L28:  Daniel Evans WR 28 defeated Jérémy Chardy (FRA) WR 64 by 6-4 1-6 6-2

*****

L16:  Daniel Evans WR 28 vs (2) Roger Federer (SUI) WR 6 (CH = 1 in February 2004)

The head-to-head is 0-3.  All encounters have been in Grand Slams, starting with Wimbledon in 2016, & finished in straight sets, the closest being the Oz Open in 2019 (6-7(5) 6-7(3) 3-6).

indiana wrote:

---

JonH comes home wrote:

---

TA rate it 84-16 in Federers favour. I think if those are reflected in the odds, it would be worth a value flutter on Dan for those who are inclined. Federer must be vulnerable given his gap of playing, injuries, age etc in the same way Andy is/was.

---

 They're not. Dan is given a much better chance by bet365. He is only 6/4 against with Fed 8/15. I might have been tempted by rather longer odds against but not at 6/4. 

---

 I guess this is as good a place as any to ask: why 6/4 not 3/2?

2.5 is 6/4 in old money.

6/4 means 6 in winnings on a bet of 4 ( or 1.5 in winnings, 2.5 back in total, on a bet of 1 )

2.5 means 2.5 back in total on a bet of 1.

For new money, basically add 1 to the old money fraction. So 2.75 is 7/4 ( 1.44 is 44/100 or 11/25 )

Not sure really why bookies use 6/4 rather than 3/2. No consistent theory when I try to google an explanation. A theory on 100/30 is 10/3 sounds like a time.

Bob in Spain wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

2.5 is 6/4 in old money.

6/4 means 6 in winnings on a bet of 4 ( or 1.5 in winnings, 2.5 back in total, on a bet of 1 )

2.5 means 2.5 back in total on a bet of 1.

For new money, basically add 1 to the old money fraction. So 2.75 is 7/4.

Not sure really why bookies use 6/4 rather than 3/2. No consistent theory when I try to google an explanation. A theory on 100/30 is 10/3 sounds like a time.

---

So does that make Federer "2/1 on" in old money ?

---

 Yes 1.5 is 2/1 on. Slightly more odds on now ie. 1.44 is 25/11 on as I ETA above.