US Open Tennis 2015
Nothing like getting out of the zone: -
ESPN crosses a line at U.S. Open with mid-match tennis player interviews
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-us- ... olumn.html
ESPN crosses a line at U.S. Open with mid-match tennis player interviews
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-us- ... olumn.html
Coco goes nuts after she loses the first set and smashes her racket.
http://hollywoodlife.com/2015/09/02/coc ... ideo-2015/
http://hollywoodlife.com/2015/09/02/coc ... ideo-2015/
I'm hoping that the knowledgeable amongst you can tell me if I'm barking up the wrong tree here.
I was watching Kovinic v Schmiedlova. At the start of the 3rd set Schiemdlova was trading at 1.55 a 64.5% chance of winning the match.
The stats on Tennis Insight show Schmiedlova in deciding sets over the last 10 games was,
All surfaces > 8-2, 80% or 1.25,
Hardcourt > 6-4, 60% or 1.66.
Adding the player SP filter to 1.20 to 1.499 and I got the following
All Surfaces > 9-1, 90% or 1.11
Hardcourt > 5-0, 100% or 1.00
I was left asking myself which is most appropriate to use, maybe none of them, maybe I should be applying further filters, should it be over a larger sample size? I wanted to avoid results spread over too long a period of time on the basis that Schmiedlova is a young upcoming player with results getting better and better match by match and this may skew the results.
My gut feel was that because of her recent run of form the last 10 games across all surfaces would be the best yard stick and therefore there would be value in backing Schmiedlova at the start of the 3rd set.
Thoughts?
I was watching Kovinic v Schmiedlova. At the start of the 3rd set Schiemdlova was trading at 1.55 a 64.5% chance of winning the match.
The stats on Tennis Insight show Schmiedlova in deciding sets over the last 10 games was,
All surfaces > 8-2, 80% or 1.25,
Hardcourt > 6-4, 60% or 1.66.
Adding the player SP filter to 1.20 to 1.499 and I got the following
All Surfaces > 9-1, 90% or 1.11
Hardcourt > 5-0, 100% or 1.00
I was left asking myself which is most appropriate to use, maybe none of them, maybe I should be applying further filters, should it be over a larger sample size? I wanted to avoid results spread over too long a period of time on the basis that Schmiedlova is a young upcoming player with results getting better and better match by match and this may skew the results.
My gut feel was that because of her recent run of form the last 10 games across all surfaces would be the best yard stick and therefore there would be value in backing Schmiedlova at the start of the 3rd set.
Thoughts?