'd used a four letter word but, at least she was riled and I liked the fact that she didn't apologise but was quite curt. A bit of 'attitude' is no bad thing.

tony_orient · ATP qualifying

Short interview with Laura in today's Sport magazine: http://www.sport-magazine.co.uk/features/laura-robson-i-want-be-beating-everyone-4312

Korriban will be pleased to know that shot-selection has been a focus of Laura's recent practice

Peter too · Tennis legend

And maybe rename Murray Mound er Robson Rise?

When I played in the juniors, people were calling it Robson Ridge. But, then again, its not really a ridge. Ill let someone else come up with a better name than me. Im not imaginative enough.

How about "Robson's Redoubt" ?

chavkev · Intermediate Club Player

Robson Green surely?

DavidC · Tennis legend

According to current odds from a (non-GB) bookie Bally is the only one who is a slight favourite. Odds checker has similar figures. I would have expected Heather to have been a slight favourite given Keys hasn't played at Wimbledon other than in juniors.

Elena Baltacha 1.73 Flavia Pennetta 1.90
Heather Watson 2.23 Madison Keys 1.57
Laura Robson 2.80 Maria Kirilenko 1.37
Anne Keothavong 3.36 Garbiñe Muguruza 1.28
Samantha Murray 3.85 Camila Giorgi 1.22
Johanna Konta 5.65 Jelena Jankovic 1.12
Tara Moore 7.50 Kaia Kanepi 1.09

steven · Tennis legend

Summing the % chances those odds imply gives a total of just over 2 wins expected.

That's about what I'd hope for - more than 2 would be fantastic, just 1 win a bit disappointing and 0 wins (about a 1 in 13 chance according to those odds) very disappointing.

Ratty · County player

Goodness, this way of expressing probabilities is bizarre. But what would you expect from people as illogical as gamblers?

Here's a better way of expressing the probability of each player winning, having taken out the bookie's margin:

Baltacha 52%, Pennetta 48%
Watson 41%, Keys 59%
Robson 33%, Kirilenko 67%
Keothavong 28%, Muguruza 72%
Murray 24%, Giorgi 76%
Konta 17%, Jankovic 83%
Moore 12%, Kanepi 88%

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Ratty wrote:
Here's a better way of expressing the probability of each player winning, having taken out the bookie's margin:

Baltacha 52%, Pennetta 48%
Watson 41%, Keys 59%
Robson 33%, Kirilenko 67%
Keothavong 28%, Muguruza 72%
Murray 24%, Giorgi 76%
Konta 17%, Jankovic 83%
Moore 12%, Kanepi 88%

For once, Ratty speaks a language I understand! wink

RBBOT · Futures qualifying

Ratty wrote:

Goodness, this way of expressing probabilities is bizarre. But what would you expect from people as illogical as gamblers?

But it's not intended to be a way of expressing probabilities - it's a way of expressing how much money you stand to win, and in that regard it does a much better job than the UK method - multiply the stake by the odds and that's what you are paid out. Much simpler than multiply by one number, divide by another and add the number you first thought of.

What is bizarre is the American method, where 1/2 is -200, Evens is 100 and 2/1 is 200.

steven · Tennis legend

Stircrazy wrote:
Ratty wrote:
Here's a better way of expressing the probability of each player winning, having taken out the bookie's margin:

Baltacha 52%, Pennetta 48%
Watson 41%, Keys 59%
Robson 33%, Kirilenko 67%
Keothavong 28%, Muguruza 72%
Murray 24%, Giorgi 76%
Konta 17%, Jankovic 83%
Moore 12%, Kanepi 88%
For once, Ratty speaks a language I understand!

... and for once, Ratty and I agree! wink He has used the same method I did to get my "summing the % chances those odds imply gives a total of just over 2 wins expected" above - or at least, I assume he has because his %s match the ones I calculated.

Anyone who knows how odds work could argue that the simple way we have allowed for the bookies margin is a bit dodgy, particularly when one player is a heavy favourite to win, but I think it is good enough. And if it's good enough for Ratty, ... smile

tony_orient · ATP qualifying

Heather and Tara are the two I would give a greater chance than those odds, I reckon Heather is about 50/50 and Tara 1 in 6 so 17%. I'm a shade more pessimistic than the bookies on the others so 2 from 7 about par.