US Open Betting Odds

[GameSetAndMath]

It is also time to monitor the USO betting odds. As of today, 20th July
the odds are as follows.

Novak Djokovic 7/4
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

Remember that these are fractional odds; if you bet $100 on Fed and he
wins it, you will be paid back $900 (i.e, you will get your money back and
win $800).

Next in order are Grigor, Milos and Birdman.

Here is the direct link that gives odds for all players from many different betting houses.

I plan to montor this once a week for the next three or four weeks and
more frequently thereafter.

The interesting thing to be noted here is that according to them, Andy
Murray has better chances of winning USO than Federer.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The odds above roughly translates to the following percentage chances for the different
players winning.

Novak 36.4%
Rafa 21.7%
Murray 15.4%
Fed 11.1%
Man 6.6%
Field 9.1%

I think this is the highest I had seen for the field in a long while. Usually, after
counting the top 5, only about 1% chance will be left for the field. This means
the betting houses are giving their reluctant nod to the Grigors and Raonics of the
world.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here are the odds of outright winning USO as of today, the 27th July.

Novak Djokovic 13/8
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

The odds for Novak has decreased little bit. But, the odds for other players
have not moved even a bit.

 

[Kieran]

Why would the odds for Novak decrease? he hasn't struck a tennis ball in anger since Wimbledon. It's funny the way these odds fluctuate and shift.

Still amazed that Murray is considered a better bet than Federer. Stan is good odds at 14...

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Why would the odds for Novak decrease? he hasn't struck a tennis ball in anger since Wimbledon. It's funny the way these odds fluctuate and shift.

Still amazed that Murray is considered a better bet than Federer. Stan is good odds at 14...

If they get lots of money in on something, they shorten the odds in order to reduce their losses if they have to pay out.

Murray should not have better odds than Roger after this year.

 

[DarthFed]

Here are the odds of outright winning USO as of today, the 27th July.

Novak Djokovic 13/8
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

The odds for Novak has decreased little bit. But, the odds for other players
have not moved even a bit.

The odds increased actually, meaning they are giving him a better chance to win and a lesser payout. It is all based on bets received thus far and it's not like the odds changed a lot.

I'd say Roger and Rafa are the most profitable bets here. Rafa has made the last 3 finals he has played at New York and Roger can beat anyone at the USO if he comes out blazing. Get him a draw where he avoids the Berd bombs and I think he has a decent chance to do some damage this year. Nole may have gotten over the GS hump but he is not nearly as strong here as he is in AO. His record vs. the other top guys on this surface is putrid and should be worse if Roger knew how to close out a 5th set.

 

[herios]

Here are the odds of outright winning USO as of today, the 27th July.

Novak Djokovic 13/8
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

The odds for Novak has decreased little bit. But, the odds for other players
have not moved even a bit.

The odds increased actually, meaning they are giving him a better chance to win and a lesser payout. It is all based on bets received thus far and it's not like the odds changed a lot.

I'd say Roger and Rafa are the most profitable bets here. Rafa has made the last 3 finals he has played at New York and Roger can beat anyone at the USO if he comes out blazing. Get him a draw where he avoids the Berd bombs and I think he has a decent chance to do some damage this year. Nole may have gotten over the GS hump but he is not nearly as strong here as he is in AO. His record vs. the other top guys on this surface is putrid and should be worse if Roger knew how to close out a 5th set.

Nole is not losing to Roger at the USO at this point. That ship has left the harbour a few years ago.

 

[DarthFed]

Here are the odds of outright winning USO as of today, the 27th July.

Novak Djokovic 13/8
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

The odds for Novak has decreased little bit. But, the odds for other players
have not moved even a bit.

The odds increased actually, meaning they are giving him a better chance to win and a lesser payout. It is all based on bets received thus far and it's not like the odds changed a lot.

I'd say Roger and Rafa are the most profitable bets here. Rafa has made the last 3 finals he has played at New York and Roger can beat anyone at the USO if he comes out blazing. Get him a draw where he avoids the Berd bombs and I think he has a decent chance to do some damage this year. Nole may have gotten over the GS hump but he is not nearly as strong here as he is in AO. His record vs. the other top guys on this surface is putrid and should be worse if Roger knew how to close out a 5th set.

Nole is not losing to Roger at the USO at this point. That ship has left the harbour a few years ago.

We will see. Nole doesn't scare me at USO in the least, it is a match Roger can and should win. One thing is for sure, Roger would have to get it done in 4 or less. Nole only has to win 2 sets and then the match is over because we know Roger isn't winning a 5th. That's his big advantage.

 

[Kieran]

We will see. Nole doesn't scare me at USO in the least, it is a match Roger can and should win.

You're kidding, right? Roger hasn't been in the final since 2009, he's been beaten at increasingly early rounds since then, and he's lost twice against Nole - who's been in every final since 2009.

I think the days when Roger "should" win against Nole at a major have long since sailed, my friend...

 

[britbox]

^ Agreed. It's a match Roger could win rather than should these days.

 

[DarthFed]

We will see. Nole doesn't scare me at USO in the least, it is a match Roger can and should win.

You're kidding, right? Roger hasn't been in the final since 2009, he's been beaten at increasingly early rounds since then, and he's lost twice against Nole - who's been in every final since 2009.

I think the days when Roger "should" win against Nole at a major have long since sailed, my friend...

Roger lost those matches on his own my friend, complete mental midgetry at it's highest level. And that's the reason he hasn't been there since 2009. This isn't 2013 so throw that out the window. And as mentioned before hopefully he avoids Berdych. Roger should beat Nole at Wimbledon and USO, these are fast courts you realize?

Regardless, one of these days Roger is going to show he can still get it done on the big stage.

 

[britbox]

Here are the odds of outright winning USO as of today, the 27th July.

Novak Djokovic 13/8
Rafael Nadal 18/5
Andy Murray 11/2
Roger Federer 8
Stan Wawrinka 14

The odds for Novak has decreased little bit. But, the odds for other players
have not moved even a bit.

The odds increased actually, meaning they are giving him a better chance to win and a lesser payout. It is all based on bets received thus far and it's not like the odds changed a lot.

I'd say Roger and Rafa are the most profitable bets here. Rafa has made the last 3 finals he has played at New York and Roger can beat anyone at the USO if he comes out blazing. Get him a draw where he avoids the Berd bombs and I think he has a decent chance to do some damage this year. Nole may have gotten over the GS hump but he is not nearly as strong here as he is in AO. His record vs. the other top guys on this surface is putrid and should be worse if Roger knew how to close out a 5th set.

Nole is not losing to Roger at the USO at this point. That ship has left the harbour a few years ago.

We will see. Nole doesn't scare me at USO in the least, it is a match Roger can and should win. One thing is for sure, Roger would have to get it done in 4 or less. Nole only has to win 2 sets and then the match is over because we know Roger isn't winning a 5th. That's his big advantage.

Nole doesn't scare you, but Berdych does?

I think Nole would go into a USO match with Fed as 70/30 favourite these days.

 

[DarthFed]

^ Berd would either beat him or at the very least extend him which would hurt his cause in the later rounds.

I'd say closer to 50-50 there. Roger isn't playing much worse than 2010 or 2011 this year and we know how those matches went. Maybe he won't be as charitable.

 

[Kieran]

^ Agreed. It's a match Roger could win rather than should these days.

Exactly. Novak isn't quite in the Rafa category, where Federer more or less prays that something bad happens to Rafa at a slam, but I'd place more money on Nole to beat Federer at any major now, than the other way around. Hell, he served to dispatch him in four at Wimbo, and bottled it.

Roger lost those matches on his own my friend, complete mental midgetry at it's highest level. And that's the reason he hasn't been there since 2009. This isn't 2013 so throw that out the window. And as mentioned before hopefully he avoids Berdych. Roger should beat Nole at Wimbledon and USO, these are fast courts you realize?

Regardless, one of these days Roger is going to show he can still compete with the best.

I would suggest the videos show that Nole won them, through superior play at the critical stages.

It could be that you're right, and Roger shows "he can still compete with the best" at a slam. In fact, he beat Murray in Oz and took Nole to 5 at Wimbledon, so he's no chump, but the days when he "should" win against the top 2, at least, have gone. "Long gone", in the case of Rafa, but also, just "gone" in the matter of Nole.

The "should" is on the other foot now...

 

[DarthFed]

^ Hard not to play superior at the critical stages when your opponent is giving away the match. Did you see a replay of the 2nd match point in 2011? Or the replay where Roger was up 2 sets to 1 in 2010 against a WTA serving Nole and 2 sets to 0 in 2011? Those were debacles, 2 of the worst of Roger's career.

I'm not riding the Cali train but people seem to pay too much attention to age rather than surface. It isn't Oz or RG where Roger would have pretty much no prayer vs. Nole. Wimbledon and USO are much different stories...even with Roger as a shell of himself. He used to be pretty damn great at those venues ya know

 

[Kieran]

He used to be pretty damn great at those venues ya know

Yeah, I know. He used to be...

 

[DarthFed]

And when he dropped down he is now just "close" to the level of the top guys at Wimbledon and USO. He used to be way way better but now it is still a contest, that's my point. Same deal indoors. Hope we see it at New York this year, could be it doesn't materialize...

 

[britbox]

^ Hard not to play superior at the critical stages when your opponent is giving away the match. Did you see a replay of the 2nd match point in 2011? Or the replay where Roger was up 2 sets to 1 in 2010 against a WTA serving Nole and 2 sets to 0 in 2011? Those were debacles, 2 of the worst of Roger's career.

I'm not riding the Cali train but people seem to pay too much attention to age rather than surface. It isn't Oz or RG where Roger would have pretty much no prayer vs. Nole. Wimbledon and USO are much different stories...even with Roger as a shell of himself. He used to be pretty damn great at those venues ya know

You're kind of contradicting yourself a little calling Roger a shell of himself and harking back to times gone by and then refuting that age has anything to do with it.

The problem with Cali's view is that there is no middle ground. Roger has a great match and everyone who thinks he isn't affected by age is a cliched clown.

Erm... Roger is still capable of playing great tennis... but less consistently. Age IS one of the factors. There is middle ground between being the greatest player on the planet and a decrepit old man who can barely compete.

 

[DarthFed]

^ Hard not to play superior at the critical stages when your opponent is giving away the match. Did you see a replay of the 2nd match point in 2011? Or the replay where Roger was up 2 sets to 1 in 2010 against a WTA serving Nole and 2 sets to 0 in 2011? Those were debacles, 2 of the worst of Roger's career.

I'm not riding the Cali train but people seem to pay too much attention to age rather than surface. It isn't Oz or RG where Roger would have pretty much no prayer vs. Nole. Wimbledon and USO are much different stories...even with Roger as a shell of himself. He used to be pretty damn great at those venues ya know

You're kind of contradicting yourself a little calling Roger a shell of himself and harking back to times gone by and then refuting that age has anything to do with it.

The problem with Cali's view is that there is no middle ground. Roger has a great match and everyone who thinks he isn't affected by age is a cliched clown.

Erm... Roger is still capable of playing great tennis... but less consistently. Age IS one of the factors. There is middle ground between being the greatest player on the planet and a decrepit old man who can barely compete.

Cali thinks age isn't a factor at all. He thinks that athletes at 32 are the same as athletes at 25. It is dumbfounding and flat out wrong.

The point I'm getting at is that it is also illogical to look at a match and say Nole is in his prime and Roger is way past his, ergo there is no reason Roger should beat him. This was especially stupid when it came to the Wimbledon final. Most in the know thought Roger was the favorite going into that match. I remember Kieran posting that Roger would likely win and then when he didn't he made it seem like Roger should feel great that he could take Nole to 5 on grass. The reason...surface matters and you have to balance that out with the fact Roger is way past it. How high was his prime level compared to Nole's current level at Wimbledon and USO? IMO we are talking a large difference. So when Roger has fallen down (and he has fallen a lot) he is now at a level still close to where Nole has ascended to.

And of course matchups matter. Nole is the greater player at this point by far and that means regardless of surface he is less likely to be upset. But if it is Roger vs. Nole at USO and Wimbledon it is still close to 50-50.

 

[britbox]

^ Hard not to play superior at the critical stages when your opponent is giving away the match. Did you see a replay of the 2nd match point in 2011? Or the replay where Roger was up 2 sets to 1 in 2010 against a WTA serving Nole and 2 sets to 0 in 2011? Those were debacles, 2 of the worst of Roger's career.

I'm not riding the Cali train but people seem to pay too much attention to age rather than surface. It isn't Oz or RG where Roger would have pretty much no prayer vs. Nole. Wimbledon and USO are much different stories...even with Roger as a shell of himself. He used to be pretty damn great at those venues ya know

You're kind of contradicting yourself a little calling Roger a shell of himself and harking back to times gone by and then refuting that age has anything to do with it.

The problem with Cali's view is that there is no middle ground. Roger has a great match and everyone who thinks he isn't affected by age is a cliched clown.

Erm... Roger is still capable of playing great tennis... but less consistently. Age IS one of the factors. There is middle ground between being the greatest player on the planet and a decrepit old man who can barely compete.

Cali thinks age isn't a factor at all. He thinks that athletes at 32 are the same as athletes at 25. It is dumbfounding and flat out wrong.

The point I'm getting at is that it is also illogical to look at a match and say Nole is in his prime and Roger is way past his, ergo there is no reason Roger should beat him. This was especially stupid when it came to the Wimbledon final. Most in the know thought Roger was the favorite going into that match. The reason...surface matters and you have to balance that out with the fact Roger is way past it. How high was his level compared to Nole's current level at Wimbledon and USO? IMO we are talking a large difference. So when Roger has fallen down (and he has fallen a lot) he is now at a level still close to where Nole has ascended to.

And of course matchups matter. Nole is the greater player at this point by far and that means regardless of surface he is less likely to be upset. But if it is Roger vs. Nole at USO and Wimbledon it is still close to 50-50.

OK, I'm not that far off that page - but I think "should" is "could' and put the odds at something more like 70/30 (in Nole's favour) than 50/50.

I had Roger as a favourite going into that Wimbledon final too... but I think it turned out to be a reminder of the current tennis world order.

Do I think Federer can still win another major? Yes.

Could he do it going via Nadal? No.

Could he do it going via Djoker? Yes, but Djokovic is the favourite.

Could he do it going via Murray? Yes.

Much will depend on who's on the other side of the court. As long as he's still in contention at the business end of a major then he's always got a chance.