And, as we know, this method of betting gives us plenty of time in which to study the form, analyse the data and plan our bets. All done in a leisurely fashion. There's no split second decisions to be made, no spur of the moment reactions (or over-reactions) to be dealt with. We are simply directed by whichever way our studies point us - whether driven by surface, head-to-heads, age, nationality, past tournament performance and so on.

However, aside from this 'ante-post' approach, we must also consider the in-running option on Betfair.

Why? Because it's an area which can offer an even greater amount of bets, and provide an even greater amount of profit, to the clued-up backer. The various conventional markets and methods of betting which are currently at our disposal are all well and good but betting on the action live, as it happens, can be every bit as lucrative. If not more so.

Mind you, this isn't to say that all the analysis and study which we have recommended in earlier articles is now to be ignored. Not a bit of it. Even before entering the fray, prior to hitting the in-running markets, the informed backer should always acquaint themselves with at least some rudiments of the form. This will save time, help to make better decisions and, in the long run, surely make more money.

But one thing to note is that such preparation won't always point to a match being a 'live' contender for in-running play. Some matches are better suited than others to this pursuit.

And to illustrate this point we looked at two matches which took place in Hamburg during their Masters Series event. Both were played on the same day but both had markedly different potential for in-running trades, as we're about to find out.

As you can see, there was little encouragement for backers of Soderling in the head-to-heads and even though Federer's form in 2008 had been patchy (to say the least) he boasted better clay form than the Swede and a very good track record here in Germany.

In short, once the world No.1 got his head in front there seemed no chance of the match turning. Yes, Soderling could have got his nose in front early to make a game of it but there was nothing to suggest he would - of the 11 previous sets he'd played against Federer, the Swede had taken just one.

What we find is these matches are much better approached from an 'ante-post' perspective - i.e. back the likes of Federer before the match starts. They will only shorten in the betting, the markets won't be volatile and the options for in-runnning plays will be fairly limited.

The 'M&S' affair. Moya against Safin was always likely to be a fascinating match.

Both players are well-renowned flakes and either was just as likely as the other to have a poor day at the office. Safin has been on the slide for a few years now but Moya has been similarly prone to the occasional baffling loss to lesser opponents. Their head-to-heads stood at 3:3, both had beaten the other on clay, and Safin, the lesser ranked player, had better current form to offset any view that Moya was the dominant force.

So although the pre-match market had this down in the Russian's favour, this was misleading and should have been the first call to action for the sharp-eyed trader. This match was more of a 50/50 call and so from these initial odds the likelihood of in-running plays was high.

Moya took over the mantle of favourite in this match after just one game(!) even though he started as the clear underdog. That position only grew stronger as he progressed through the first set courtesy of a double-break.

The Spaniard then went a break up in the second set and the market decreed the match was over. Plenty of money was traded on Moya at less than [1.10] (1.10). However, Safin broke back, held on for a tie-break and levelled the match by taking it 7-3.

All of a sudden Safin is now the favourite for the match again!

Next thing, Moya simply holds serve at the start of the third set and he regains favouritism. He then breaks Safin in the next game to go 2-0 up and from there never loses his momentum as he powers to a 6-2 6-7 6-1 victory.

Moya had gone from clear underdog to shoo-in favourite, back out to underdog and then back to being the jolly before he won at a canter. By the same token, the 'Yo-Yo Market' had seen Safin's price bounce all over the place, winner one moment, loser the next.

In terms of our discussion, this match had classic characteristics written all over it. Both players had more than a little previous in this department, had a close fought head-to-head rivalry and had blown hot and cold throughout their careers. Even the surface, clay, led to a more even contest.

So what we have is two contrasting matches. The Federer v Soderling match was an open and shut case but Moya v Safin had angles right through its 147 minute running time.

To be successful, you can't watch every single match. You have to be selective. Hence, a method of prior analysis, which determines which games are good and which ones are bad for in-running plays, WILL save you time and WILL make you money. Look for those matches where upsets could occur, where prices seem out of line and where either player has a genuine chance of victory. These games will give some great in-running opportunities.

When so much of the women's game these days is about repetitive ball belting from the baseline, the diminutive Belgian has thankfully provided more variety and subtlety than most with her unique style and craft, plus one of the most beautiful backhands ever seen.

To think that we will no longer be able to admire that great shot in live action is sad indeed but from Henin's own point of view, after giving yet another major decision in her life serious thought, she is in no doubt that walking away is the right thing to do.

"This is the end of a child's dream," said the reigning French Open, US Open and Olympic champion. "I have experienced everything I could have. I have lived completely for tennis. I am relieved and proud of what I achieved."

From the moment Henin turned professional back in 1999 and won her very first WTA tournament in Antwerp (where she also won the last of her 41 career titles back in February) it has been fascinating to see how the slightly-built slip of a girl has fought her way to the top of the women's game, adapting and strengthening her own along the way to beat numerous bigger and more powerful athletes.

The combination of her talent, technical skills, speed around the court, plus a fiercely competitive spirit have been fundamental to her winning seven grand slams and nearly $20 million in prize money. That such success has been set against a back-drop of personal upheavals, including the death of her mother when Justine was only 12, estrangement for years from her father and siblings (now happily reconciled), plus the break-up of her five-year marriage in 2007, has made it even more remarkable.

So it is not hard to see from where she has drawn her inspiration and motivation under the sympathetic but demanding gaze of her long-time coach Carlos Rodriguez. Yet through her harsh experiences of life, including a vulnerability to illnesses and injuries, has also come a great sense of realism.

Having ended a career-best season in 2007, for which she was named the Laureus World Sportswomen of the Year, Henin's results in 2008 have failed to match up to her very high standards. Two in particular suggested she no longer had the will to fight on at such a level - a 6-4, 6-0 dismissal by Maria Sharapova at the Australian Open and a 6-2, 6-0 crushing by Serena Williams in Miami.

Currently trading as the [2.46] favourite to win this week's Italian Open in Rome, Williams said of her Belgian rival: "She was a great champion and gave me so much trouble." Serena's sister Venus [6.8] added: "She was a great opponent and a real fighter. She always challenged herself to play her best tennis, no matter what the circumstances."

Only last weekend the WTA Tour filmed many of its star players around the streets of Rome as part of a new multi-million dollar 'Superhero' marketing campaign. For some involved such a tag is rather overdoing it but in Henin's case, had she been present, it would have been more appropriate.

She may have lacked the glamour of many of her rivals, promoted so heavily these days by the WTA Tour. But even Larry Scott, its chairman and chief executive officer, recognised the real substance which the Belgian brought to women's tennis and which will be sorely missed in the future.

"Justine Henin will be remembered as one of the all-time great champions in women's tennis, and a woman who made up for her lack of size with a will to win and fighting spirit that was second to none," said Scott.

"It is rare that an athlete leaves at the very top of her game in this day and age, but Justine has always played by her own rules, in the very best sense of those words."

In a truly bizarre situation on Saturday afternoon, both semi finals ended in retirements and the sell out crowd witnessed only 10 one-sided games, as both Andy Roddick and Radek Stepanek both pulled out citing injury and illness.

Roddick's back went early in his clash with Wawrinka and he retired after just three games and then Stepanek, after a lacklustre first set in which he was bagelled by Djokovic, quit after the first game of the second set with what appeared to be heatstroke.

Djokovic then will be appearing in a final in the peak of physical fitness for once, having been handed another retirement in the quarter's by Nicolas Almagro and the crowd after suffering three early finishes in a row will be demanding to be entertained.

The omens aren't great however, as Wawrinka's sole ATP title in Umag in 2006 came by way of retirement by a certain Novak Djokovic, who pulled out during the first set breaker.

Assuming there are no further mishaps, this has the makings of a decent final and the Serbian is rightly favourite at around [1.33] to collect his third title of the year, after tasting success at the Australian Open and Indian Wells.

Other than the aborted Umag encounter, these two have never met on clay, but overall the world number three holds a 3-2 advantage over the Swiss number two and although I'm a big fan of Wawrinka's, it's hard to see how he can beat Djokovic on Sunday.

A great player to watch with a wonderful backhand, Wawrinka is guaranteed to be in the top 10 in the world whatever the result when the latest rankings come out on Monday and he's made steady progress this year, but Djokovic in a final is a tough proposition for anyone to take on.
The Serbian has nine final wins to his name and only three losses, one of which was the retirement in Umag and once he gets his teeth into a tournament, even the Federer's and Nadal's of this world have their work cut out to shake him off.

He has been serving very well this week and mixing the play up extremely effectively, to add to his powerful and accurate groundstrokes and it seems unlikely that Wawrinka will have the consistency in his eye-catching shots to keep up with Djokovic for three sets. Almagro, who has been in fine form on the red dirt this year certainly didn't fancy carrying on after taking a hiding in the first set of their match and that form is hard to ignore.

The Swiss has beaten the likes of Andy Murray, JC Ferrero and James Blake to get to the final and will hopefully put up a good show, but if there is one weakness in his game it's his temperament, which is certainly not as strong as that of Djokovic, who beat him in the Vienna final 6-4 6-0 last year.

The Serb also beat Wawrinka in straight sets on his way to the title at Indian Wells in March and a repeat of that particular outcome looks likely at around [1.73].

As far as the correct score betting goes, the 11 about a 7-5 Djokovic victory in the first set looks tempting and if you fancy Wawrinka to upset the form book, he will start at around [4.0] and should be in the region of [7.0] to [7.5] to win 2-0 or 2-1.

I'm sticking with 'Nole' to bring home the bacon though, perhaps in style by two sets to nil.

Once again we'll return to a number of previous topics of discussion and show their continued relevance to the most recent events on the circuit. Then we'll mark your card with a few players to watch, and a few to swerve, during this coming month's tournaments. In short, 'Who's Hot' and 'Who's Not' just at the moment.

We start, as usual, with a look at the results from April's six main events. It's been clay all the way and that usually means one thing ... Rafael Nadal.

Two more titles for the Spanish ace (including a record fourth straight Monte Carlo crown) a return to form for David Ferrer and Fernando Gonzalez. Also, Roger Federer finally wins an event in 2008 and what about Marcel Granollers-Pujol? More of him in a moment.

Question is, should we have been able to profit from these results if we had followed some of our own advice from previous articles? Hence a quick spin dowm memory lane to see whose been paying attention...

Federer & Nadal - What Are You Doing To The Formbook?

Whilst discussing the partial demise of the world's No.1 and No.2 players, we offered several names for future reference. Players who we said you needed to be 'quick enough to latch onto' in coming events. Last named was none other than the Spaniard, Marcel Granollers-Pujol who won in Houston after being available at the better side of [51.0] . Question was, were you on?

Challenge Tour Results Can Help You Find The Next Tsonga

This follows on from the previous point. As players drift out of contention at the top of the game, so new players start to come through from the bottom. Granollers-Pujol, again, is a good example of this (Challenge Tour winner and RU this year before Houston) and there will be more like him coming along in the future. In fact, you'll find more details about another potential newcomer in the 'Who's Hot' and 'Who's Not' list below.

The European Clay Court Season - Finding Diamonds In The Dirt

Plenty of pointers here as we previewed the current clay season with a host of facts and figures. One point we made was the number of seeded players making finals and winning titles. Looking at the table above, of the 12 finalists there have been 11 seeds, and nine of them were either No.1 or No.2 seeds. You can't argue with the formbook so do take the opportunity to review this article with a view to the coming clay tournaments.

Break Points - Are They Really That Important?

Juan Monaco lost to Igor Andreev the other day in Rome. In the match the Argentine forced more break points than the Russian - 14 to 10 - but only took four compared to the Russian's six. And so he lost. We discussed this very point in an article which highlighted the fact that as backers we should embrace such an ebb and flow of service breaks - as they make for volatility, and volatility makes for good betting markets!

Who Says Home Advantage Doesn't Matter in Tennis?

Undoubtedly certain events do favour home players - early season tournaments Down Under, events in the Far East and so on. In Europe and North America this effect is less pronounced but still we find in Valencia, for example, five of the last six winners are Spanish (RU the other year), same goes for Barcelona where the last six winners have all been native players! It is well worth checking out the national bias of certain events.

So, by all means refresh your memory with a look through these articles. They have had a bearing on the action which took place last week, the games which are happening this week and, no doubt, the events to be played next week. Never be afraid to take a little bit of time to improve your betting technique and don't let bad habits start to take over!

Finally, we've compiled our monthly list of 'Who's Hot' and 'Who's Not' on tour. Players who we consider to be in decent form or those we feel are on the slide. Also a new face who we feel could be the next Marcel Granollers-Pujol ...

We should have a great month ahead on the ATP Tour, make sure you get your share of the profits via Betfair with the aid of our regular tennis features. Next stops Hamburg, Portschach, Casablanca and then it's Paris!

In 1968 Laver received £2,000 in prize money for winning the men's singles title at Wimbledon, while women's champion Billie Jean King earned £750. Contrast that to the £750,000 both champions will receive for the fortnight's work at the All England Club this year and you can see how staggering the evolution is!

Like all leading sports, professional tennis is a huge business these days and because of its global appeal the amount of money it attracts through television rights, advertising and sponsorship is astounding. With such riches available the competition to get a piece of the action has never been more fierce.

As in any competitive field having an 'edge' over one's rivals is crucial. So with such revenue in the sport there has not only been massive investment in stadia and training facilities by governing bodies and national federations but also individually by players in terms of the entourages they now employ.

Back in Laver's day travelling with a coach, let alone a fitness trainer, physiotherapist, dietician, sports psychologist, agent etc. was unheard of. It was not until the 1970's, when Bjorn Borg achieved so much under the watchful eye of coach Lennart Bergelin, that such a trend started to develop and players brought a higher level of professionalism to their work.

Another facet of the whole process is a much greater use of computer and video analysis not only to develop one's own game but also to assess those of others, to look for strengths and weaknesses in the constant pursuit of improvement and advantage. The range of statistical information on all facets of the game has never been greater, but thankfully no robot has yet been built that can win a grand slam and the human element remains the vital ingredient.

Looking back there must be times when today's players, under such intense scrutiny, wish they could enjoy the more relaxed approach of their illustrious predecessors, who competed fiercely against each other on court but then shared a few beers together afterwards. But as with evolution in any sphere there is no going back and the level of tennis being played today compared to only a few years ago shows it has never been better.

Sergi Bruguera and Thomas Muster won their French Open titles in the 1990's by grinding almost totally from the back of the court. But while Rafa has done plenty of that himself at Roland Garros over the past three years, his game is so much more entertaining as it combines incredible defence with electrifying attack, his speed and skills around the net as important as what he does from the baseline.

Right now it is hard to think of anyone playing any better on the surface. But 10 years down the road someone will - you can bet on it.

This week my aim is to take this study a step further with another look at the subject, albeit from a slightly different angle, and in so doing develop a more informed and successful way of betting throughout the current European clay court season.

To briefly re-cap: we previously argued the case that players, by playing a certain percentage of their matches on a particular surface, were 'tipping us off' as to their favourite (and so most successful) type of court. As such, this provided another valuable piece in the complex jigsaw that we call 'form study'.

Here we move that debate on to a higher level where we look at the specific win/loss ratio of players on a given surface - in this case clay. So it's not just the number of matches that is the key, it is also the number of matches they win.

The table below lists the top 50 players in the ATP Tour Rankings as of April 28th. You will see four columns by each player's name.

We have the total number of matches played in their career and the overall percentage of matches won. This is followed by the total number of matches played on clay and the percentage of matches won, again solely on clay.

As with all our tables, it illustrates some very interesting points :-

You're looking, primarily, for two things:

Players With A Positive Clay/Overall Record - that is, the guys whose win percentage on clay is higher than their overall career strike rate. Take the top man on dirt, Rafael Nadal. His overall win percentage, on all surfaces, is 79%. However, on clay alone this soars to a remarkable 91%.

That's 12% on the 'positive' side. Same goes for the likes of Volandri (11%), Ferrero (9%), Almagro & Acasuso (8%), Monaco, Starace & Simon (7%) and Moya (6%).

The higher the percentage, the greater a player's prowess on the surface. And, as you'll see, these guys really up the ante on dirt and, arguably, play to a level higher than their official rankings.

Players With A Negative Clay/Overall Record - those players with a lower percentage on clay than on other surfaces. Here you have to start with Roger Federer, although a 5% deficit in his case is none too shabby.

Better examples come with Tursunov & Mahut (18%), Llodra (16%), Fish (14%), Blake (13%) and Soderling (10%). However, top of the list, with a whopping 30%, is none other than Andy Murray. A player who learned his trade as a junior on the clay courts of Spain but now can't buy a win on dirt (see recent wide margin losses to Djokovic and, more alarmingly, Mario Ancic).

These guys can do it on faster surfaces but either through a lack of ability or confidence, or a plain and simple shortage of desire, just can't do it on the clay.

The application of these figures, as we hinted in our previous article, works best when there's a strong positive or negative on either side of a potential match bet. This fact, added to the other more obvious match betting guides (current form, head-to-head form, tournament record etc) will increase the depth of your analysis and so, in principle, generate better bets and bigger profits.

So when we get two guys with close world rankings and similar career histories but one is +9% and the other is -9% then we're looking at a potential mismatch. Or, we would argue, a potentially good bet.

We also note the differential for the 'traditional' clay courters when they play on faster surfaces is much less than we see when the 'dyed in the wool' hard courters try to play on clay - i.e. on average, the positive figures are much smaller than the negative figures.

What this might very well tell us is that clay court tennis is more of a specialist discipline, whereas faster courts are played on by all players to a much closer general standard. And, with the majority of ATP events being played on such courts, that is understandable.

And finally, in more general terms, a point which re-inforces last week's article. See the likes of Fish, Querrey, Mahut and Murray compared to Nadal, Moya, Robredo and Nalbandian. The higher the win percentage on clay, the more matches these players play on the surface (and vice-versa). There is a direct correlation.

What we have shown once again is the importance of reading between the form lines in order to determine the strongest possible bets. Giving ourselves a better chance of success than other, less well-informed, backers on Betfair.

Make a note of these players and see how the likes of Nadal, Almagro and Monaco should be considered as bankers and, shamefully, the Andy Murray's of this world are the blow outs!

Had the young Serb not felt dizzy and pulled up during his Monte Carlo semi-final against Federer, the 20 year-old Australian Open champion might well have faced Nadal on clay for the first time since last year's semi-final at Roland Garros. He lost that in straight sets as he did in Rome a month earlier and Djokovic clearly had some work to do to close the gap between them.

But back then Djokovic was ranked No.6 and still a month away from breaking into the Top 3 for the first time. Yet all the work he has put into improving every facet of his game since, with the careful guidance of his coach Marian Vajda, has reaped dividends.

The way Djokovic dismissed Ivan Ljubicic, Andy Murray and Sam Querrey all in straights sets for the loss of just 14 games underlined his improvement - he seemed to have so much time on the ball - and it was a pretty impressive first outing on the terre battue this year. He broke serve a total of 13 times in those three matches, dropped his own only twice, scored two 6-0 sets in the process and while admitting that his game on clay is not yet as good as it is on hard courts, showed that it is not lagging far behind.

Twelve months ago Nadal had 4,875 ranking points compared to Djokovic's 2,595; now Nadal is on 5,655 with the Serb up to 4,935. After Nadal's title defence this week in Barcelona (where he is currently trading at [1.27] for the title) he will have 1,850 more points to defend in Rome, Hamburg and Roland Garros compared to Djokovic with only 700, so opportunity knocks for the Serb to close the gap between them still further or maybe even overtake Rafa.

But that is far easier said than done, of course, if the world No.2 continues with the kind of incredible form which he displayed throughout his first week back on the dirt. Having ended his nine-month title drought the 21 year-old Spaniard will be in no mood to start another anytime soon and for all his phenomenal success already on his favourite surface, he keeps working as hard as anyone on improving his game.

Prior to Federer's sixth loss in seven clay court encounters with Nadal, he also knocked out David Ferrer and Nikolay Davydenko, the next best players on the surface. So how can Djokovic overcome him?

Basically to play at the level he did at Melbourne Park in January and then some! In other words: serve powerfully at a high percentage; return with great pace, accuracy and variety; run down everything; remain patient in punishing rallies but also press buttons at the right moments, be it with his up-the-line two-handers, drop shots or surprise attacks to the net, volleying either deep or with short angles but never in between. Not much to ask!

You only have to look at Federer's failure to win the second set of last Sunday's final from 4-love up to see what a monumental task it is to try and master Nadal on clay. But then the Swiss has mental baggage when it comes to battling his nemesis on the red stuff, primarily because he has still not won the French Open, and for all his undoubted spells of brilliance in that last match, Federer's inability to sustain them for long enough cost him yet again.

Six years younger than Federer, Djokovic is still a rising force in the game rather than at its very peak. Consequently he is as yet unburdened by such concerns and full of confidence as he strives for top of the rankings which he fully believes he will reach.

He will certainly need all of his great self-belief if he is to beat Nadal on the dirt for the first time. But while beating Nadal over best-of-three sets is certainly conceivable in Djokovic's case, I still wonder whether he has sufficient stamina to do it at the French Open over best-of-five, bearing in mind that nobody has ever done that before!

As we know, the study of statistics is a vital pursuit if we are to improve our betting. To some it might be a cursory glance over a handful of figures, to others a full-on investigation, trawling through reams of data. Either way, your betting should be much improved in terms of quality (and quantity ... of profits, that is) given some familiarity with the facts and figures.

However, moving on from a basic appreciation of the material which is presented to us on countless websites and in numerous books, we can also benefit by the application of a little bit of lateral thinking to the problem of finding winners.

The commonly known statistics will only take you so far and all too often a slavish following of them will lump you in with the herd, chasing ever-decreasing prices about 'obvious' bets - and we don't want that do we?

In the table below you'll see figures for a number of players, selected at random, from the world rankings. These reflect the number of matches they have played on each surface so far during their careers.

This forms Part 1 of a two part article about playing surfaces - so do be sure to check back next week! - in which we'll discuss the importance of court conditions. In short, how differing surfaces can have a radical effect on match outcomes.

We'll use the table below to open the debate with an illustration of player preferences when it comes to court surfaces. We've chosen these guys completely at random but the study can work for all players on tour.

Remember also, when you look at the table, this year we have 65 ATP Tour events with 30 on hard courts (46%) plus 23 on clay (35%) and 6 apiece on both carpet and grass (making up the other 19%). As a result, don't be surprised to see the first two columns, hard and clay, dominate our findings.

Initially, let's just go back to school. And we mean this quite literally! The subjects you enjoyed most were the ones you were best at (and the ones you were best at you enjoyed the most). In the same way, surely the surface you play on most often is the one you feel most at home on, one where you should play your best tennis and consequently get your best results.

Hence, you can use the clear preference of the players as a guide to your own betting and it's interesting to see how widely these figures differ from player to player.

You'll see that Roger Federer has played just 20% of his matches on clay whilst David Ferrer has played nearly 49% of his matches on dirt.

Hyung-Taik Lee has played 65% of his matches on hard courts and Mario Ancic 55% but they've both played very little on clay - just 17% and 16% respectively.

Kevin Anderson has yet to move away from hard courts whilst Marcel Granollers-Pujol wouldn't know one if he saw one!

Even when we get to the more specialist surfaces, those less frequently used, we see a wide disparity in the figures. Rafael Nadal's 2% activity on carpet compared to Nikolay Davydenko's 10%, Mario Ancic up at 14% on grass and David Ferrer down on 3%.

For sure, with some players who are still in the early stages of their careers the figures can be a little misleading if taken too literally but used in association with other statistical aids (head-to-head form, recent match performances, track record in tournaments) it adds greater depth to the form and so, we assume, a better return on our bets.

The real value is when the figures are used to split two seemingly very close players. Ones which the casual, or ill-informed, observer would lump together as being of a similar standard. These figures tell us if they really are.

Take the example in the box below and you'll see exactly what we mean.

It's funny how two players who have played many times, and have a close overall record, have an individual surface record which aligns very closely with their match percentages. Hewitt has a clear lead on hard courts and grass, Safin is the dominant carpet player. As for clay ... well, back Safin next time they meet!

Yes, we're straying a little into the area of horseracing and results being determined purely by the going (or in this case the surface) but the preference of certain players is important - and next week we'll show you how it's not just the number of matches played on a surface that should be considered but the specific winning percentage on each individual surface which also has a significant bearing on the outcome.

In the meantime, make sure you scratch a little below the 'surface' when considering your bets.

Twice a semi-finalist at Roland Garros in the early 80's before guiding Michael Chang and Jim Courier to titles there, Higueras certainly has the credentials of one of the most astute clay court coaches around. But while Federer's title-win last week in Estoril was a positive start to their working relationship it may have only papered over the cracks.

The first four opponents Federer faced in the Portuguese event were all ranked way outside the Top 50, two of them took Federer the distance and if Nikolay Davydenko had not hurt himself in the final even the Russian might have beaten the world No.1 for the first time. Three days later in Monte Carlo Federer breezed through the first set against Ramirez Hidalgo, but having done so he then went into a worrying decline that underlined the questions marks which remain against his form and fitness.

"I felt a little bit slow out there today," admitted Federer. "I was just hoping for a better spell where I wasn't making maybe so many mistakes."

Fifty-five unforced errors certainly contributed to his problems and his forehand in particular, which had fired well in the first set, went badly awry thereafter until the last few games. That is not the first time it has happened, especially in recent months, but Federer's loss of focus and a look of boredom with the proceedings would suggest that those are the biggest issues Higueras must address if they are to continue on successfully through this campaign.

Federer has insisted for a while now that he is over the bout of mononucleosis which struck him at the start of the year. But while the medics have told him the virus has have left his body, it may well be having a lingering effect on his game as the following anonymous entry on a recent message board suggests:

"I happen to be a physician, and I am persuaded that Federer's loss of form is primarily due to Mono. This disease is associated with subtle effects that can last as long as a year. The effects can include depression and reduced energy levels. In many patients these effects inevitably produce some loss of motivation and confidence. For an illness to produce depression, there must be an effect on the central nervous system, which could produce a very slight slowing of reaction times and even a very slight effect on co-ordination.

"Bottom line: I believe that the subtle long term effects of Mono are enough to account for Fed seeming to lose his edge. After all, tennis at this level is a game where results are often determined by a few shots missing by an inch or two. I hope I'm wrong, but Fed could remain below top form for several more months before he finally is rid of the effects of the Mono."

Federer is also a victim of his own success because having achieved so much and set the bar so high, constantly finding the motivation to keep on doing it is becoming the biggest challenge of all. Someone who truly understands that and who also sought out Higueras' advice to try and help him conquer the French Open is Pete Sampras.

The American was over 30 when he did so in 2002 and by then it was clearly too late in the day as he crashed out of Roland Garros in the first round. Having now forged a good friendship with Federer this is Sampras' take on the situation facing the Swiss.

"He has the game to do it," said Sampras. "He grew up playing on clay and he's more prominent on clay than I ever was. Things need to fall into place for him. Once he hits 29 or 30 the Djokovics and Nadals will be in their prime and it'll become a little tougher."

It's looking very tough now.

At the Monte Carlo Master Series on Court Central (Centre Court to you and I) from 9am today the following matches will be taking place all back to back. That's eight hours of unbelievable tennis.

Juan Carlos Ferrero v Rafael Nadal

Novak Djokovic v Andrew Murray

That's more big games than you can shake a racquet at, the top four players in the world and then Andy Murray thrown in for good measure, streamed directly to your computer.

http://betting.betfair.com/live-video/

Federer was backed into odds of [1.01] on Betfair after seizing the first set 6-1 but the wheels came off the Fed Express afterwards as his price took a rollercoaster ride on the Betfair match odds market.

At 5-2 down in the third set, the world number one was backed for £180 at [15.0], with his Spanish opponent - available at [100.0] after the first set - down to [1.05] on the exchange.

But the pressure clearly told on Hidalgo who couldn't close out and eventually went on to lose on a tiebreak.

Federer has been backed at a high of [40.0] on the win market but now trades as the [7.4] second favourite behind Rafael Nadal, who is available to back at [1.76].

Team sports have a whole myriad of considerations to evaluate and even some of the other so-called individual sports can be difficult to grasp. For example, in horseracing, how much is down to the horse and how much to the jockey? Same goes for Formula 1, is it the car or the driver who wins the race?

Tennis though, like golf, snooker, darts and boxing is what you might call a pure sport when it comes to form study. The process of who wins and who loses is determined by the individual participants themselves with no undue reliance on fellow team members or superior means of transportation!

The upshot is a formbook cleared of the many grey areas which we find in other sports. As a result, and as we try to argue here week after week, tennis is one of the best sports to bet on. Everything is black and white, all you need to do is to work out the form and the odds better than your fellow Betfair user ... and that's where we come in!

The table below illustrates this point as we take in the career Win-Loss record in finals of the top 100 players in the current ATP Rankings. Just how reliable are these guys when the heat is on? Furthermore, how many supposedly top players have very little experience when it comes to the business end of tournaments.

What is clear straightaway is that finals aren't 50:50 calls. We dispelled a similar myth about tie-breaks quite some time ago and the same goes here.

Six broad groups present themselves :-

The 'MENSA' Mob - these guys have the mental fortitude, added to physical ability, to win a high percentage of finals. Federer (75%), Djokovic (75%) and Nadal (74%) are gimmes but special mention must go to Davydenko, Almagro and Tursunov (all 80%).

The 'B+ Brigade' - multiple finalists with respectable strike rates. Ivo Karlovic (66%), Andy Roddick (65%), Lleyton Hewitt (64%), Thomas Johansson (64%) and Tommy Haas (59%). All are good but their record puts them as just short of real top class.

The 'Under-Achievers' - Tomas Berdych (57%), David Ferrer (55%), Andy Murray (55%), David Nalbandian (53%), Marat Safin (51%) plus Gasquet, Youzhny and Robredo (all 50%). Even guys like Blake (47%) and Canas (47%) come into this category.

The 'Must Do Better' Group - players such as Jose Acasuso (36%), Nicolas Kiefer (35%) Marcos Baghdatis (33%) and Agustin Calleri (33%) give cause for concern. These guys clearly have ability but, mentally, do they have what it takes to win regularly? No.

The 'See Me' Set - Mario Ancic (30%), Robin Soderling (28%), Filippo Volandri (25%), Mardy Fish (20%) and Jurgen Melzer (16%) are all highly disappointing. The last three might be excused but Ancic (3:7) and Soderling (2:5) have woeful records in finals.

The 'New Kids' - as you'll see, many players have very little final experience. Some are good like Philipp Kohlschreiber and Robby Ginepri (both 100%) whilst others struggle such as Vliegen, Montanes and Guccione (all 0%). Too little data means the jury is still out.

When it comes down to two men on either side of the net, you'd like to know who you can rely upon - and this table acts as a barometer for many players.

For sure, certain guys will have been a little fortunate (or unfortunate) with their opponents in these respective deciders, as such we shouldn't get too carried away with our findings.

However, making the general assumption that to get to an ATP final you have to be a pretty good player, and in that final you're likely to meet another pretty good player, it's a good test of which guys can win the big points, who can make a 50:50 match into a 60:40 one in their own favour.

In terms of betting this table has a number of important spin-offs.

Firstly, in finals themselves. It's good to know who has a track record of success (the 70% and aboves) and who are the dodge-pots (below 40%).

Secondly, in outright betting. Why take a price about, say, Mario Ancic winning an event at [4.0] (4.0) when he's about that mark just to win the final? Let alone all the matches required to even get to the decider.

Thirdly, in everyday match betting. As we said at the start, tennis is a singular pursuit. There's nobody else to hide behind, no external aids to get you out of trouble. When the going gets tough, this is the table which tells you who gets going!

Finally, it also illustrates how quickly some players jump up the rankings with little, or no, final experience. Remember, these guys are all top 100 performers. Of these 38 have never won an event and 24 have never even made a final on tour!

These findings provide further valuable assistance in our assessment of players. In these articles we're constantly looking at ways to evaluate players (and so determine the right bets and the right prices).

Use these statistics as another way to gauge whether your fancy in Monte Carlo next week has what it takes to win.

Yet this season with the usual two-week gap between Monte Carlo and Rome cut in half, the 21 year-old Spaniard will have to play for four weeks in a row if he is also to compete in Hamburg, where his record 81-match winning streak on clay came to an end last year in the final against Roger Federer. Nadal is not happy about it.

"It's an outrageous way to treat European and clay-court players," Nadal declared. "Moving Miami and Indian Wells back because of college basketball is something I understand because it's very important to them but this is a world tour.

"We only have three Masters Series events and we have to play them with an important tournament like Barcelona all running together. I'm tired of complaining about this but the people in charge of this don't share my opinion and I have to respect that."

Since winning his first title on clay at Sopot in 2004, only three other men aside from Federer have beaten Nadal on the surface - Olivier Mutis (retired), Gaston Gaudio (a spent force now ranked No.252) and world No.26 Igor Andreev. So what is it about Nadal's game which makes him such a formidable opponent on clay?

Firstly, he grew up on the surface so he knows how to move on it. He has the strength to keep going on it hour after hour and he is also very quick to the ball, applying great control when he reaches it.

His counterpunching style means he is an excellent defender, able to return ball after ball like a machine, applying heavy topspin to keep his opponents under pressure, as well as giving himself more time to recover between shots. But he can also turn defence into attack in a flash off both sides, which in part has something to do with his extra strength of being a natural right-hander playing left-handed, and his serve although by no means the quickest, is very effective.

Add all that to his ferociously competitive nature on court, always giving everything to the next point and Nadal is a formidable force, whose exploits have now built up a great aura every time he steps onto court. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that he is currently trading at [1.94] to win his fourth successive French Open, where he has a perfect 21-0 record.

So who can challenge him? Federer [7.6], although the last man to beat Nadal on clay and runner-up to him for the past two years at Roland Garros, clearly has some questions to answer about his own form, which has also left him without a title so far this year.

Interestingly, the world No.1 has linked up with Jose Higueras this week in Estoril with a view to improving his own game. Bearing in mind Higueras' past success with the likes of former French Open champions Michael Chang and Jim Courier and that might prove to be a smart move but on first evidence it may take a while to have any great effect.

To my mind it needs a player with greater aggression off the return than Federer and a fearless approach to take the initiative quickly against Nadal rather than be sucked into a succession of gruelling long rallies. The obvious candidate is Australian Open and Indian Wells champion Novak Djokovic who trades at [9.0] and who reached last year's semi-finals at Roland Garros.

The other man to do that was Nikolay Davydenko who is [24.0] and if the Russian can continue to apply the kind of aggressive, accurate game he used to dismiss Nadal in the final in Miami, then the young Spaniard could find himself under further threat. But such is Nadal's self-belief on the surface that it's is going to take something outstanding to dethrone the King of Clay.

Not only has Australian Open runner-up Jo-Wilfried Tsonga flown home because of a knee injury which may require surgery, but the French No.1 Richard Gasquet has been left out of the opening days singles because of a blistered right hand as well as a sore knee. Consequently Forget has selected Michael Llodra and Paul Henri Mathieu for singles duty, with Llodra also due to partner Arnaud Clement in Saturday's doubles.

Llodra will be first up against Roddick, who has won 27 Davis Cup singles rubbers including his last seven. But while Llodra has never played a 'live' Davis Cup singles before, the left-handed serve and volleyer should like the fast indoor court in the Joel Coliseum as much as the American and both of them have already won two titles each this season.

Picked as France's No.1, Mathieu will then take on Blake who needed a final set tiebreak to beat him last year in New Haven. Just four places apart in the rankings Blake should have the edge again, especially if he gets in the first strike as he likes to do.

Beyond that the Bryan brothers have said the doubles could be their toughest yet against the pair who beat them in last year's Wimbledon final. But the Americans just won Miami and as a team USA are currently trading at [1.22] to reach the semi-finals with France at [4.8].

Russia's captain Shamil Tarpischev, who has made many smart decisions before, has decided to risk out-of-form Marat Safin for first day singles duty against the Czech Republic in Moscow rather than Miami champion Nikolay Davydenko. Safin has won only one match this year, but he has far better Davis Cup record than Davydenko and could certainly upstage the mentally fragile Tomas Berdych in the opening rubber on clay.

Igor Andreev, who is a proven force on the dirt, has then been picked ahead of Mikhail Youzhny, to face Radek Stepanek, who won their only previous encounter but on a faster surface more to his liking than the one laid in the Luzhniki Small Sports Arena. Davydenko and Mikhail Youzhny have been named to face the Czech doubles specialists Lukas Dlouhy and Pavel Vizner and currently Russia are being backed to advance at [1.67] with the Czechs trading at [2.3].

Rafael Nadal, who missed Spain's first round victory in Peru, returns for the tie away to Germany on an indoor hard court in Bremen's AWD Dome. Runner-up last weekend in Miami, the world No.2 will kick things off against Nicolas Kiefer, whom he beat comfortably there 6-2, 6-4.

A closer call may be the second singles between Philipp Kohlschreiber and David Ferrer. The Spaniard leads their head-to-head 2-1 but has lost form since reaching the quarterfinals of the Australian Open.

After a strong start to the year it has been a similar story for Kohlschreiber, who will also partner Philipp Petzschner in the doubles versus Feliciano Lopez and Fernando Verdasco. Currently Germany are trading at [3.5] to succeed compared with Spain at [1.4].

But, as things stand, the clearest favourites in any off the quarterfinals are Argentina at [1.05] who will be hosting Sweden who are [15.5] outdoors on the slow clay court in their 'fortress' - the Estadio Parque Roca in Buenos Aires. The Argentines have not lost at home for 10 years and the Swedes were crushed there 5-0 in 2006.

Last year, in the quarterfinals in Gothenburg, Sweden prevailed 4-1 so the hosts will be out for revenge this time with David Nalbandian looking to reverse the result of his opening rubber against Thomas Johansson before Jose Acasuso faces Robin Soderling. With Nalbandian due to partner Guillermo Canas against Jonas Bjorkman and Robert Lindstedt on Saturday, Argentina could well secure victory before the third and final day.

Over the next seven weeks there are ten tournaments prior to the French Open and, as a prelude to this mini season, we're going to revisit a topic touched upon a month or two ago - remember when we spoke about the tennis calendar being a series of mini seasons linked together in a chain, each with their own little micro-climate of form?

Well, here we have the first part of the European clay court season leading up to Roland Garros. For your perusal, we've collated the results from these tournaments for the past three years.

You'll see the winners and runners-up for each event listed in bold type and below them the respective semi-finalists beaten by them en route to the final. And interesting reading it makes for ...

On the back of this data, here's some pointers for the clay court season ahead :-

Rafa's Amazing Record

Rafael Nadal is the only player to have won more than once in any one year. In fact his hat-trick of hat-tricks (Monte Carlo, Barcelona and Rome) in 2005, 2006 and 2007 is a stunning achievement.

Multiple Finalists Are Rare

Very few players even manage to make more than one final in any one year.
2005 - Nadal & Coria
2006 - Nadal, Federer, Robredo & Davydenko
2007 - Nadal, Federer

Even Semi-Finalists See Little Familiarity

We also struggle to find players making multiple semi-finals (or better) in any one year. 2005 - Nadal, Coria, Davydenko, Gasquet, Melzer, Ferrero & Christophe Rochus
2006 - Nadal, Federer, Robredo, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Melzer, Almagro & Simon
2007 - Nadal, Federer, Mathieu, Berdych & Hewitt

Dodgy South American Form

There's a distinctly European feel to these events. South Americans won only one event in 2007 with Juan Monaco (Portschach) and David Nalbandian was the sole winner in 2006 (Estoril). Even in 2005 we had only three wins by Gaudio (Estoril), Nalbandian (Munich) and Puerta (Casablanca). That's five winners out of a total of 30 events (17%).

Defending Champions

With players having set patterns to their French Open preparation, repeat wins are likely as players regularly return to the same events. Davydenko (Portschach 2005, 2006), Nicolas Almagro (Valencia 2006, 2007) and of course Nadal illustrate this point. Roger Federer (Monte Carlo 2006, 2007) is the only repeat finalist.

Look For Seeded Winners

From the 30 winners produced by these 10 tournaments over the past three years, only six have been unseeded (20%). In year order (2007-2006-2005) the winning seeds are :-
Estoril (3-1-2), Valencia (3-x-7), Houston (x-x-1), Monte Carlo (2-2-x), Barcelona (1-1-8), Munich (x-5-1), Rome (2-2-5), Hamburg (1-8-1), Portschach (x-1-1), Casablanca (8-7-6)

Right Time Of Year

Certain players do catch the eye for making the latter stages consistently year after year, albeit in different events. Nadal and Federer are standing dishes but Carlos Moya, Tommy Robredo and Nikolay Davydenko all feature at least once in each of the three years.

Experience Is The Key

The case of Nadal can muddy the waters a bit. However, looking through the lists you'll find that none of the other events are won by real whipper-snappers. Most are established tour players suggesting that clay takes more mastering than other surfaces.

Given all the above data it's possible to draw some definite conclusions on who should do well and which players look set to struggle.

First up, lay the big-hitters. Ljubicic, Querrey, Tsonga, Ancic look set to struggle and even the three former winners in Houston (Roddick, Fish and Karlovic) will do well to figure in any finals this year - especially outside of the States.

Secondly, back the Spanish. With the dominance of European players look to Spain for the best bets. Nadal is a gimme but Robredo, Ferrer, Almagro must all feature at some point during the next couple of months.

Thirdly, be wary of the South Americans. There is a big difference between the early season clay court events in South America and these in Europe. Both may well be on clay but many of the players who do well in places like Acapulco and Buenos Aires struggle on the Continent. We might see flashes from Nalbandian and Monaco but this table offers little hope for the likes of Canas, Chela and even Fernando Gonzalez.

Fourthly, can you trust these guys? It's a crucial time for Federer, Djokovic and Murray. For different reasons all have questions to answer this Summer. Federer must start to win again, Djokovic must transfer his progress onto clay and Murray must make up for an injury-ravaged 2007 clay season.

And finally, can Rafa do the four-peat? You bet he'll be trying but watch him start to move his focus solely onto Paris. Masters Series events provide the preparation but the French Open is the real deal. He might alter his schedule to go all out at Roland Garros.

There should be some great tennis ahead, even before we get to Paris, and it all starts in Estoril, Valencia and Houston. Use the information we've provided, shrewdly apply it to the Betfair markets and you shouldn't go far wrong.