Tennis betting odds

Andy Murray

Maiden Slam - 4/9
To win all 4 - 200/1
To finish 2012 Number 1 in the world - 12/1

Roger Federer

To win a slam in 2012 - 11/13
To win all 4 Slams and Olympics - 250/1

Novak Djokovic

To win all 4 Slams - 20/1
To win Golden Slam - 40/1

Rafael Nadal

Not to win a Slam - 9/4
To win all 4 - 33/1 - Ladbrokes offering 66/1!!! Tempting!!

LK's top tip

Donald Young finish 2012 as highest ranked American in the rankings - 28/1

This is worth a £10 punt. Hard to see Fish and Roddick with age against them maintaining a top 20 place. Isner and Harrison don't have enough. I think Young could made headways up the rankings.

That last bet looks interesting, I didn't see Donald Young play this year though so could be hard to decide.

I think the bookies have officially named Murray as their cash cow.

It strikes me how he always get similar quotes to the other top four who are all multi slam holders, and few of them are tipped as possible best ever.

In particular this one:

"To finish 2012 Number 1 in the world - 12/1" looks like the perfect swindle for the neofites. I bet the bookie doesn't warn you that the Djoker is some 6000+ points above.......

As regards to the quote:

"To win all 4 Slams and Olympics - 250/1"

On the contrary they lost a lot of money on Federer: I see why they don't rate him as Djokovic and Nadal.....

I definitely will not be taking Andy Murray at 4/9 to win his maiden slam. These are ridiculously poor odds.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:In particular this one:

"To finish 2012 Number 1 in the world - 12/1" looks like the perfect swindle for the neofites. I bet the bookie doesn't warn you that the Djoker is some 6000+ points above.......

At this point in the season, the gap between Murray and Djokovic is actually completely irrelevant. The person who finishes 2012 as number one in the world is the player that amasses the most points during the year. So essentially, when it comes to that bet, all players start off completely even.

12/1 seems pretty fair to me.

Also, you say that the odds for Murray are similar to the others. How is 200/1 to win all 4 similar to 20/1 for Djokovic and 33/1 for Nadal?

The Donald Young bet looks tempting indeed BITF. I think what makes it tempting is that we could see Fish finish outside the top 10. Roddick is on the decline, which is a shame to see. Young out in some good performances at the US Open.

The current rankings for the US Players

Mardy Fish - 8
Andy Roddick - 14
John Isner - 18
Donald Young - 39
James Blake - 59
Ryan Sweeting - 72
Ryan Harrison - 79
Sam Querrey - 93

A very tempting bet indeed

I think Nadal at 66/1 for all 4 is generous. If he succeeds at Melbourne, he would have a great chance. A month off. Be fresh for the Clay. Would have a very good chance.

djlovesyou wrote:

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:In particular this one:

"To finish 2012 Number 1 in the world - 12/1" looks like the perfect swindle for the neofites. I bet the bookie doesn't warn you that the Djoker is some 6000+ points above.......

At this point in the season, the gap between Murray and Djokovic is actually completely irrelevant. The person who finishes 2012 as number one in the world is the player that amasses the most points during the year. So essentially, when it comes to that bet, all players start off completely even.

12/1 seems pretty fair to me.

Also, you say that the odds for Murray are similar to the others. How is 200/1 to win all 4 similar to 20/1 for Djokovic and 33/1 for Nadal?

Djlovesyou odds to be new to tennis: 1/50.

Ha ha! Why is Nadal the only player with odds given NOT to win a slam?

hawkeye wrote:Ha ha! Why is Nadal the only player with odds given NOT to win a slam?

Because at 9/4 I think it is rather generous of bookies.

Murray was 4/9 not to win one.

So if I was a betting man, who would be the best in respects of a return on your money?

Which part of my post do you feel shows my lack of understanding of the sport Jeremy?

Calder106 wrote:I definitely will not be taking Andy Murray at 4/9 to win his maiden slam. These are ridiculously poor odds.

I'm assuming these are local odds to the UK. You might get slightly better odds in Spain. You need to consider the potential "hit" by the bookies if Murray does win a slam (at least the UK bookies). I think there will be a lot of (hopeful) expectation from many (especially in the UK) that Murray will have a breakthrough this year.

The only odds I could see for Murray winning a slam were 12/5 against. He was about 1-2 not to win one this year, so I can only presume that the 4/9 to win one is wrong.

djlovesyou wrote:The only odds I could see for Murray winning a slam were 12/5 against. He was about 1-2 not to win one this year, so I can only presume that the 4/9 to win one is wrong.

You're right the 4/9 is for Murray to win NO slam single titles for 2012. A two to one bet for Murray to win a single slam seems fairer.

That makes more sense. Still don't think I'll take a punt on it though.

djlovesyou wrote:So essentially, when it comes to that bet, all players start off completely even.

This bit isn't true. Do you really think that a player who starts the season with say 15,000 points is in the same position of a player who starts from 0??

The difference between a player with 15000 and a player with 0 is that the player with 0 won't get direct acceptance into big enough events to gain enough points.

Between Murray and Djokovic there is no difference because both players can play in every event due to their ranking.

Djokovic is obviously in a stronger position to finish the year as number one because he's essentially the better player, but he carries no point advantage in terms of who becomes year end number one at this point in the season.

So if Murray won the Australian Open, he would have an advantage over Djokovic in the race for year end No 1 even if he was still below him in the rankings.

Dj loves you is correct here.

Also, I assume 4/9 is the odds for Murray to win a slam in his career/by 2015/by 2020/ by the age of 30/by the age of 35 or something like that.

In which case it would be more in line what you might expect.

I tend to go for the more exotic bets. For example, the odds are 5,000 to 1 for Nadal to be run over by a truck driven by Federer.

Henman Bill wrote:Dj loves you is correct here.

Also, I assume 4/9 is the odds for Murray to win a slam in his career/by 2015/by 2020/ by the age of 30/by the age of 35 or something like that.

In which case it would be more in line what you might expect.

I disagree. You believe DJ is correct because you are thinking about a specific player: Murray and a specific position N.4. What would it be if ,say ,Murray in the first half of the season will drop to N.6 or 7. He will find himself clearly disadvantaged having to play stronger players earlier. On the contrary if, like is the case of Djokovic, a player starts the season with a consistent margin of safety at the top he is in a relatively favourable position.

I mean the bit which isn't right is the following:

DJ wrote
"So essentially, when it comes to that bet, all players start off completely even".

You insulted me for something as trivial as that?

If I'd have said 'more or less even' would that have made it better?

I see your point, but I don't think that in terms of finishing as year end number 1 it makes as much difference as you would think given that the person who finishes top is generally the best player over the course of the season. So therefore it shouldn't matter where he plays the better players.

djlovesyou wrote:You insulted me for something as trivial as that?

If I'd have said 'more or less even' would that have made it better?

I see your point, but I don't think that in terms of finishing as year end number 1 it makes as much difference as you would think given that the person who finishes top is generally the best player over the course of the season. So therefore it shouldn't matter where he plays the better players.

Apologies if you felt insulted. Odds for JK to mean the insult; nil

Henman Bill wrote:
Also, I assume 4/9 is the odds for Murray to win a slam in his career/by 2015/by 2020/ by the age of 30/by the age of 35 or something like that.

.

I don't know the details of the bet either but your interpretation seems to me highly unlikely. The winner would be paid after a decade of so. What if Murray is still playing at 40

Jeremy Kyle, I see your argument, but you said:
"To finish 2012 Number 1 in the world - 12/1" looks like the perfect swindle for the neofites. I bet the bookie doesn't warn you that the Djoker is some 6000+ points above......."
This immediately gives you the impression that you think he has a ranking cushion and that the current points are more directly relevant to the end 2012 position. If you meant the points to mean that he will be able to retain his higher seeding for longer even if he does badly, you should have explained that better initially.

Bets for players to do something by the end of their careers definately do exist although sometimes you have to request them. Strictly speaking they are usually stated as "by 2020" or "by the age of 35" so they at least have some clearly defined end point. However these bets typically include 90% or more of the likely period during which the event might occur.

The original article didn't source its odds and is unclear about what was meant by 4/9 but I see my guess was wrong and as stated above in previous comments which I skimmed over before it seems to be the odds for him not to win any slam in 2012. I maanged to find this on Apollo bet.
None 4/9
Exactly 1 15/8
Exactly 2 16/1
Exactly 3 80/1
Four 300/1

Looking on odds checker, I see at the time of writing,
Andy Murray to win a slam in 2012 13/8 Sky Bet, 7/4 William Hill, 127/100 Betfair.
Andy Murray to NOT win a slam in 2012 2/5 William Hill, 43/100 Betfair. (Similar to the 4/9.)

Not Won A Slam By End of 2015 11/10. William Hill is the only thing on Odds checker coming close to a bet on him to not win one in his career and by implication you could probably also get something like 4/6 from the same bookmaker on that he WILL win one by 2015 or you could just take all 4 of their bets, to win one in 2012, to win one in 2013, to win one in 2014, to win one in 2015.

HB,

It was Oddschecker I used and even went on the Ladbrokes, William, Betfair websites to check too.

The Andy Murray odds are just silly either way. I think the only bet that could deliver any odds would be for Murray to finish outside the top 8 in 2012. Some bookmakers haven't even given it odds.