WEBVTT - Beating the Book: 2023 Wimbledon Preview 0:00:01.080 --> 0:00:04.560 Come check it down, then. 0:00:05.920 --> 0:00:13.160 Come low down. Then Friday morning, June thirty, twenty twenty three, 0:00:13.160 --> 0:00:16.000 it is the Beating the Book podcast, Gil Alexander. It 0:00:16.160 --> 0:00:19.560 is Wimbledon. Tennis is third major of the year, the 0:00:19.720 --> 0:00:23.599 grass Major, if you will, the shortest of all seasons 0:00:23.920 --> 0:00:26.479 in terms of services in tennis. Grass court season is 0:00:26.560 --> 0:00:30.640 like five weeks total. So this podcast and when we're 0:00:30.640 --> 0:00:32.600 sort of wedging it in, reflects the nature of that 0:00:32.600 --> 0:00:35.159 grass court season. Just as it's hard for some players 0:00:35.159 --> 0:00:37.800 to squeeze in matches before Wimbledon, it was hard to 0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:41.160 squeeze in this podcast, but Drew Densick as always kind 0:00:41.240 --> 0:00:43.879 enough to join us to make it happen. You can 0:00:43.960 --> 0:00:46.400 follow him on Twitter at Whale Underscore Capper. He's the 0:00:46.400 --> 0:00:49.120 host of not one but two podcasts, The Deep Dive podcast, 0:00:49.120 --> 0:00:51.720 which he does with Andy Moltur and of course NBC 0:00:51.800 --> 0:00:54.440 Sports Bet the Edge, and one of I don't know, 0:00:54.480 --> 0:00:55.960 I'm embarrassing maybe a little. I don't know if he's 0:00:55.960 --> 0:00:58.720 gonna agree with this. One of the great global tennis 0:00:58.800 --> 0:01:01.080 minds that there is. How about that? 0:01:01.480 --> 0:01:02.160 How about that? Drew? 0:01:02.320 --> 0:01:02.920 You do it man? 0:01:04.480 --> 0:01:10.920 Yeah, I'll take it. I definitely. I think there are many, many, many, 0:01:10.959 --> 0:01:14.520 many greater global tennis minds. But if you want to 0:01:14.560 --> 0:01:17.000 give me a qualification of being able to weave what 0:01:17.080 --> 0:01:20.280 I'm seeing on tennis into a handicap better than your 0:01:20.319 --> 0:01:24.800 average you know, tennis fan or prognosticator, that's fine. Yeah, 0:01:24.840 --> 0:01:25.399 we'll go with that. 0:01:25.480 --> 0:01:28.720 Yeah he's so, here's the deal, everybody. So we're recording 0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:33.760 this at nine am Pacific twelve noon Eastern on Friday. 0:01:34.160 --> 0:01:37.959 The main draw begins in less than less than forty 0:01:38.000 --> 0:01:43.200 eight hours. They just put out the draw this morning 0:01:43.480 --> 0:01:47.360 in terms of overnight Stateside, so while we were sleeping, 0:01:47.760 --> 0:01:51.040 the men's and the women's draw came out. As other 0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:54.880 random grass court tournaments in England and Germany specifically wind down, 0:01:54.920 --> 0:01:57.760 and some people are quitting left and right. Ego, for instance, said, 0:01:57.760 --> 0:02:01.000 I'm not feeling well. She decided after getting to the semis, 0:02:01.000 --> 0:02:04.160 her first semi have a grasscourt tournament. She's like, deuces. 0:02:04.200 --> 0:02:06.760 Sounds to me like she's just getting ready for Wimbledon. 0:02:07.080 --> 0:02:09.320 I don't know, but that's what it sounds like. So 0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:12.240 the concern this morning was because I just did a 0:02:12.280 --> 0:02:15.639 numbers game that started two hours before this. When I 0:02:15.639 --> 0:02:17.440 started a numbers game, I just wanted to talk about 0:02:17.440 --> 0:02:20.160 my thoughts on the draw and hopefully there would be 0:02:20.200 --> 0:02:23.320 some numbers associated with the quarters. At that time two 0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:25.600 hours ago, they were just trickling in while I was 0:02:25.600 --> 0:02:27.920 talking about it. So it's just sort of doing it theoretically. 0:02:27.960 --> 0:02:31.359 And then some came in, we have women's numbers as 0:02:31.400 --> 0:02:33.560 we do this. I don't believe we have men's numbers. 0:02:33.560 --> 0:02:34.240 Are you seeing that. 0:02:35.720 --> 0:02:40.799 I'm looking everywhere. There's men's quarters at a couple of spots. Okay, good, Yeah, 0:02:41.000 --> 0:02:42.960 there's there's a pretty good amount of numbers. I mean, 0:02:43.000 --> 0:02:45.600 my numbers now that we've got the draw and I've 0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:47.840 kind of run some sims and I have, you know, 0:02:47.919 --> 0:02:52.560 actual win probabilities for quarters here are hot off the press. 0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:55.839 I haven't even really I haven't even really digested these 0:02:55.919 --> 0:02:58.520 trying to kind of, you know, kind of give them 0:02:58.560 --> 0:03:02.440 a little bit of added score. So you know, there's 0:03:02.480 --> 0:03:04.840 some we may say some things on this podcast that 0:03:04.960 --> 0:03:08.200 ultimately I either don't act on or revise as I 0:03:08.240 --> 0:03:11.720 continue to, you know, kind of go through this process. 0:03:11.760 --> 0:03:14.680 Because as you're mentioning like we're you're you're getting a 0:03:14.800 --> 0:03:19.120 very raw response reaction to you know, what is uh, 0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:22.400 what is a very interesting draw on a women's tournament 0:03:22.440 --> 0:03:24.320 that is going to be fascinated. 0:03:24.720 --> 0:03:26.160 Yeah, do you want to start with the women or 0:03:26.200 --> 0:03:28.040 should we creshando to the women? Your call? 0:03:28.880 --> 0:03:31.200 I I guess maybe let's go a step back and 0:03:31.240 --> 0:03:33.960 do a little bit of why is grass unique? Okay, 0:03:34.520 --> 0:03:37.320 why is this? Why is this a difficult handicap? Uh? 0:03:37.920 --> 0:03:40.160 You know we have you know, last time we you know, 0:03:40.200 --> 0:03:44.440 talked to Deep Tennis, it was, you know, the finale 0:03:44.520 --> 0:03:47.280 of clay season. Clay season is you know two two 0:03:47.320 --> 0:03:50.160 and a half months long. It even kind of is 0:03:50.200 --> 0:03:53.040 preceded by Indian Wells and Miami Indian Wells very you know, 0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:56.040 very slow hard court. So you have a kind of 0:03:56.040 --> 0:03:59.680 a good sample of you know, player form, uh and 0:04:00.200 --> 0:04:03.960 kind of you know court speed specific form for clay. 0:04:04.440 --> 0:04:07.520 You know, as you head into Roland Garros and then 0:04:07.560 --> 0:04:11.320 everything gets flipped on its head, you know, and the 0:04:11.480 --> 0:04:14.240 entire game is different when you go from clay to grass, 0:04:14.240 --> 0:04:17.280 from rolling Garros to you know, the grass run up 0:04:17.279 --> 0:04:20.720 and the grass run up is extremely compressed. There are 0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:24.960 players who you know, bagged it during clay because they're 0:04:25.000 --> 0:04:27.080 not especially good on that surface, who have come out 0:04:27.120 --> 0:04:29.760 of nowhere and have shown amazing forms so far on grass. 0:04:30.560 --> 0:04:33.440 There are players who you know, you thought were kind 0:04:33.440 --> 0:04:36.560 of putting something together this season who have stepped on 0:04:36.560 --> 0:04:41.039 a grass court and just wildly underwhelmed. And you know, 0:04:41.080 --> 0:04:44.640 I think I tend to try to treat what we 0:04:44.720 --> 0:04:47.960 see in the run up on grass with extreme caution, 0:04:48.360 --> 0:04:51.080 just because there are lots and lots of examples of 0:04:51.400 --> 0:04:56.280 losing quarter bets in my portfolio where we're like, my god, 0:04:56.360 --> 0:04:58.240 did you see how good that guy looked in Halla? 0:04:58.440 --> 0:05:01.680 And then he shows up and loses round one, And 0:05:02.040 --> 0:05:06.120 there's that general sense of success on grass and the 0:05:06.240 --> 0:05:08.880 lead up leading to success at Wimbledon. I don't think 0:05:09.000 --> 0:05:12.760 is surprising because of the compressed schedule, right, A lot 0:05:12.800 --> 0:05:15.359 of the best players don't take it seriously. They literally 0:05:15.400 --> 0:05:18.440 are like, this is too short. As you mentioned, Egas 0:05:18.440 --> 0:05:21.120 played a couple of warm ups. You know, anyone that 0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:23.560 bet on her to win in Bad Homburg for a 0:05:23.640 --> 0:05:27.320 championship is probably like, what the hell like? She's clearly 0:05:27.440 --> 0:05:29.960 the best in that field, not even close. Whatever the 0:05:29.960 --> 0:05:33.520 outright markets were there, she was the right bet. But 0:05:33.960 --> 0:05:36.840 you know, her motivations are a little her motivations are 0:05:36.839 --> 0:05:39.200 a little, a little little different than everybody else's. So 0:05:39.560 --> 0:05:42.359 you know, it's it's the players who have already had 0:05:42.400 --> 0:05:44.240 success this season, who have already won titles, who have 0:05:44.240 --> 0:05:47.080 already gotten points, who have already won money. I don't 0:05:47.080 --> 0:05:49.120 think you can really look at their results and make 0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:51.240 any draw any conclusions. And then the flip side is 0:05:51.279 --> 0:05:54.279 true if you have won a title on grass so 0:05:54.360 --> 0:05:56.400 far on the run up, but you know, you may 0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:59.280 be thinking, man, mission accomplished. You know, I'll go too, Bob, 0:05:59.400 --> 0:06:01.960 and I'll pick up, but I'll enjoy the pomp and circumstance. 0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:04.320 I'll have some strawberries and cream and then you know, 0:06:04.360 --> 0:06:06.640 it's a hardcore season, you know. So it's it's it's 0:06:06.680 --> 0:06:09.200 a little tough to read too much into what you've 0:06:09.200 --> 0:06:11.440 seen the last three weeks. And I'll just say exercise 0:06:11.520 --> 0:06:14.680 some caution. In terms of the game on grass, it's 0:06:14.720 --> 0:06:20.040 different because the rallies are substantially shorter, sets are shorter. 0:06:20.920 --> 0:06:23.040 You know, there's just in general, you know, games are shorter, 0:06:23.120 --> 0:06:27.440 sets are shorter. Hold percentage is substantially higher on grass 0:06:27.440 --> 0:06:29.760 than it is on clay because the speed of the 0:06:29.800 --> 0:06:32.240 surface and because of you know, what it affords certain 0:06:32.279 --> 0:06:35.440 players who have especially strong fast serve or especially good 0:06:35.440 --> 0:06:39.240 placement with their serve. You know, they become quote unquote 0:06:39.279 --> 0:06:43.080 grass specialists just because they're extremely tough to break. Because 0:06:43.120 --> 0:06:45.200 of that, tie breaks, you know, games in a given 0:06:45.240 --> 0:06:48.120 set go up relative to clay. You see a lot 0:06:48.160 --> 0:06:50.719 more a lot higher percentage of tie breaks, particularly in 0:06:50.760 --> 0:06:55.000 sets one on grass relative to any other surface. And 0:06:55.040 --> 0:06:58.680 then as we know specifically look at Wimbledon itself. You know, 0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:05.839 the grass is a living organism and it changes from 0:07:06.120 --> 0:07:08.800 day one to day twelve of this tournament as it 0:07:08.839 --> 0:07:12.040 gets played on and as it gets beaten up, and 0:07:12.120 --> 0:07:14.000 you know, the weather that can you know, the weather 0:07:14.080 --> 0:07:17.080 and the moisture in the air and the heat all 0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:21.280 that definitely tends to, you know, change the overall surface 0:07:21.320 --> 0:07:23.560 speed from you know, from the beginning to the end 0:07:23.600 --> 0:07:25.240 of the tournament. And that's something you got to weave 0:07:25.240 --> 0:07:27.360 in as well. It's different on center court than it 0:07:27.400 --> 0:07:29.160 is on some of the show courts, you know, So 0:07:29.480 --> 0:07:31.560 there is a million moving parts that make this this 0:07:31.840 --> 0:07:36.360 especially difficult and fun handicap. And I think you know, 0:07:36.640 --> 0:07:38.400 just kind of come into this with a little bit 0:07:38.400 --> 0:07:41.119 of a be ready to be surprised by some stuff 0:07:41.120 --> 0:07:42.080 that happens in week one. 0:07:42.640 --> 0:07:44.480 Well, let me get back to that fun comment you 0:07:44.520 --> 0:07:46.400 just made, because in the end you said, oh it's fun. 0:07:47.400 --> 0:07:49.360 You know, part and parcel with everything you just say. 0:07:49.360 --> 0:07:51.200 Because somebody asked me on Twitter this morning during the show. 0:07:51.200 --> 0:07:53.120 They were like, hey, is this your best slam? I 0:07:53.160 --> 0:07:55.200 was like, oh, hey, I didn't say this was up felling. 0:07:55.600 --> 0:07:59.560 Oh hell right, it's not for all the reasons you stay. Also, 0:08:00.080 --> 0:08:02.000 you know, just the data, just the data itself, right, 0:08:02.000 --> 0:08:04.800 there's less of it. And that makes sense because it's 0:08:04.800 --> 0:08:07.080 only like a five week grass court season, so really, 0:08:07.440 --> 0:08:09.280 you know, if I'm doing, if we're doing hard courts, 0:08:09.280 --> 0:08:11.880 I won't just speak for myself. Typically you're looking at year, 0:08:11.960 --> 0:08:14.160 you're looking at six months. Drew is also a guy 0:08:14.200 --> 0:08:17.680 who likes to look at recency Morgan, perhaps others, and 0:08:18.000 --> 0:08:21.480 I think hardcore the numbers are so so predictive. And 0:08:22.080 --> 0:08:25.280 obviously there's different gradations of hardcore too, but generally speaking, 0:08:25.320 --> 0:08:28.960 hardcore numbers are really predictive in a way that grass isn't, 0:08:29.000 --> 0:08:31.520 And so it causes this thing where it's like, if 0:08:31.560 --> 0:08:34.120 you have somebody who's been at this for a long time, 0:08:34.440 --> 0:08:37.839 you can trust those grass numbers but you also if 0:08:37.880 --> 0:08:41.240 you have someone who doesn't have any at all, it's 0:08:41.280 --> 0:08:44.760 not like you can throw them out in the same 0:08:44.800 --> 0:08:47.439 way that you could because you just don't. You don't 0:08:47.480 --> 0:08:51.360 really know in this very truncated thing because you don't 0:08:51.360 --> 0:08:53.320 have as much robust data for others. So I guess 0:08:53.320 --> 0:08:55.559 in the end, the question is use the word fun? 0:08:56.360 --> 0:08:57.880 Is it in the end for you? Or do you 0:08:57.920 --> 0:09:00.000 feel like this is more art than science? 0:09:00.080 --> 0:09:03.640 If you will, Yeah, I know it's it definitely is 0:09:03.760 --> 0:09:08.520 more art, Absolutely I would, And I think your point 0:09:08.559 --> 0:09:11.640 is fair, Like what you have a huge, huge imbalance 0:09:11.679 --> 0:09:14.520 and sample size between players like Patrick Kvitova who have 0:09:14.559 --> 0:09:17.280 played a million grass matches and players like Ego who 0:09:17.320 --> 0:09:20.960 have not, and like coming up with a fair price 0:09:21.000 --> 0:09:26.199 for those two, if that's your final, that's art, it is, yes, 0:09:26.760 --> 0:09:30.120 And I would even say that, like because it's such 0:09:30.160 --> 0:09:36.160 a serve oriented surface. The best bets I tend to 0:09:36.200 --> 0:09:40.120 make a Wimbledon come around the halfway point where you 0:09:40.160 --> 0:09:43.760 get a sense of how good of players serve is 0:09:43.800 --> 0:09:47.080 in terms of just rhythm, Like serve in my mind 0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:49.560 at least is a very hot hand kind of deal, 0:09:50.160 --> 0:09:53.199 right if you're serving with confidence? Yep, you know, you 0:09:53.200 --> 0:09:55.280 you continue to serve well. If you're playing tie breaks 0:09:55.280 --> 0:09:58.040 with confidence, you continue to play tiebreaks well. Like these 0:09:58.040 --> 0:10:00.559 are weird little mental wrinkles that are very much part 0:10:00.559 --> 0:10:04.960 of the art of handicapping on grass. And you know, 0:10:05.040 --> 0:10:15.280 I think, like was remember the Wimbledon that Gabrine Gaberinier one, Yeah, yeah, 0:10:15.320 --> 0:10:17.640 So that one stands out in my mind because coming 0:10:17.679 --> 0:10:20.480 into that she was like what you would have had 0:10:20.520 --> 0:10:24.720 thought fiftieth choice, Like, you know, you hadn't seen anything 0:10:24.760 --> 0:10:26.720 to tell you that that was going to happen, but 0:10:26.800 --> 0:10:29.160 you watched enough of kind of week one from her 0:10:29.520 --> 0:10:31.600 and saw what, you know, what was happening with her 0:10:31.679 --> 0:10:33.520 game that week and the confidence she was playing it, 0:10:33.520 --> 0:10:35.400 and you were like, oh my god, who's beating her? 0:10:35.800 --> 0:10:39.319 You know, like that that type of stuff happens. And 0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:43.240 you know Rebakan the last year, you know, I mean, 0:10:43.280 --> 0:10:45.480 I don't think there were probably people who thought before 0:10:45.480 --> 0:10:47.360 the tournament like, I'm just going to continue to better 0:10:47.440 --> 0:10:49.440 until she wins one, because she ultimately will I have 0:10:49.520 --> 0:10:51.679 confidence in her game blah blah blah. I'm sure people 0:10:51.679 --> 0:10:55.800 did that, but you I certainly didn't see any signal before. 0:10:56.040 --> 0:10:57.880 You know, she showed up and you know, before you 0:10:57.920 --> 0:11:00.760 saw what she was playing with confidence wise, and particularly 0:11:00.880 --> 0:11:03.920 she ousted. Did she oust Ego last year? 0:11:04.040 --> 0:11:05.559 Or was no cornad? 0:11:05.640 --> 0:11:08.440 Did I believe Corny did? Okay? All right, Well, she 0:11:08.480 --> 0:11:11.839 had a couple wins either way. Eating Simone Halp in 0:11:11.840 --> 0:11:14.000 the semi finals is probably the one that stands out then, 0:11:15.160 --> 0:11:17.640 where you know, help was you know, I think she 0:11:17.720 --> 0:11:20.040 was pretty heavy favorite over Bakana in that moment, and 0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:22.720 that was one way match and uh, you know, she 0:11:22.720 --> 0:11:26.319 she wrote that momentum to a title. You don't need 0:11:26.360 --> 0:11:29.120 to really reflect anymore other than that on last year's final. 0:11:29.160 --> 0:11:31.800 But the greatest thing about that final that I will 0:11:31.840 --> 0:11:34.680 always remember is her lack of her lack of a 0:11:34.760 --> 0:11:39.040 reaction when she won the first slam. She was just nonplused. 0:11:39.160 --> 0:11:42.960 She was like business as usual. Yeah, So you know, 0:11:43.000 --> 0:11:46.640 I think, you know, I agree, it's art more than science. 0:11:46.679 --> 0:11:49.240 It's you know, you are stuck with a lot of 0:11:49.280 --> 0:11:52.440 sample sized issues with the data, so that takes you know, 0:11:52.480 --> 0:11:54.880 that levels the playing field a little bit. I don't 0:11:54.880 --> 0:11:57.959 think there's any kind of endboss grass tennis originator out 0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:00.199 there who's coming up with numbers and prices is in 0:12:00.280 --> 0:12:03.280 shaping the market to the way that like even just 0:12:03.320 --> 0:12:06.280 your average show who has been you know, coming up 0:12:06.320 --> 0:12:08.400 with fairs based on some mental model. I don't think 0:12:08.400 --> 0:12:12.640 those type of players are out of the game, whereas 0:12:12.679 --> 0:12:15.200 other services, other tournaments, they definitely are. 0:12:15.440 --> 0:12:18.560 No totally agree this is now. Having said all that, 0:12:19.800 --> 0:12:22.880 the draw came out and there are definitely some lines 0:12:22.920 --> 0:12:24.679 you can draw to bets. And let's start on the 0:12:24.679 --> 0:12:27.520 women's side, because this is more meaty than the men's side, 0:12:27.520 --> 0:12:30.880 which which obviously has Novak Djokovic and Carlos al Karez 0:12:30.920 --> 0:12:33.920 at the top. But on the lady's side. And I 0:12:33.920 --> 0:12:36.480 don't know what your reaction was, but my my reaction 0:12:36.640 --> 0:12:41.600 to the draw was, holy shit, did they make Q 0:12:41.720 --> 0:12:46.120 three and Q four much more densely populated with players 0:12:46.520 --> 0:12:49.000 than Q one and Q two players that can you know, 0:12:49.080 --> 0:12:51.120 have a shot at going deep in this tournament. So 0:12:51.760 --> 0:12:54.880 Q one is the Spia Tech quarter, if you will, 0:12:55.480 --> 0:12:58.679 cassid Keina golf bench, it's there. Q two. I mean 0:12:58.720 --> 0:13:00.520 I already recommended on the shows morning, I have a 0:13:00.600 --> 0:13:04.079 kup dere Matova bet there, you got Pagoula, you got Vekch. 0:13:04.120 --> 0:13:06.560 I know you like Donna vekch Carolyne Garcia is there 0:13:07.080 --> 0:13:09.680 to a lesser extent, Leila Fernandez and Lude Mila Samsonova. 0:13:09.720 --> 0:13:11.160 But then Q three and Q four and I'll just 0:13:11.240 --> 0:13:13.640 leave this for you to come in afterwards. Q three 0:13:13.679 --> 0:13:16.480 has got Jabor Pliskova, kvid of A, Hadad, Maaya Osta, 0:13:16.480 --> 0:13:21.239 Panko and Rebakana, and Q four has got Soakkary keys Andreva, Kurdjikova, 0:13:21.280 --> 0:13:23.199 Alexandrova and Sabalanka. 0:13:23.640 --> 0:13:29.800 Good god, Yeah, I share your sentiment. And when you 0:13:29.840 --> 0:13:33.760 see something like this, it's uh, you know, I would 0:13:33.800 --> 0:13:35.440 qualify it as an imbalanced draw. 0:13:36.200 --> 0:13:36.440 Yep. 0:13:37.600 --> 0:13:40.040 Even though Ega is on the top, the top is weak, 0:13:40.280 --> 0:13:46.000 the bottom is strong, and you I think you correctly 0:13:46.040 --> 0:13:50.480 laid it out. Like my my percentage is for Ego 0:13:50.559 --> 0:13:52.960 to win Q one and Kuda Matova to win Q 0:13:53.080 --> 0:13:56.360 two relative to my percentage for those same players winning 0:13:56.400 --> 0:14:01.360 the title are outsized right right, and so attacking them 0:14:01.559 --> 0:14:04.240 with Q one Q two type of bets as opposed 0:14:04.280 --> 0:14:07.160 to taking them out right makes sense to me. But 0:14:07.240 --> 0:14:10.280 then again, taking them out right and expecting that there's 0:14:10.280 --> 0:14:11.920 going to be chaos on the other side of the draw, 0:14:12.000 --> 0:14:13.680 and you don't know for sure that a you know, 0:14:13.679 --> 0:14:16.720 and especially uh, you know the worst case You know 0:14:16.760 --> 0:14:19.680 that you don't know that the worst case player is 0:14:19.720 --> 0:14:21.600 going to come through, And I don't even know that 0:14:21.640 --> 0:14:23.440 we can sit here and tell you sincerely who the 0:14:23.440 --> 0:14:25.400 worst case player would be for an ego. 0:14:25.360 --> 0:14:27.080 Right, It's exactly right, we don't know. 0:14:27.800 --> 0:14:33.960 I could be it could be uh uh. I would 0:14:34.000 --> 0:14:38.640 say full strength Rebecca probably, yeah, full Strengthbaa, yeah, could 0:14:38.680 --> 0:14:41.600 be Kvitva just because of her you know, experience on 0:14:41.600 --> 0:14:42.160 the surface. 0:14:42.360 --> 0:14:44.520 Actually, I would say it's a toss up between those two. 0:14:44.720 --> 0:14:49.320 Yes, yeah, I wouldn't entirely rule out Sabolenca if she's 0:14:49.600 --> 0:14:53.840 playing with confidence in her service firing like that's not crazy. 0:14:54.760 --> 0:14:56.800 I'll be honest with you, Drew. I have to keep 0:14:57.120 --> 0:15:01.040 reminding myself that she's a kN tender, Like, I don't 0:15:01.040 --> 0:15:03.560 know what that is about me, but I have I 0:15:03.560 --> 0:15:07.440 have Kavitava and Rebakta. I have the I mean for 0:15:07.560 --> 0:15:10.600 me when I'm just looking at historical numbers, right, Jabor's 0:15:10.720 --> 0:15:14.640 actually great, but she's not in top form. Kvidava's next, 0:15:15.360 --> 0:15:19.480 but like even like Krejikovasakary, kuder Matova, Ostapenko, Like I'm 0:15:19.520 --> 0:15:22.920 just going down the list. You've got Ostapenko and Rebacca 0:15:23.000 --> 0:15:26.440 and Kavidva all in that, Jabor all in that. You know, 0:15:26.480 --> 0:15:28.520 you got a serve bot in Piliskovo, You've got Hadad 0:15:28.640 --> 0:15:31.520 Maya in there. So I mean, I think the answer 0:15:31.560 --> 0:15:33.120 is probably to your question is probably a full strength 0:15:33.120 --> 0:15:36.920 Rebaka and Kovidva. But yeah, if it's I mean, if 0:15:36.960 --> 0:15:41.040 it were a if Ostapenko got there and she was 0:15:41.120 --> 0:15:43.160 just killing, I'd be terrified of her too. 0:15:44.000 --> 0:15:49.640 Sure. Yeah. In a lot of the lead up before 0:15:49.680 --> 0:15:51.360 we saw the draw, I would have told you I 0:15:51.360 --> 0:15:54.160 have a list of twelve women who I have greater 0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:57.600 than two percent chance to win. That's a lot. 0:15:57.720 --> 0:15:58.240 Let's hear that. 0:15:58.240 --> 0:15:58.640 That's a lot. 0:15:58.680 --> 0:15:59.640 That's a lot of players. 0:15:59.760 --> 0:16:02.880 Yeah, ten of them are on the bottom, two of 0:16:02.920 --> 0:16:03.840 them are on the top. 0:16:03.960 --> 0:16:07.480 And the two on the top are taking ku deer Mantova. Correct, yep, 0:16:08.200 --> 0:16:09.000 totally agree. 0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:10.480 That's a huge balance. 0:16:10.480 --> 0:16:11.400 It's unbelievable. 0:16:11.480 --> 0:16:13.840 Yeah, yeah, yeah, So what do you do with that? 0:16:14.800 --> 0:16:17.000 I mean, I think basically, if you really had eyes 0:16:17.040 --> 0:16:19.800 for if you specifically have you know, if you already 0:16:19.800 --> 0:16:23.720 have a bed and pocket on you know, on covid 0:16:23.760 --> 0:16:27.080 of a. This was a big old give me a 0:16:27.080 --> 0:16:29.920 break kind of a draw because a ton of the 0:16:29.920 --> 0:16:33.120 equity you've already captured with her form you've seen so 0:16:33.200 --> 0:16:36.520 far this year has kind of been tilted back into 0:16:36.560 --> 0:16:39.840 the ego bucket, which is a bummer, but that's fine. 0:16:40.600 --> 0:16:43.680 You know that the idea of being able to get 0:16:44.040 --> 0:16:46.280 a decent price on covid of A against some of 0:16:46.320 --> 0:16:48.760 these women she's going to have to go through going 0:16:48.760 --> 0:16:50.360 to get a good you know, it'll be a good 0:16:51.400 --> 0:16:56.640 maybe perceived as an interesting matchup against Pushkova in round three, 0:16:57.880 --> 0:17:00.920 a good matchup against your board round four if your 0:17:00.920 --> 0:17:02.720 board gets there. Man, I don't know what's going on 0:17:02.760 --> 0:17:07.840 with her. And then you know, presumably Rebakna in a 0:17:08.720 --> 0:17:11.000 in the quarterfinal like those are that's a that's a 0:17:11.119 --> 0:17:12.879 that's a one two three right there. That's going to 0:17:12.920 --> 0:17:16.359 get you some pretty good rollover type of pricing. And 0:17:16.400 --> 0:17:18.879 then you know sable Anka and the semi finals and 0:17:18.880 --> 0:17:22.119 then again the finals. Like I think a rollover on COVIDVA, 0:17:22.240 --> 0:17:24.600 worst case scenario in terms of who she would face, 0:17:25.000 --> 0:17:28.760 would probably get you in the twelve to fifteen to 0:17:28.800 --> 0:17:30.680 one range. And I think her prices are a little 0:17:30.680 --> 0:17:31.280 shorter than that. 0:17:31.720 --> 0:17:33.560 Little shorter consais you might be able to find a 0:17:33.600 --> 0:17:34.680 twelve to one out there, but. 0:17:34.760 --> 0:17:38.200 Yes, yeah, typically shorter. So it's you know, I think 0:17:38.560 --> 0:17:40.879 you have you're gonna have to make some decisions, and 0:17:40.960 --> 0:17:42.760 you actually can be a little bit patient and watch 0:17:42.760 --> 0:17:45.919 a couple of rounds see sort of how you know 0:17:45.960 --> 0:17:48.880 how things are materializing on the bottom, and then kind 0:17:48.920 --> 0:17:52.159 of ride a specific player round by round as opposed 0:17:52.200 --> 0:17:55.760 to outright on the bottom. You know you can get 0:17:55.840 --> 0:17:58.359 but you know, there's always the possibility you wake up 0:17:58.359 --> 0:18:02.240 one morning and Rebacca this out because of illness. Right, 0:18:03.720 --> 0:18:06.720 there's a chance that Jibor gets upset in round one 0:18:06.800 --> 0:18:09.399 or something and then all of a sudden, that section 0:18:09.480 --> 0:18:11.600 of the draw for Kamitova is a lot softer, right, 0:18:12.960 --> 0:18:15.520 So you know, I think there's a little bit of 0:18:15.520 --> 0:18:17.600 ept exercise caution if you're going to look at things 0:18:17.640 --> 0:18:20.399 this way. But I think that's the right way to 0:18:20.400 --> 0:18:23.119 look at it math wise, just because there's you know 0:18:23.160 --> 0:18:25.000 that some of the players we haven't even mentioned that 0:18:25.040 --> 0:18:29.719 are very good or on the bottom. Alexandrova is in 0:18:29.760 --> 0:18:33.040 my twelve for sure, She's got an interesting spot in 0:18:33.080 --> 0:18:36.119 the draw. I really don't know what to make in 0:18:36.160 --> 0:18:38.800 terms of Katchikova right now. But she's shown you enough 0:18:38.800 --> 0:18:40.879 on grass, I think in the run up that and 0:18:41.080 --> 0:18:43.760 enough in this year so far in terms of quality 0:18:43.800 --> 0:18:46.520 of play that Katchikova has to be, you know, in 0:18:46.560 --> 0:18:49.760 the mix. Andreva, I really don't know what to make 0:18:49.800 --> 0:18:52.560 of because she is a total unknown on grass. 0:18:52.200 --> 0:18:54.359 No grass data whatsoever on any tour. 0:18:54.800 --> 0:19:00.359 Yeah, and her outright prices are just wildly unbeddable. There's 0:19:01.040 --> 0:19:03.360 it's nonsense that she's in like the fifty to one range. 0:19:03.400 --> 0:19:07.639 Oh, that's ridiculous. When I was going through Q four, 0:19:07.680 --> 0:19:08.800 I actually I don't know if you caught it. I 0:19:08.800 --> 0:19:13.520 did mention. I mentioned Alexandrova Kjikoba, Andreva. I also mentioned 0:19:13.600 --> 0:19:18.760 soakery and Keys. Socchary's grass numbers are really good and 0:19:18.800 --> 0:19:22.000 we just don't think about her. Could this finally be 0:19:22.119 --> 0:19:23.040 the tournament for her? 0:19:26.720 --> 0:19:30.320 She looks like an out in round three Keys to me, yes, uh. 0:19:30.359 --> 0:19:34.520 And you know, Socchary falls into specific bucket of players 0:19:34.600 --> 0:19:39.159 I just never even really consider because there they consistently 0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:42.560 underperform at the slam level relative to their numbers. Doesn't matter, 0:19:42.680 --> 0:19:46.000 like kind of seems like it doesn't matter. There's some guys, 0:19:46.040 --> 0:19:48.720 guys who fall into that bucket pretty clearly too, that 0:19:48.760 --> 0:19:52.080 we'll talk about, I'm sure, but you know, I kind 0:19:52.080 --> 0:19:53.960 of will pay to see Sokery do it at the 0:19:53.960 --> 0:19:58.760 slam level at this point, the inexcusable that she didn't 0:19:58.760 --> 0:20:01.800 win that Fred Shope and the Chikova won, considering how 0:20:01.800 --> 0:20:05.720 that broke for her. The other name he didn't mention 0:20:05.800 --> 0:20:09.280 in the Q four though, is your French Open finalist 0:20:09.320 --> 0:20:15.919 Carolina Mukhova. Yes, I did not mention your correct Yeah, 0:20:16.280 --> 0:20:19.639 she could. She could pop again, entirely possible. You know, 0:20:19.760 --> 0:20:22.399 she has on record as clay is not her favorite surface, 0:20:22.440 --> 0:20:25.080 and yet there she was in the last two. Actually, 0:20:25.080 --> 0:20:27.280 there she was with a chance to serve it out. 0:20:28.440 --> 0:20:30.639 It's funny, though, you say that, because immediately, like we 0:20:30.800 --> 0:20:32.960 just talked about how you know, with this data, it's 0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:35.359 tough I look at her because my instinct is to 0:20:35.359 --> 0:20:36.840 look at the data, right, and her grass data is 0:20:36.880 --> 0:20:41.920 not that spectacular. But then again, this isn't this isn't 0:20:41.960 --> 0:20:44.240