Men's Draw / Matthew Walton / 27 June 2008 /

As slams take players to the limit of mental and physical exertion, it's important for punters to know who has the stomach for the fight and who throws in the towel. Matthew Walton investigates and finds the results are not always what you might have expected.

As backers, one of the benefits of Grand Slam play is the chance for us to study, and then bet on, five set matches. Surely, when we get the opportunity to play on these longer matches, we will see a stronger adherence to the formbook and a set of results which go much more according to the script.

In the regular week-to-week action on the ATP Tour, where all but the occasional final is best of three sets, we can often see what we might term 'strange' results. Ones where a fancied player is a bit slow out of the traps, or the underdog plays a blinder for a set and a half and the match is all but over, an unlucky net cord, a close tie-break - all these things can have a disproportionate effect when we're considering a best of three set match.

At the Slams we can reduce our concerns about these factors and concentrate purely on the form. Over the longer number of sets the cream should rise to the top and the better player should win - and we should win as well ... money!

Or so you would think.

One phenomenon of the five set format is a match which goes the distance. The full five sets, strung out over three, four or five gruelling hours. When such matches occur, we got to thinking, are all players equally adept at hanging in there and grinding out a result.

Let's consider the scenario. Player A is the favourite, he's [1.57] to win the match. Player B is trading at around [2.30]. They play a five set match where they win sets alternately (A-B-A-B) so we enter into the fifth set. It's two sets all, what are the prices now?

One could argue, they should be around [2.00] apiece. After all, it's a close match and it could go either way. Four sets have shown them to be equal, at least on this particular day, so the fifth is little more than the toss of a coin.

On the other hand, you could say that Player A still deserves the tag of favourite. We presume he is (a) the better player and (b) he might also hold the head-to-head advantage - after all, why is he the favourite in the first place? Hence we revert to something like [1.57] and [2.30].

You can also throw in factors such as who is serving first in the fifth set (it always seems best to serve first, so your opponent has to play catch up), who won the fourth set and so has the momentum, what are the exact match statistics up to this point - and so on.

Well, here's another aspect to consider. Just how good are certain players over the long haul? Not every player on tour is as good as the next when it comes to five set matches, and so we did a bit of research into the subject.

As you can see, a wide variety of success for players - top players at that - when we get into these long matches. Of course some of these matches will be against each other, hence we have to have a winner and a loser within this group, but a notable percentage are against 'lesser' players. And, if that's the case, it's a damning statistic that certain guys tail off badly when the matches get longer.

It could be a matter of fitness or concentration or whatever but it's an interesting fact to note about certain players. When the going gets tough, they don't get going!!

And it's a topic of discussion which echoes an earlier piece we forwarded about tie-breaks. In theory, a tie-break should be a 50/50 call. After a close set, it could go either way. Still we find certain players do well and others perform badly when the pressure is on. Same applies here.

Going into a fifth set, we see certain players like David Ferrer (88%), Novak Djokovic (77%) and each of Nadal, Wawrinka and Robredo (75%) all recording victories well in excess of the standard 50% which you might expect.

At the other end we find Ivo Karlovic with an atrocious 0-9 career record in matches which go to a fifth set. Elsewhere, others like James Blake (23%), Paul-Henri Mathieu (30%), Radek Stepanek and Richard Gasquet (40%) all fall some way short of the mark we should expect from players in the top 25 of the world rankings.

Even the mighty Roger Federer shows a modest return of 55% wins so far in his career - nothing to write home about.

Our research can even take in 4 set matches as well where players such as Nicolas Almagro and Andy Murray (both 33%) along with Juan Monaco (50%) don't possess the kind of records you'd expect from a leading player.

Of course, the bulk of matches are two set affairs (players win 2-0 or lose 0-2) but here, at the Slams, we have a chance to see players taken to the limit of mental and physical exertion. It's important to know who has the stomach for the fight and who throws in the towel.

Furthermore, away from the majors, we can also use this data in creating our photo-fit of players. It tells us about their character in more general terms - you want to back fighters not lovers in this game and such statistics help you decide which players will get the job done for you even if the circumstances differ.

And just to prove our point. Our figures don't include the current Wimbledon tournament but so far in R1 and R2 at SW19, five of the players in our table have been involved in five set matches.

Almagro (0%) and Blake (23%) both lost whilst Stepanek (40%), Youzhny (50%) and Berdych (75%) all won.

Whether it's long-term betting or in-running trades, knowledge of statistics such as this can significantly improve your Betfair business. Take note!

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: