Roland Garros - Day 11

First topic message reminder :

Here we are. Getting ever near to the end. Today should be treat. Will have to go somewhere to eclipse yesterday's play.

Rafael Nadal v Nicolas Almgaro

Andy Murray v David Ferrer

Maria Sharapova v Kaia Kanepi

Yaroslava Shvedova v Petra Kvitova

Where's your money on?

Nadal in 3
Murray in 4
Sharapova in 3
Kvitova in 2

I think MFC the battle will be won on the CCFH's today. Almagro hits a very high but flat FH and I think if he can avoid the net, he could find joy.

bogbrush wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Hawky,

You can actually be a good poster when your not trying so hard to be a complete twirp trying to prove things which quite frankily are unfounded.

Gasquet is pathetic. You lose a point because the opponent played the better shot and use that as an excuse to lose is pathetic.

The win at all costs mentality does not come into it when an opponent is folding because of losing a point.

To be fair to Gasquet, the text I saw didn't use any excuse but rather simply admitted that Murray hitting the lines on key points dispirited him. I don't see that as pathetic, just honest.

Still pathetic in my eyes. He made a thing on 1 point.

Play hard or go home. No point just saying oh the guy hit the lines. Gasquet went from moving like ship at the bottom on Space Invaders to a flat footed elephant on a balance beam.

Poor form in my eyes.

One has to admire the way Murray has come through adversary, where it seemed he would certainly have to concede his second round match after the first few games, to reach the quarter finals of another slam tournament.

If he is able to reach the semi-finals (which he certainly has the talent to achieve) his reward will be a meeting with an in-form Rafael Nadal. Meeting anyone of the top three players in a grand slam semi-final (or final), provides a learning opportunity (if not a win), to test and develop playing strategies, shots and mental resolve.

A fairly straight forward victory for the Mallorcan with potentially one tight set...

Murray - Ferrer can go all the way to five sets. If it goes to five Murray wins. Else, four set victory to Ferrer.

Hmmm...

For me I don't think Sharapova or Kvitova are guaranteed winners in their respective matches> I think Kanepi has a great chance and Shvedova showed much potential in her last match imo, so i think they could both be 3 sets matches. Obviously the favourites are the favourites, but there seems to be no real form book to tie yourself to in the womens.

As for Murray. I have to say i think Ferrer will get him in 4 sets, as he just seems too good on this surface and Murrays weapons, just rendered slightly weak. That said Murrays last match he made me remember just how capable the guy is, so i would be very pleased to be wrong on this one.

Nadal and Almagro, OK anyone would be crazy to go for anything else other than a Nadal win. However we saw how much clay the ball was picking up yesterday in the grim conditions and although its warmer today, the conditions still look damp, particularly later on. We know how these heavy conditions stop Nadal getting as much topspin on his shots and reduce the balls bounce height, in turn allowing opponents to hit in a more comfortable strike zone. I think Almagro has a good chance to nick a set and be competitive throughout here, as he is able to inject a lot of pace into his shots. Also in one of Nadal's most dominant years at the FO in 2010 Almagro gave Nadal his tightest match of the tournament in relatively similar conditions (22 degrees C, high humidity, drop of rain). Personally i am not expecting Nadal to look bulletproof today.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I did see a 95 one on ebay which had me tempted.

I agree it felt a lot easier on the arm. You can get heavier Babolat's, but it does tend to hamper the spin you can generate.

I use the RPM Blast, I used the Hurriance strings for ages! Took me a while to be sold on the RPM Blast.

Cool, sorry for the delay in replying...work and all that...
Yes they say the 95 has the feel of the original 85 6.0, and of course Federer's 90. Worth a look at. Many pros who test a whole range of racquets use the Prostaffs as a kind of control in experimentation. Many of them then end up switching to the Prostaffs! Which then get a paint-job to look like the newest Wilson BLX, K-Six, or whatever. Its a great racquet with immense feel, but you do need to have fast swing indexes to get the most from them.
Yeah I tried RPM Blast but a little too much spin for me...I use Luxilon Alu-Power. The combo of gut/poly from Babolat is nice. The thing to do these days is drop the tension with these new poly strings...the pros arent using around 60lbs anymore, most are dropping down below 50...maybe around 48 to get the power as well as the spin. Its much better on the arm too. I'd recommend anyone to give lower tension a try, especially if you suffer arm issues.
Agree there are some heavier Babolats but they're not really "Babolat" to me...Babolats are all about being lightweight and rapid swing speed. The Tsonga racquet is quite a nice one. Nadal's feels like a feather to me...lord knows how he gets any power out of it...can you imagine Nadal with a Prostaff!!!

lydian wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I did see a 95 one on ebay which had me tempted.

I agree it felt a lot easier on the arm. You can get heavier Babolat's, but it does tend to hamper the spin you can generate.

I use the RPM Blast, I used the Hurriance strings for ages! Took me a while to be sold on the RPM Blast.

Cool, sorry for the delay in replying...work and all that...
Yes they say the 95 has the feel of the original 85 6.0, and of course Federer's 90. Worth a look at. Many pros who test a whole range of racquets use the Prostaffs as a kind of control in experimentation. Many of them then end up switching to the Prostaffs! Which then get a paint-job to look like the newest Wilson BLX, K-Six, or whatever. Its a great racquet with immense feel, but you do need to have fast swing indexes to get the most from them.
Yeah I tried RPM Blast but a little too much spin for me...I use Luxilon Alu-Power. The combo of gut/poly from Babolat is nice. The thing to do these days is drop the tension with these new poly strings...the pros arent using around 60lbs anymore, most are dropping down below 50...maybe around 48 to get the power as well as the spin. Its much better on the arm too. I'd recommend anyone to give lower tension a try, especially if you suffer arm issues.
Agree there are some heavier Babolats but they're not really "Babolat" to me...Babolats are all about being lightweight and rapid swing speed. The Tsonga racquet is quite a nice one. Nadal's feels like a feather to me...lord knows how he gets any power out of it...can you imagine Nadal with a Prostaff!!!

Nadal and Prostaff would be an intriguing mix. I think the desgin is less refined and I think it would un-settle him because of the thickness of the racquet.

I know the county players at my club go for 50-52 lbs tension now on most of their racquets.

The Babolat is a very secure racquet because the control of it offers so much 'reassured' confidence.

I remember using me Dunlop Max 200 at school and that was a beast of a racquet.

I think the adult versions weighed 375G :Shocked:

Dunlop Max 200. My weapon of choice. Back in the day when strings were just things you put inside the racquet, there were good and ordinary but it wasnt the World.
If I could make one change to the rules of tennis (a la F1) I'd limit strings to natural gut. Make natural the definition and let them work within that. String warfare now is just like unfettered F1 technology, and that almost killed it.

Indeed BB.

Kevlar strings for me is a step too far in evolution if you could call it that. Dunlop used to make amazing racquets and now eclipsed by the more 'control' racquets on the market.

Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

I agree eman .. consistency is his biggest problem.. self-belief is the other.
He says he is now feeling much happier both on and off court.. he has now made efforts to bring his family closer to him and that helps him mentally.I think that has definitely been apparent during this tournament.
(A local boy for me .. lives about 17 miles away so I love to see him win. BUT NOT TODAY lol )

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

Nadal in 3. I can't believe the talking up of El Mugro I'm reading on here, the guy has nothing between the ears despite having a nice game.

Ferrer in 3 or 4, he's like a rock right now.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Yeah I used to play with the old green/black 200 as well, a nice racquet...similarish feel to those original Prince racquets with the joining bar in the throat.

Kevlar is one thing...the newer poly strings even a step further.
Many players still use gut but combine it with a poly string such as Luxilon Big Banger for durability and spin.
Federer uses the combo of gut/Luxilon strings. He's down around 46lbs tension.
Nadal uses RPM blast around 55lbs.
Djokovic uses similar to Federer but around 55lbs.
Murray uses Luxilon/Babolat synthetic gut...around 62lbs
Tsonga same as Murray..but lower tension
Raonic uses pure Luxilon and 42 lbs....hence the power!!!

To be honest, I dont think you would see as massive a difference as you think if you took the non-gut component away. These guys have such racquet head speed and spin-whip now vs say 15 years ago that the ball is going to fly come what may...and they play with lower tensions to get even more power. Bigger racquets are part of the key too...guys like Ferrer playing with 100inch racuqets...bigger sweet spots,

BB

Nadal in 3. I can't believe the talking up of El Mugro I'm reading on here, the guy has nothing between the ears despite having a nice game.
------------------
Aww come on BB thats a bit harsh .. you dont get to quarter finals not conceding a set because you have nothing between your ears... :doh:

I know Agassi played with a 105in racquet head.

Luxilon I found to be a forgiving string.

My old Dunlop from school as gut all the way.

Raonic's tension is just ridiculous. How he manages to control his shots to is the more remarkable

I endorse the Prince racquets for Juniors though.

I bought my nephew the Prince AIRO3 as the Wilson range was predominatly 235-45 weight and the Prince AIRO3 was 220G and it has helped his game massively. Wish I had that in my day

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Its very simple to understand LK. I think he will be competitive throughout the match, however i would be willing to put money on at least one competitive set. Theres obviously difference between what a person believes to be the most probable event and whether the strength of that probability warrants a bet.

E.g

>I thought Man City would hold on to win the Premier League before the final game this year, however i wouldn't have bet on it for a second.

if you want further clarification on this principle i would be willing to give it, but i think you already understood it perfectly before your post above.....

Watching a little of the Sharapova match today. Is it just me or has the women's event been fairly dire at RG this year.
The complete inability to hold serve/see out matches/play the proper tactics seems rife.
What, for example, was Serena doing trying to blaze off winners instead of keeping the points going against an opponent who could hardly walk?
Sharapova was out there for nearly three hours in one of her matches which ought to have been done and dusted hours earlier.
The girls seem either tentative and defensive (Kerber/Wozniaki) or unable to do anything other than blast it.
Having said all that, I like the look of Errani and Kvitova strikes the ball cleanly (and doesn't SHRIEK).

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Its very simple to understand LK. I think he will be competitive throughout the match, however i would be willing to put money on at least one competitive set. Theres obviously difference between what a person believes to be the most probable event and whether the strength of that probability warrants a bet.

E.g

>I thought Man City would hold on to win the Premier League before the final game this year, however i wouldn't have bet on it for a second.

if you want further clarification on this principle i would be willing to give it, but i think you already understood it perfectly before your post above.....

The principle is sit on the fence and spread the bet to put it more bluntly.

to be fair, Sharapova's played remarkably well to make it to the QFs (and probably on today's evidence so far the SFs) without being able to serve

Liam Broady is out of the Juniors

Kyle Edmund however is through

Come on Kvitova. Want a 3-setter so I can make the Murray match when I get in.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Its very simple to understand LK. I think he will be competitive throughout the match, however i would be willing to put money on at least one competitive set. Theres obviously difference between what a person believes to be the most probable event and whether the strength of that probability warrants a bet.

E.g

>I thought Man City would hold on to win the Premier League before the final game this year, however i wouldn't have bet on it for a second.

if you want further clarification on this principle i would be willing to give it, but i think you already understood it perfectly before your post above.....

The principle is sit on the fence and spread the bet to put it more bluntly.

Not really. Its usually called risk balancing, i.e balancing perceived probability with risk. However as you seem to be acknowledging that you understood to some extent, it begs the question why you bothered to reply in the first instance. Feel you are being a bit childish here.

Just so we are clear that i'm not on the fence. I believe overall Almagro is playing well enough to make the sets competitive and this is what i expect we will see. However i would not bet on it, as the risk balance is not good enough due to other events possibly occurring - e.g Almagro becoming overawed by Nadal, Almagro not playing well, Almagro getting injured, Nadal getting injured and retiring, rain delays throwing the momentum of the match etc etc.

Obviously behind any bet you would also have to balance the odds on offer and assess whether they represent lower or greater than your perceived true probability, but this comes after the process above.

Sharapova seems to be doing the opposite of what you're supposed to do by losing her own serve and concentrating on breaking her opponent's. All rather pathetic and hardly a good advert for the women's circuit.
Ah, Maria wins. On her opponent's serve, naturally. Thank goodness. Now we can have some proper tennis.

Sharapova cruizing 2 victory, 6-2 6-3, like a training match.

Was a boring match.

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Its very simple to understand LK. I think he will be competitive throughout the match, however i would be willing to put money on at least one competitive set. Theres obviously difference between what a person believes to be the most probable event and whether the strength of that probability warrants a bet.

E.g

>I thought Man City would hold on to win the Premier League before the final game this year, however i wouldn't have bet on it for a second.

if you want further clarification on this principle i would be willing to give it, but i think you already understood it perfectly before your post above.....

The principle is sit on the fence and spread the bet to put it more bluntly.

Not really. Its usually called risk balancing, i.e balancing perceived probability with risk. However as you seem to be acknowledging that you understood to some extent, it begs the question why you bothered to reply in the first instance. Feel you are being a bit childish here.

Just so we are clear that i'm not on the fence. I believe overall Almagro is playing well enough to make the sets competitive and this is what i expect we will see. However i would not bet on it, as the risk balance is not good enough due to other events possibly occurring - e.g Almagro becoming overawed by Nadal, Almagro not playing well, Almagro getting injured, Nadal getting injured and retiring, rain delays throwing the momentum of the match etc etc.

Obviously behind any bet you would also have to balance the odds on offer and assess whether they represent lower or greater than your perceived true probability, but this comes after the process above.

A tad silly to say 'He will be competitive for a whole match' and then say 'Oh I bet he will make at least one set competitive'

Thats a nice weight LK....my son (who I also coach) plays with a Babolat 25" Junior racquet...they dont want anything too heavy to start with before they're settled onto technique and grips (semi-western of course!).

Gut has a lovely feel, and at club level the difference between all the strings isnt as big - tension is the biggest difference. Yeah Agassi always played with a literally large Head didnt he...I used to use the Agassi Head Radical in the early 90s but I couldnt get on with it for long, gave me arm problems as it was head-heavy. I then went to Prostaff, then Fischer Vacuums and now for past 10 years I play with Volkl C10s with luxilon combos. My wife plays with Prince EX03 racquets but they're again too light for me. Our club endorses Babolats...dont they all now...amazing how far Babolat have come in 15 years since being known really as just a string maker befroehand. Moya has a lot to answer for

Absolutely SFP...I cant abide to watch her though, that interminable screaming and posturing around she does drives me up the wall. What a prima donna. Roll on the men...

Imagine what's it like for the men waiting in the locker room while the flaky women chuck away match winning opportunities.
At least Wimbledon keeps the men and women apart after the second Monday of the championship. Other Slams don't dare do it in case stadiums are empty for women's matches.

It is a great weight lydian. My nephew is a leftie and his technique at swinging for a FH was just dreadful. His confidence sank. When I got him the Prince AIRO3 and his confidence soared. His technique improved dramatically. When he begun swinging much easier on the FH, his movement again improve. He wasn't being so slouchy.

I did try and persevere with a YonexRQ. I felt compelled to try because of how good their badminton racquets were. Again they are similar in vein to the Wilson racquets. Less sterdier though.

My brother used to use a Fischer and then moved over to Babolat!!

They are taking over the world.

It Rafa time expecting straight set victory, with sum crazy 4hand winners.

Bit of a sexism debate going on over on BBC. Over pay.

Just read Almagro held to love. Positive start

Nadal looking a little flat, or not as good as with Monaco.

Early days yet.

Another hold by Almagro. Consensus is that Nadal is not flowing at the moment. 4-4 on Lenglen. Don't mind that ladies. An Isner/Mahut effort is needed so ole LK can get back in time to watch.

Just watching what hopefully will be the end of the Kvitova match. Almost every point won with an error. Quite awful. At last, it's over with Kv winning.

Be a ball bashers delight tomorrow between Sharapova/Kvitova.

Almagro BH is a rocket.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Be a ball bashers delight tomorrow between Sharapova/Kvitova.

Yes, but just how many holds of serves will there be ? Can't remember such a poor standard at a GS.

sirfredperry wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Be a ball bashers delight tomorrow between Sharapova/Kvitova.

Yes, but just how many holds of serves will there be ? Can't remember such a poor standard at a GS.

Well it depends whether they would be more inclined to drop a couple mph off their serves just to get them in. I am hoping it is something that they might consider.

Almagro leads 4-3, he could hang up the boots now and say he put in a solid innings. If he retired now he could at least say he was winning the quarter final when he stopped.

Very under rated player, have yet to see much of him in this French Open but his backhand is some weopon

Almagro is really doing this the hard way.

Plying with very little margin.

If he was a bit more comfortable at the net he could finish off a lot these points much quicker.

not watching it emancipator but with a 5-4 lead, doing it the hard way already seems to be proving more successful than others

perhaps he should stick to the hard way

The fact he is hanging with Nadal is good sign.

LF has been spot on in her predictions.

Here comes the break for Rafa at 5-5

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Tom_____ wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

emancipator wrote:Craig,

you are completely wrong in stating that Almagro has no weapons.

He has plenty; good serve, great BH, and he can crack with the FH too. His problem is consistency. I expect Rafa to become a wall and to just wear him down.

Yes perhaps unfair. He has weapons but not ones to ruffle Nadal in my opinion. Time will tell. Almagro has weapons to hurt and beat 95% of the players on the tennis circuit but Nadal is king at RG and I can't see where he is truly going to hurt Nadal. I hope I am wrong as a highly competitive match would be great to see but I have my doubts.

I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today.

Despite earlier saying he will be competitive throughout the match?

Its very simple to understand LK. I think he will be competitive throughout the match, however i would be willing to put money on at least one competitive set. Theres obviously difference between what a person believes to be the most probable event and whether the strength of that probability warrants a bet.

E.g

>I thought Man City would hold on to win the Premier League before the final game this year, however i wouldn't have bet on it for a second.

if you want further clarification on this principle i would be willing to give it, but i think you already understood it perfectly before your post above.....

The principle is sit on the fence and spread the bet to put it more bluntly.

Not really. Its usually called risk balancing, i.e balancing perceived probability with risk. However as you seem to be acknowledging that you understood to some extent, it begs the question why you bothered to reply in the first instance. Feel you are being a bit childish here.

Just so we are clear that i'm not on the fence. I believe overall Almagro is playing well enough to make the sets competitive and this is what i expect we will see. However i would not bet on it, as the risk balance is not good enough due to other events possibly occurring - e.g Almagro becoming overawed by Nadal, Almagro not playing well, Almagro getting injured, Nadal getting injured and retiring, rain delays throwing the momentum of the match etc etc.

Obviously behind any bet you would also have to balance the odds on offer and assess whether they represent lower or greater than your perceived true probability, but this comes after the process above.

A tad silly to say 'He will be competitive for a whole match' and then say 'Oh I bet he will make at least one set competitive'

A tad sensible actually. Like being predicted and A grade, but betting you will get at least a B. My comments above were:

"I think Almagro has a good chance to nick a set and be competitive throughout here, as he is able to inject a lot of pace into his shots"

"I would be willing to bet we will see at least one highly competitive set from Almagro today."

these are mutually inclusive and hence make complete sense. Its quite possible that Almagro will be competitive throughout and have at least one if not more than one highly competitive set (E.g win one, tiebreak, 7-5 loss)

Given that it was asked who your money was on in the title thread, i think its a bit ridiculous to attempt to niggle away when some one states what they think will happen and then who they would bet on, as so so often these are two separate things - Clearly we are not a forum of gamblers and most people on here have simply posted a view rather than a bet slip. In my case i was specifically stating something i would put money on, rather than using the word 'bet' as a figure of speech.

I maintain that your being a bit childish choosing to pursue me on this one as there's nothing wrong, contradictory or even inflammatory in what i originally said.

Thus far Almagro appears to be being competitive. Wonder if it will last the next few points. It might be better for this people reading this thread if the matches are the sole focus of thread