The Art Of Outright Tennis Betting_ Lesson 3 - Seeding

The seeding process for any tennis tournament (World Tour 250 to Grand Slam), is very simple.

The total number of players, which can be 28, 32, 48 or 64, are listed in the order of their world ranking. Seedings are then given in descending order until the desired number of seeds are determined. The No.1 seed is the highest ranking player in the world rankings, followed by No.2, No.3, and so forth.

The usual format is for the No.1 and No.3 seeds to be placed in the top half of the draw, the No.2 and No.4 seeds in the bottom half. The rest of the seeds are then divided equally to create the frame around which the rest is done.

Egp88 apk It's not rocket science, and tournament organizers may make changes from time to time. But it is something that every tennis backer should know - even though many don't!

Blindly accepting these seedings when selecting outright bets can lead to high-risk strategies. They take little, or no, account of current form, surface form nor the rest of the players in the draw (in that a top seed might avoid other seeds until the QF's or SF's but they could still face some tough opponents in the opening rounds).

And the statistics firmly point to the fact that No.1 seeds don't win as many tournaments as you might think.

In the first 20 tournaments of 2010 the ratio of wins/seeds was:- No.1 (4), No.2 (4), No.3 (5), No.4 & No.5 (0), No.6 (1), No.7 (0), No.8 (1) and unseeded (5). This is right. Only 4/20, or 20%, of ATP Tour winners were top seeded. However, interestingly 5/20 (or 25%) were unseeded.

Example: Feliciano Lopez (Johannesburg 2010) WON 8/1
The Spaniard was the third seed in South Africa, and statistically the most successful. His success further supported the argument that not all No.1 seeds are guaranteed to win a tournament. They are not more likely than any other seed to win, according to the numbers.

http://www.ray-banssunglasses.us.org/casino-blackjack/ And so whilst there is sense in believing the No.1 seed is the best player in the draw (as he's the highest in the world rankings) and so the player who is most likely to win, this is a far too simplistic a method upon which to base a whole betting strategy.

In selecting outright bets, seedings should be taken as a mere guideline and nothing more - after all, how many times is the No.1 seed not the market leader. If the bookies don't consider him the most likely winner why should you?