I don't bet tennis so....

PatrickMcIrish · Aug 4, 2003

... is this new rule from Pinnacle any big deal? Just noticed this on their site.

We have changed our rules covering match betting in tennis. The new rule takes effect immediately, and reads as follows:

"If a tennis match is not completed due to a player retirement or disqualification, all wagers will be canceled and the monies refunded."

The only thing I thought of it would suck if a guy is one point away from losing and then decided to just quit. Fake an injury or something, LOL. Of course as long as it works both ways it is fair. Just curious is this different from most books or they just getting in line with the others.

Railbird · Aug 4, 2003

McIrish,

Some bookies named Cockney and Micheal at Olympic started to whine like little girls because they lost a couple of bets on defaults in the same week. Better soloution would be to take possible injury matches off the board.

The player that defaults was going to lose anyway 99% of the time, its a pretty stupid rule. Usually players feelings are hurt more than the made up injury. Venus Willimas and Pete Sampras are famous for faking injurys to gain sympathy from a gullible American public.

mjred · Aug 4, 2003

the trend actually started with some of the australian books a couple months ago. there were some very fishy retirements in matches that had unusually large action on the winning side. although there were no outright accusations made i think there was a general feeling that some large bettors had some influence over the players decisions to 'retire'. i think the matches a couple weeks ago that rail is referring to were jsut the straw that broke the camel's back for a lot of books. although i would agree with him that (particularly in the most recent ones) the matches probably should not have been on the board.
olympic and pinnacle are relatively late comers to the rule change. other biggies already did it. i think its really just another example of some iffy management by books who were not paying attention enough to avoid the big losses they took on the questionable matches. in my own experience i'm sure that i have been burned by unexpected retirements much more often than i have gained by fading a guy who i thought might not make it thru due to some injury.

PatrickMcIrish · Aug 4, 2003

Thanks men, very nice input. Just the kind of stuff I like to know about...

Railbird · Aug 4, 2003

I guarantee there is no match fixing, guys were going to def anyway. The defs were occuring in the 2nd set, when you lose the 1st set in tennis your done anyway. Its like losing your Queen in chess, you basically have no chance once you lose the 1st set. These places should cancel boxing wagers when guys throw in the towel, its the same thing.

max1234 · Aug 4, 2003

VG789 · Aug 4, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Railbird:
when you lose the 1st set in tennis your done anyway<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"a girl having two vaginas is very common" was better,but I m enjoying this one also

CHALKMAN · Aug 4, 2003

I do bet tennis and usually all the steam on it overnight is based on injuries or players looking to dump a first round match in smaller tournaments to get out of a mandatory appearance that the ATP makes them do.

I have no doubt that players dump matches faking injuries because you don't see it often during tournaments such as this weeks Masters Series in Montreal and of course in Majors.

It makes sense to me why books would use that rule to protect themselves against the vultures who only play a match that isn't going to be completed more than likely. I would say about 75% of the moves of more than 30 cents overnight get there and a good perc entage of them end on a retirement.

Tennis is really the only one on one sport that gets bet match to match so if a player can't go no one is coming off the bench. Even in golf you still need to make it through 4 rounds usually unless the guy withdraws or misses the cut but if a golfer has an injury they usually drop out before the tournament starts. Tennis players get injured on Monday and have to play again on Wednesday so the word gets out and the line used becomes irrelevant because the participant isn't healthy.

jwunderdog · Aug 4, 2003

CHalkman, Golf it happens all the time. I think this week there were several that quite after playing round one. I don't mind the rule change since I know it in advance ,but I still don't like it, the match has started if you bet on the winner of the match you should be paid and vice-versa. I understand why they are doing it but they should just include the possiblity of default when they set the line.It is another example of books taking the easy way out.

I don't really blame them because I am sure tennis is a very small sport for most books.

wannamakeabet · Aug 4, 2003

There are still several European books who call it action as soon as the match goes off. I know WSEX requires at least one set to be played for it to be considered action.

But Mjred is correct, on some of the smaller matches in Europe, guys hobble out to the court all the time just to get that appearance money when they have no business being on the court.

vindaloo · Aug 4, 2003

In the UK, most books still settle the player who goes through to the next round as the winner as long as at least one point is played (no action if the match doesn't start).

However, a year or so ago there was an instance of a player retiring through injury when he was winning easily. He just picked up the injury during the match and couldn't continue. So many people complained when their bet on the injured player was treated as a loser that a few books decided to change their rules. Some made it no action unless the match finishes, and a few others made it no action unless at least one set is completed.

I feel that the only sensible option is to make all bets action once one point is played. If your player gets injured then tough. You don't get your money back if the horse you've bet on falls or is pulled up, so why should you get it back if your player gets injured in a tennis match? If bets are no action when a player retires, he could bet on himself, play the best he can, and then retire "hurt" when it's match point against him and get his money back, so this rule doesn't prevent corruption if that's the intention.

PO69 · Aug 4, 2003

VG789, can we bump that thread up to the front page, I LOVED your comment about Railbird getting on my ass saying the "IT IS COMMON FOR A WOMAN TO HAVE 2 VAGINAS." Maybe memebers of his family have 2 OR MORE vaginas, but it is not common

bigboydan · Aug 4, 2003

this sucks i won alot of matches because of that rule

Fishhead · Aug 4, 2003

THIS IS ABSURD!!

areeff · Aug 4, 2003

Insider traders are not vultures.

If they know something you don't they should be able to profit of it, that is the beauty of the economic information age. I get bit by this rule after betting on railbirds taylor dent line i bet that he WOULD NOT win a tournament after railbird discussed his back injury. Well 5dimes called it no action because he retired right after the match even though it was a future not a match bet.

McIrish was helping me but i think he gave up after the CBS fiasco

VG789 · Aug 4, 2003

If a girl with two vaginas loses the first set during a tennis match,she is going to lose for sure

Ninja · Aug 4, 2003

Does anyone have a list of the different rules at the books who have tennis?

It would be interesting to see how different books handle this.

I don't know a lot about tennis betting, but it looks like WSEX way of handling this is fair.

peskypup · Aug 4, 2003

I bet a lot of tennis and injuries are a good source of profits.

However, "tanking" is comon in tennis for various reasons such as the other guy is a home player, you are tired because you unexpectedly had 5 matches last week and want a rest before next week's big event, the other player badly needs the points and makes you an offer.

This sort of thing is well known in the sport. Although it doesn't happen in majors, injury situations are more frequent in majors.

There are 2 reasons in my view:

1. 5 sets, often in extreme conditions - Aussie open, French open heat, Wimbeldon slippery grass.

2. Players are willing to take a risk and play the slams with painkillers and so on, but would not do this in minor events - Safin would never have played the Aussie Open this year with the injury he had unless it was a slam, plus he was defending a bucketful of points having made the 02 final.

Overall I am happy with the move to "match completed" - I've had some bad breaks when my guy sprained an anle at 6-4, 4-2 and lost. Somehow you remember those more than when it works the other way.