WEBVTT - Beating The Book: 2022 French Open Preview 0:00:03.440 --> 0:00:14.040 Check it down, Man Down Thursday morning, May the Beating 0:00:14.040 --> 0:00:17.920 the Book podcast Skill Alexander and as we have tried 0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.680 to do now outside of football season, even during football 0:00:20.720 --> 0:00:25.599 season when it applies, talk about every tennis slam. That's 0:00:25.600 --> 0:00:28.200 what we're doing. Uh, and we bring back the crew. 0:00:28.240 --> 0:00:29.960 We tried to bring Brack the crew for this one, 0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:33.680 but part of the crew Dan Weston. Dan texted me 0:00:33.760 --> 0:00:35.920 on what's happened from a cruise ship and when I 0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:38.360 say a cruise ship, I mean the finest cruise ship 0:00:38.360 --> 0:00:40.800 on planet Earth. He was a docked outside of My 0:00:40.840 --> 0:00:43.040 York at the time and he's like, I can't make 0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:45.680 it this one. I'll be back for Wimbledon. But we 0:00:45.800 --> 0:00:48.159 have Drew Dinsick here from the Deep Dive podcast and 0:00:48.159 --> 0:00:50.360 of course the Bet the Edge podcast from NBC Sports, 0:00:50.600 --> 0:00:53.920 the former with with Andy Molitor that he does the 0:00:54.000 --> 0:00:57.160 latter with Sarah Pearlman. It's Drew Dense at Whale Underscore, Kapper, 0:00:57.160 --> 0:01:00.560 How you doing man? Thank you for well, Gil, thank 0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:03.040 you for having me. As always, we get to put 0:01:03.360 --> 0:01:06.400 an exclamation point on what has been an absolutely awesome 0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:09.040 play season so far in Europe with the French Open 0:01:09.120 --> 0:01:13.080 coming up here and Uh, yeah, no, no, no better 0:01:13.120 --> 0:01:15.960 way to kick it off than doing a nice little 0:01:16.720 --> 0:01:20.800 both women's, men's and women's draw preview with with the 0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:23.720 listeners of the megapod. Yeah, we and we hope that 0:01:23.760 --> 0:01:28.280 the draw actually appears before our eyes here momentarily because 0:01:28.280 --> 0:01:30.839 I sort of jumped the gun on our recording time. 0:01:30.880 --> 0:01:34.280 But apparently whatever the as you said, whatever Lifer says, 0:01:34.319 --> 0:01:38.160 get to it whenever they get Yeah, well, we'll have 0:01:38.240 --> 0:01:40.280 ourselves a draw. But we can talk about this broadly. 0:01:40.319 --> 0:01:41.920 You and I have done it on the radio side 0:01:41.959 --> 0:01:44.760 earlier this week, but let's just talk about it broadly, 0:01:44.800 --> 0:01:48.000 and I'll just start by saying, this is, you know, 0:01:48.120 --> 0:01:53.000 unlike with the previous tournaments that we've done this year, uh, 0:01:53.000 --> 0:01:57.520 specifically the Australian Open, this was one we're futures that 0:01:57.600 --> 0:02:00.440 I've made and I'm sure you two I've made them 0:02:00.480 --> 0:02:04.000 long before now. So I just want to apologize right 0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:06.160 in Advanceam. If this is the show you're landing on 0:02:06.240 --> 0:02:09.240 to talk French Open, we already have numbers on Ego 0:02:09.360 --> 0:02:11.720 that are way better than exists now. On the women's side, 0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:14.880 we already have numbers on Carlos Alcoraz that are way 0:02:14.919 --> 0:02:17.400 better than exists now on the men's side. But Drew, 0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:19.280 I'll just start with that question. Let's just start with 0:02:19.320 --> 0:02:22.760 the women's side. Egos Fiatec, who has won one major 0:02:23.440 --> 0:02:28.600 UH French Open famously around these parts. She is getting 0:02:28.639 --> 0:02:33.840 into Stephie Graft Monica Sellis territory. She is either plus 0:02:33.880 --> 0:02:37.080 one hundred or a ticking to minus money now to 0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:39.880 win this tournament, to win her second major. She's won 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:43.960 twenty eight matches in a row. This is her surface. 0:02:44.280 --> 0:02:47.359 She's one. I want to say it's forty seven out 0:02:47.360 --> 0:02:49.600 of forty eight sets. Don't hold me to that exactly, 0:02:49.720 --> 0:02:51.919 but it's somewhere in the forties. She only dropped one 0:02:52.000 --> 0:02:55.800 set along the way. I believe it was to Mila 0:02:55.880 --> 0:03:00.000 Sampson Nova. I believe was who got her on one set. Uh, 0:03:00.800 --> 0:03:04.320 can you recommend anybody else in an outright? We'll get 0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:06.680 into quarters and we'll get into matches. But is there 0:03:06.680 --> 0:03:09.000 anybody else in an out right you could like legitimately 0:03:09.080 --> 0:03:14.320 recommend to somebody? I mean, we'll find some quarter prices 0:03:14.360 --> 0:03:17.320 for sure, but not to win the tournament now. Um 0:03:17.360 --> 0:03:21.000 I given her current form and her you know, my 0:03:21.000 --> 0:03:24.320 my ratings on IgA, I would make her no worse 0:03:24.360 --> 0:03:28.040 than minus four in any match in any syst you know, 0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:31.440 step of the way, and realistically, UM, in the first 0:03:31.480 --> 0:03:34.400 handful of matches, when she's going up against qualifiers and 0:03:34.520 --> 0:03:37.200 some of the lower ranked players, you know she's going 0:03:37.240 --> 0:03:40.520 to be in the minus two thousand's range for you know, 0:03:40.640 --> 0:03:44.160 match by matching. UM. It's not often you see that 0:03:44.240 --> 0:03:46.000 in best of three tennis because things are a little 0:03:46.000 --> 0:03:47.960 more random as often you see that a women's tennis 0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:51.400 because things are a little bit flatter in general. UM. 0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:53.920 But she is performing at a level that is all 0:03:53.960 --> 0:03:57.480 all universe, and you know, the comp of stephie Groff 0:03:57.480 --> 0:04:01.800 I think is completely fair, especially because two years ago 0:04:01.960 --> 0:04:06.240 EGA completed a dominant performance at Rolling Garrows in the 0:04:06.280 --> 0:04:09.520 fall that you had to go back to and stephie 0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:12.600 Groff to find any comp for UM. And so it's 0:04:12.640 --> 0:04:16.240 not like this is this is not like this is unbelievable. 0:04:16.279 --> 0:04:18.640 Like the Radakanu run last year at the U S 0:04:18.680 --> 0:04:22.000 Open was out of nowhere. And you know, if it 0:04:22.320 --> 0:04:25.440 now feels even more um like was that a fluke? 0:04:25.640 --> 0:04:29.280 The EGA run was not and is now being you know, 0:04:29.360 --> 0:04:31.840 clearly backed up with a number of titles here and 0:04:32.160 --> 0:04:33.560 I guess if you want to take a step back 0:04:33.600 --> 0:04:36.159 a little bit about sort of the strategy of playing 0:04:36.200 --> 0:04:40.720 futures for the UM. You know, for the Slams, you 0:04:40.720 --> 0:04:43.840 can get away with waiting untill the draw for the 0:04:43.880 --> 0:04:48.040 Australian Open, even for the U s Open, because player 0:04:48.120 --> 0:04:51.920 form is huge question marks for both of those tournaments 0:04:51.960 --> 0:04:57.599 for different reasons. Um, huge question mark on the UH 0:04:57.800 --> 0:05:00.160 you know, for the player form at the u US 0:05:00.200 --> 0:05:02.200 Open because players are tired at the end of a 0:05:02.240 --> 0:05:04.920 long season. Huge question about player form for the Australian 0:05:04.960 --> 0:05:07.200 Open because everybody's had a haul off season and some 0:05:07.240 --> 0:05:10.200 players used it to rest and recuperate, others you know, 0:05:10.240 --> 0:05:13.400 sharpening their games. So um, those two tournaments are fine 0:05:13.440 --> 0:05:16.560 to wait on UH and and Wimbledon. You know, the 0:05:16.600 --> 0:05:19.520 grass season is so compact that you don't really need 0:05:19.560 --> 0:05:21.800 to be way out ahead of the market on those 0:05:21.880 --> 0:05:24.960 numbers just because you know that it's it's just a 0:05:25.160 --> 0:05:28.680 it's a blip on the calendar. The clay season is 0:05:28.720 --> 0:05:32.160 the opposite, like you need to be very carefully following 0:05:32.200 --> 0:05:35.880 pricing throughout the Indian Wells really starts to set the 0:05:35.920 --> 0:05:39.440 market for this because the conditions are similar. Because it's 0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:42.240 sort of the um, you know, the beginning of what 0:05:42.480 --> 0:05:45.280 is a concentrated stretch of everybody playing every week with 0:05:45.360 --> 0:05:48.279 high stakes and so um. You know, we're watching Indian 0:05:48.279 --> 0:05:51.080 Wells pretty carefully and you're picking up, you know, signs 0:05:51.120 --> 0:05:54.560 at that time that Ego's form was looking very, very good. 0:05:54.720 --> 0:05:57.599 She came off of a decent, you know, decent oceanic swing, 0:05:58.360 --> 0:06:00.479 decent time in the Middle East, but in an Indian 0:06:00.520 --> 0:06:04.359 Wells she was absolutely ripping um. And it was like, Okay, 0:06:04.400 --> 0:06:07.120 if she's playing this well here and builds on this 0:06:07.240 --> 0:06:10.800 through the spring and an early summer into um into 0:06:10.880 --> 0:06:13.359 Rolling Carrol, she's gonna be tough to be. And of course, 0:06:13.440 --> 0:06:15.680 at that time, who was the market favorite. It was 0:06:15.720 --> 0:06:18.440 not Ego, It was Ash Party. She was at the 0:06:18.480 --> 0:06:21.480 top of the market for most of the month of March. 0:06:22.080 --> 0:06:25.080 And you know, lo and behold, You're sitting at your 0:06:25.080 --> 0:06:27.560 computer one day and the news comes across the ticker 0:06:27.880 --> 0:06:30.799 Ash Party has suddenly retired from the sport of tennis. 0:06:31.200 --> 0:06:34.240 And I think everyone who follows the sport closely who 0:06:34.279 --> 0:06:36.520 was watching him betting Indian Wells did the same thing. 0:06:36.640 --> 0:06:39.600 Run to the book, you know, and and click as 0:06:39.600 --> 0:06:41.480 many times as you could you get to win the 0:06:41.520 --> 0:06:44.599 French Open because that was the two woman race that 0:06:44.640 --> 0:06:49.640 became a one woman race and that Yeah, And honestly, 0:06:49.720 --> 0:06:52.400 like at the time, I think best prices were four 0:06:52.440 --> 0:06:56.800 to one, and uh, I got down what I could 0:06:56.839 --> 0:06:59.480 get down at that time. And I think if that 0:06:59.560 --> 0:07:02.279 hadn't happened, I may even be in a better position 0:07:02.360 --> 0:07:05.600 right now because I kind of I didn't keep adding 0:07:05.640 --> 0:07:08.520 to my my spot. Right, the price moved, it gets shorter, 0:07:08.920 --> 0:07:10.640 and I'm looking at two to ones and I'm like, 0:07:11.240 --> 0:07:13.040 I got four to one in pocket, Why would I 0:07:13.080 --> 0:07:16.520 bet to to one? Right, That's why I didn't continue 0:07:16.560 --> 0:07:19.520 to add to that position. And ultimately now I'm angry 0:07:19.560 --> 0:07:22.160 because it's she's even honest to win this tournament, and 0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:24.000 I'm looking at my before though, like, God, I should 0:07:24.000 --> 0:07:26.800 have more, Like why don't I have more? Like she 0:07:26.920 --> 0:07:28.720 did everything that was asked for her. At Indian Well, 0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:30.920 she was dominant. She packed it up with the title. 0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:32.840 At Miami. I know you had futures on her at 0:07:32.840 --> 0:07:35.120 both of those stages, so you're already you know, flush 0:07:35.200 --> 0:07:38.320 at that point. Um, and then right into clay season, 0:07:38.400 --> 0:07:40.920 she has lost absolutely no step at all. She was 0:07:41.000 --> 0:07:44.760 so dynamic after I think maybe her best torm might 0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:46.960 have been I don't even know it was her best 0:07:46.960 --> 0:07:49.720 torm at Hamburg or Rome. It's tough to say, um, 0:07:49.760 --> 0:07:54.000 but they were both dominant, and after Hamburg, you know, 0:07:54.040 --> 0:07:56.920 on the heels of this huge streak, I'm starting to think, well, okay, 0:07:56.920 --> 0:08:00.480 at this point, I kind of hope she uh, um, 0:08:00.520 --> 0:08:02.680 you know, gets a little bit of a break here. 0:08:02.720 --> 0:08:04.400 It wouldn't be the worst thing if she loses at 0:08:04.400 --> 0:08:06.080 Madrid and gets like a little bit of a week 0:08:06.200 --> 0:08:09.000 to recuperate, rest and recuperate here, because Madrid is a grind, 0:08:09.400 --> 0:08:13.400 you know, Madrid is a tough and she decides, okay, 0:08:13.600 --> 0:08:15.240 they'll take it off for injury. And I think that 0:08:15.320 --> 0:08:16.800 was actually one of the best things she could have 0:08:16.840 --> 0:08:19.240 done from a strategy standpoint, because she came back at 0:08:19.320 --> 0:08:23.960 Rome and was absolutely dynamic. Her game is as advertised 0:08:23.960 --> 0:08:27.120 in terms of perfect for the surface of clay, and um, 0:08:27.680 --> 0:08:29.960 you know, I mean, you know, this is this is 0:08:30.000 --> 0:08:32.960 something we haven't seen since the eighties. Um. She's more 0:08:33.000 --> 0:08:36.800 dominant on this surface than Serena ever was on clay. Um. 0:08:37.040 --> 0:08:39.000 And so it's uh, you know, you have to draw 0:08:39.080 --> 0:08:41.920 compared parallels to the men's tour or that you know 0:08:41.960 --> 0:08:44.360 stephie Graff in the eighties in terms of what we're 0:08:44.360 --> 0:08:46.200 seeing right now, and it's it's cool to be a 0:08:46.200 --> 0:08:48.120 part of. And you know, I had tipped to you 0:08:48.160 --> 0:08:50.880 for being way way ahead of this, uh you know, 0:08:51.080 --> 0:08:55.280 rise from Ego because um, you know, I probably I 0:08:55.320 --> 0:08:57.760 would have doubted it. Honestly, if you didn't have conviction 0:08:57.840 --> 0:08:59.600 back in the day, I would have been like, I 0:08:59.600 --> 0:09:03.200 don't know, is this sustainable. We'll see, um, but you 0:09:03.240 --> 0:09:05.160 can't deny it at this point, she really is the 0:09:05.360 --> 0:09:07.720 best women's tennis player in the world. Then you know, 0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:10.720 there are sometimes when like there are some years when 0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:14.679 Rafa was the clear best and it was not competitive, right, 0:09:15.360 --> 0:09:18.760 and that was more about his greatness, And there is 0:09:18.800 --> 0:09:21.800 a lot of that with EGA. But in my opinion, 0:09:21.840 --> 0:09:25.400 at least the women's field is weaker this year than 0:09:25.440 --> 0:09:27.200 it has been in years past. Would you agree with that? 0:09:27.240 --> 0:09:29.480 And I would agree with that, And and to two 0:09:29.520 --> 0:09:31.960 months ago, three months ago, I would not have agreed 0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:35.960 with that. It just kind of worked out that anyway. Yeah, 0:09:36.000 --> 0:09:40.040 party retiring Hallap who had great clay numbers, right, great 0:09:40.080 --> 0:09:43.480 six month grade, twelve month clay numbers just hasn't looked 0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:47.160 good of late. And then a couple of the players 0:09:47.160 --> 0:09:50.000 who you think may it would give, you know, might 0:09:50.080 --> 0:09:51.920 give Ego trouble. I don't know if some people thought 0:09:51.920 --> 0:09:55.440 Samolanka would she just dispatched her so quickly. I mean, 0:09:55.640 --> 0:09:57.520 we'll get to the question of if I came to 0:09:57.559 --> 0:09:59.480 you from the future and I told you, oh my god, 0:09:59.600 --> 0:10:02.160 Ega lost to somebody, who would that be. We'll get 0:10:02.200 --> 0:10:03.920 to that momentarily, because I do have one or two 0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:07.319 names in mind, just because we're spitballing, but only because 0:10:07.320 --> 0:10:10.080 we're spitballing, right Like, I'm almost forced to ask you 0:10:10.120 --> 0:10:12.360 the question just that to ask something interesting. But as 0:10:12.360 --> 0:10:14.600 far as he is concerned, I mean, honestly, Drew like, 0:10:15.280 --> 0:10:19.920 it's probably my greatest call in any sport ever. Quite frankly, um, 0:10:19.960 --> 0:10:21.560 I mean, let's be honest. This is for those who 0:10:21.640 --> 0:10:24.719 you know miss in the details. This was the bet 0:10:24.760 --> 0:10:28.520 I made famously thirty thirty three to one for the 0:10:28.720 --> 0:10:31.320 for the French open in got paid on everyone but 0:10:31.360 --> 0:10:33.160 the one at the West Gate, which is still depending 0:10:33.640 --> 0:10:36.240 that that was, you know, And since then we've had 0:10:36.240 --> 0:10:38.240 her many times, and I've made a couple of comments 0:10:38.360 --> 0:10:41.000 hyperbolic comments on a numbers game. First and I said 0:10:41.000 --> 0:10:43.320 she's gonna win double digit majors. That was about a 0:10:43.400 --> 0:10:45.480 year ago, because I figured she'd win about eight French 0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:48.920 this should be her second. But then you know recently 0:10:49.000 --> 0:10:52.640 she's won four w T A one thousands this year, 0:10:53.280 --> 0:10:56.960 Like that's just that hasn't happened since I want to 0:10:56.960 --> 0:11:01.120 get this exactly right, four four w T one thousands 0:11:01.120 --> 0:11:04.840 hasn't happened since Serena did in one thousands, being the 0:11:04.880 --> 0:11:08.400 tournament level just just below the Slams. If she wins 0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:12.400 all seven of these matches, she will tie Venus Williams 0:11:12.400 --> 0:11:16.160 streak of thirty five consecutive victories from the year two thousands. 0:11:16.160 --> 0:11:18.720 So what I said earlier this year, as she was 0:11:18.720 --> 0:11:21.320 winning these tournaments and on this street was I think 0:11:21.440 --> 0:11:25.120 she's going to be the greatest women's player of all time, 0:11:25.440 --> 0:11:28.720 which is a out which is an an outlandish comment 0:11:28.800 --> 0:11:31.240 to make right because you have Martina de Rando, Lovan, 0:11:31.240 --> 0:11:33.360 Stephie Groff and Monica Cells. By the way, just from 0:11:33.400 --> 0:11:35.439 a betting market. I give shout out to sports Odds 0:11:35.480 --> 0:11:38.280 History dot com for providing these numbers, but just French 0:11:38.320 --> 0:11:41.160 Open History and here at the I'm at the d 0:11:41.720 --> 0:11:44.800 here at Circus Sports, Ega is even money plus one. 0:11:45.720 --> 0:11:47.360 But as far as like, who has been a pre 0:11:47.480 --> 0:11:51.160 flop favorite at the French Open in modern history as 0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:57.160 a minus number Serena talking about eventual champions Serena minus 0:11:57.200 --> 0:12:00.720 one thirty three, and before that have to go all 0:12:00.720 --> 0:12:06.800 the way back to stephie Groff minus, stephie Graff minus 0:12:08.440 --> 0:12:12.400 and poor Monica Sellis in minus one sixty three whose 0:12:12.400 --> 0:12:15.400 career was forever altered by being stabbed by a fan. 0:12:16.280 --> 0:12:21.280 And so that's the Them's the stratospheres we're dealing with 0:12:21.400 --> 0:12:24.400 right now. That's the stratosphere we're dealing with. Uh. And 0:12:24.440 --> 0:12:28.560 that's the story with Ega, who is the odds on 0:12:28.679 --> 0:12:32.400 favorite here and should be. And what you said minus 0:12:32.400 --> 0:12:34.280 four hundred, you don't have her in less than minus 0:12:34.320 --> 0:12:36.720 four hundred in any match on clay. It is her service. 0:12:36.880 --> 0:12:39.920 She's the women's world number one. I honestly like I 0:12:39.920 --> 0:12:42.560 wanted to I wanted to weep when she became the 0:12:42.559 --> 0:12:44.840 world's number one. It was on the Ash Party retirement. 0:12:44.920 --> 0:12:47.080 But going back to that night that Ash Party retired, 0:12:47.240 --> 0:12:49.120 so I had the same experience you did, Drew. I 0:12:49.120 --> 0:12:52.000 had plus four fifties in my pocket on ego I 0:12:52.000 --> 0:12:55.080 immediately because I was on Primetime Action. You texted me 0:12:55.800 --> 0:12:59.080 literally the minute that that show ended, which is it 0:12:59.160 --> 0:13:01.000 timed out with the into that show. I had no 0:13:01.080 --> 0:13:04.160 idea that to happen, And I was like, what you 0:13:04.240 --> 0:13:07.320 texted me? Daniel already texted me, somebody else texted me, 0:13:07.520 --> 0:13:10.320 anybody who was into tennis texted like, what is happening? 0:13:10.640 --> 0:13:12.480 Because it came out of nowhere, the world number one 0:13:12.520 --> 0:13:16.240 ash Party retiring, although you know, out of nowhere. Ash 0:13:16.240 --> 0:13:20.120 Party had never really embraced playing tennis as other champions have, 0:13:20.240 --> 0:13:22.200 so maybe not completely out of nowhere, but certainly out 0:13:22.240 --> 0:13:24.000 of nowhere at that moment. So I had the same experience. 0:13:24.000 --> 0:13:26.360 I'm like, okay, let me quickly go around looking around 0:13:26.400 --> 0:13:29.760 town and offshore. Are there numbers better than the ones 0:13:29.800 --> 0:13:32.040 that I have or there's still some stray Egan numbers? 0:13:32.440 --> 0:13:34.960 What I found is that there weren't any right. My 0:13:35.040 --> 0:13:37.320 experience was that there was. It was already down to 0:13:37.400 --> 0:13:40.200 three or lower plus three D or lower. And so 0:13:40.240 --> 0:13:43.360 I was like, uh, you know what, I don't know 0:13:43.360 --> 0:13:45.240 if I'm gonna add to it, maybe I'll make a 0:13:45.280 --> 0:13:48.360 decision on this later, which you know was a ridiculous 0:13:48.400 --> 0:13:50.200 thing to think what it did do for me. And 0:13:50.200 --> 0:13:52.520 we'll get to this in a bit. Is I decided 0:13:52.520 --> 0:13:54.720 while I was there checking EGO numbers, I was like, 0:13:55.040 --> 0:13:57.720 let me just see casually what some French open numbers 0:13:57.720 --> 0:14:00.480 are on the men's side. And that was the night 0:14:00.520 --> 0:14:05.400 that I lucked into finding stray numbers on Carlos Alcaraz, 0:14:05.880 --> 0:14:08.960 who was still at eleven to one around town and 0:14:09.200 --> 0:14:13.400 nine to one, and so Ash Barty didn't have me 0:14:13.520 --> 0:14:17.440 adding to EGA. It just accidentally had had me adding 0:14:17.480 --> 0:14:20.800 to Carlos Algorrez, which was incredible, not even adding starting 0:14:20.880 --> 0:14:22.800 at those numbers of Carlos Algarez. But let me just 0:14:22.840 --> 0:14:25.000 ask you the question though about the women's side here 0:14:25.360 --> 0:14:28.800 pre draw. If I came to you and I said, 0:14:28.880 --> 0:14:34.880 drew it happened. IgA didn't win this, she lost. Give 0:14:34.880 --> 0:14:38.440 me the player or players that you believe I'm talking about, 0:14:38.560 --> 0:14:44.880 man from the future. Man, uh, I'll go to go 0:14:45.000 --> 0:14:47.080 down the seeds here. Um, we don't even know if 0:14:47.120 --> 0:14:50.560 Krichica is going to play defend the strike strike striker 0:14:51.120 --> 0:14:55.360 Um Bodoza injured out of form. Striker Um fourth seed 0:14:55.440 --> 0:14:59.360 sacchary Um the last woman to defeat the Agan, clay 0:15:00.200 --> 0:15:04.480 Worth noting in general plays her pretty tough. Um has 0:15:04.600 --> 0:15:07.000 kind of a ceiling when she's on that's high enough 0:15:07.040 --> 0:15:08.760 to go toe to toe with someone who's as good 0:15:08.760 --> 0:15:12.040 as Ego. So sacchary Um would be kind of the 0:15:12.080 --> 0:15:17.680 first name that fifth onst board. No, although let's circle 0:15:17.680 --> 0:15:20.880 back on onst board for um, you know, for some 0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:25.320 other market prices before we wrap this pod um sabuenca 0:15:25.400 --> 0:15:31.760 no way, plashkava, no way. Danielle Collins. Maybe Collins beat her. 0:15:32.440 --> 0:15:37.040 She got Danielle freaking Collins got her, uh somewhat recently, right, 0:15:37.440 --> 0:15:40.800 She pop her at the Australian Open. Is that why 0:15:40.840 --> 0:15:43.280 you didn't win the Australian Open. I remember being surprised 0:15:43.280 --> 0:15:46.320 that you didn't lean now the Aussie frankly just because 0:15:46.320 --> 0:15:47.880 she was in great I thought she was in great 0:15:47.920 --> 0:15:52.840 form at the time. Yeah. I don't remember who beat 0:15:52.840 --> 0:15:56.840 her at the in down Onda, but I think it 0:15:56.920 --> 0:15:59.600 might have been It might have been Collins. It was, yeah, 0:16:00.080 --> 0:16:02.200 Neil Collins got her six four six one weird no 0:16:02.280 --> 0:16:05.160 show from me again that that match. So I guess 0:16:05.280 --> 0:16:07.240 I wouldn't you know, I guess you have to include 0:16:07.240 --> 0:16:09.040 her to some degree just because she's going to have 0:16:09.080 --> 0:16:12.280 the confidence and she's she's a tough She's a tough 0:16:12.320 --> 0:16:15.320 matchup no matter who you are. If the if, if 0:16:15.320 --> 0:16:18.120 the day is right, U Mugar rutha way out of form, 0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:22.320 no chance on clay, Radakanu injured and out of form, 0:16:22.760 --> 0:16:26.040 Osta Penco Osta Penco has played her pretty tough. I 0:16:26.080 --> 0:16:27.960 think that's the third name that you have to put 0:16:28.000 --> 0:16:31.400 in consideration. Even though she has been miserable on clay 0:16:31.480 --> 0:16:34.720 this season. She did get her earlier in I want 0:16:34.720 --> 0:16:39.280 to say Doha, No ego one Doha. It was the 0:16:39.320 --> 0:16:42.200 other one. Dubai. Ostapenko got her in Dubai. Osta Penco 0:16:42.280 --> 0:16:45.560 got her in Indian Wells in fall last year. UM 0:16:45.680 --> 0:16:49.360 So she guests deserves some consideration. Um And then of 0:16:49.440 --> 0:16:51.560 all of the matches that he has played on clay 0:16:51.600 --> 0:16:53.640 this year, the only time that I ever felt like 0:16:53.680 --> 0:16:58.360 she was especially under pressure was up against um Our. 0:16:58.440 --> 0:17:02.200 Canadian Bianca Andreas showed a little bit of form in 0:17:02.240 --> 0:17:04.720 that match in Rome. And so I think that's the 0:17:04.760 --> 0:17:07.600 fourth name. That's the person I would have come with. 0:17:07.760 --> 0:17:10.920 Right again, let me just preface this again by saying 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:13.920 we are not saying it's going to happen, But I'm 0:17:13.960 --> 0:17:17.960 just fulfilling content purposes just to ask the question if 0:17:17.960 --> 0:17:20.960 it did, who might it be. I actually think on 0:17:21.119 --> 0:17:24.560 Dressco's as good of a choice as any because we 0:17:24.640 --> 0:17:30.800 still don't know what a renewed peak form Bianca could be. 0:17:32.400 --> 0:17:35.600 She's kind of a wild card out there. Yeah, almost certainly. 0:17:35.640 --> 0:17:37.720 I'm going to sit down for every ego match this 0:17:37.880 --> 0:17:40.760 rolling Garrow's run and have and b and be cool 0:17:40.800 --> 0:17:43.480 as a cucumber, no sweat. You know this is gonna 0:17:43.480 --> 0:17:45.920 be fun. Let's see how good she is today if 0:17:45.920 --> 0:17:48.760 there's like a semifinal draw against and ask you, I'm 0:17:48.800 --> 0:17:51.560 going to be a little bit nervous that day, me too. Yeah, 0:17:51.960 --> 0:17:54.640 and On is a little bit andre a little bit 0:17:54.920 --> 0:17:57.560 I think would be a little bit. Yeah. I mean 0:17:57.600 --> 0:18:01.800 her game is, her game is is fun to watch 0:18:01.800 --> 0:18:04.040 and cheer four and it's different, which makes her a 0:18:04.080 --> 0:18:07.000 tough player to match up against. But the fact that 0:18:07.040 --> 0:18:10.240 you get solved that in Rome, I think should be 0:18:10.520 --> 0:18:13.720 should be somewhat of a positive sign for this tournament now, 0:18:14.720 --> 0:18:18.840 as is an amazing form. She ought to probably be 0:18:18.880 --> 0:18:21.640 the second choice in terms of just you know, if 0:18:21.800 --> 0:18:23.840 if there's another woman in this field who can beat 0:18:23.880 --> 0:18:27.920 all the other women considering their current form, it's probably her. 0:18:28.160 --> 0:18:30.439 She probably ought to be the second, you know, second 0:18:30.480 --> 0:18:32.639 choice in the betting market, even though I don't like 0:18:32.720 --> 0:18:35.560 her chances against you get head to head, um, but 0:18:36.440 --> 0:18:39.760 I think her form speaks to a potential awesome run 0:18:39.800 --> 0:18:43.560 on grass. And I've gotten some pretty aggressive positions going 0:18:43.600 --> 0:18:48.360 now for Ans at wimby uh in the thirty rain 0:18:49.840 --> 0:18:53.719 one plus range. So um, that's what it takes this weekend. 0:18:53.720 --> 0:18:58.640 About grabbed on thirty plus two one at Wimbledon. Yeah, 0:18:58.680 --> 0:19:00.840 I think, and I think, if I think again, she 0:19:00.880 --> 0:19:03.680 ought to be the clear second choice at Wimbledon after 0:19:04.560 --> 0:19:07.199 in my by by numbers, and she was priced in 0:19:07.320 --> 0:19:09.480 like that kind of third tier range, which doesn't make 0:19:09.520 --> 0:19:12.040 any sense at all because she, you know her her 0:19:12.080 --> 0:19:15.040 grasp elo is best on tour. Right now, I grabbed 0:19:15.080 --> 0:19:17.440 just to let you know again back to the Stephie graph, 0:19:17.560 --> 0:19:23.119 Monica sellis theme I have grabbed since, you know, just 0:19:23.240 --> 0:19:26.600 deciding that this is the player that we always thought 0:19:26.640 --> 0:19:29.400 she would be. Kind of thing I had. I grabbed 0:19:29.400 --> 0:19:33.080 Ega at nine to one at Wimbledon, and I grabbed 0:19:33.080 --> 0:19:35.679 Ega at seven to one at the US Open just 0:19:35.720 --> 0:19:39.240 because I wanted to have them. And you know, is 0:19:39.359 --> 0:19:41.320 are those who you know, she's never won anything on 0:19:41.359 --> 0:19:44.840 grass before, by the way, people right, never hasn't won 0:19:44.880 --> 0:19:47.679 a tournament on grass before. But at this point, is 0:19:47.680 --> 0:19:51.240 there any clay is always going to be one. He 0:19:51.320 --> 0:19:53.800 has shown great prowess on hard courts. Is there any 0:19:53.840 --> 0:19:56.040 reason to believe she's not an all court player at 0:19:56.040 --> 0:19:59.359 this point? No? No, no, no, no no. And I 0:19:59.359 --> 0:20:01.240 think what you saw from her at Indian Wells and 0:20:01.320 --> 0:20:05.959 Miami proves that that she ought to be the the clear, 0:20:06.359 --> 0:20:09.720 clear favorite at the US Open um. And you know, 0:20:09.960 --> 0:20:14.160 just just from my neutral everybody's healthy, everybody's playing their 0:20:14.200 --> 0:20:18.480 best tennis. She's winning that US Open comfortably, in my opinion. 0:20:19.400 --> 0:20:22.760 If there's a realistic chance that she just plays so 0:20:22.840 --> 0:20:27.200 much tennis that she is a little bit more weary, 0:20:27.280 --> 0:20:30.000 a little bit more fatigued than the other women and 0:20:30.080 --> 0:20:32.840 somebody catches her by surprise, that won't be shocking. It's 0:20:32.920 --> 0:20:37.000 usually quite hot in September, and uh, you know, conditions 0:20:37.040 --> 0:20:40.400 are not ideal. If you've kind of been grinding yourself 0:20:40.440 --> 0:20:43.560 to a fine dust throughout the rest of the season, 0:20:43.920 --> 0:20:47.120 you can get caught by surprise. But outside of that 0:20:47.240 --> 0:20:51.600 exact scenario, she's she's getting at least two slams this 0:20:51.680 --> 0:20:56.320 year in my opinion, French Open, in the US Open, um, Wimbledon's, 0:20:56.480 --> 0:20:59.120 Wimbledon's is a mystery to me. You know, we'll see 0:20:59.119 --> 0:21:00.960 how she looks on graph and as you said, it's 0:21:00.960 --> 0:21:03.120 the shortest season of all so the data is as 0:21:03.160 --> 0:21:05.879 scarce as it comes as well. But if she figures 0:21:05.880 --> 0:21:08.280 out a way to win that, then we could be 0:21:08.359 --> 0:21:13.639 talking about an EGA slam possibility income Australian Open next year. Um, 0:21:13.760 --> 0:21:15.640 let's go to the men's side for a second here 0:21:15.680 --> 0:21:19.879 because we wait for the draw. Um. Listen. So this 0:21:19.960 --> 0:21:23.280 is obviously Rafa Nadal's domain for so many years. He's 0:21:23.280 --> 0:21:26.080