The sports spread betting blog

Singapore Grand Prix, preview - 24/09/09

Take a look at the following sequence: Button, Vettel, Webber, Hamilton, Barrichello, Raikkonen. What came next? The answer was Barrichello, winner of the last Grand Prix at Monza two weeks ago, and the first repeat winner of a race in Formula 1 since Jenson Button won his sixth out of seven in Turkey. This was back in early June, a time when it looked like Brawn GP was romping home to the Constructor’s Championship in its maiden season, with its undercooked rivals at a loss to stop the new speedster on the grid. Since then, however, a sport frequently derided for its predictability has sprung up surprise after surprise. And that’s just on the racetrack.

Without meaning to go back over the innumerable controversial off-field incidents that have punctuated Formula 1 season, there is a certain delicious twist that in the same week that the full shameful extent of Piquet Jr.’s deliberate crash was revealed, the teams have returned to the same track where the whole sorry saga unfurled, Singapore. Goodness only knows what will be running through Fernando Alonso’s mind in the pit-lane on Sunday. Last year’s winner will be racing without the support of his erstwhile team-mates Briatore, Piquet and Symonds, and the Renault driver must surely be feeling guilty about his role in their downfall – despite his denial of any involvement in the incident.

Alonso is available at 9-12 on the race index for the Grand Prix, which awarded 60 points to the winner, 40 to the runner-up, all the way down to 5 points for eighth place. I’ve always found this index an enjoyable market to play: having 8 places paid far exceeds the 3 typically offered each-way by fixed odds firms. Even if the leaders charge away at the start, your attention is still held by the chasing pack, within which the scrap for points is normally even more intense, especially as this stage of the season with contracts up for renewal. With over half the drivers expected to swap teams in time for the start of the 2010 season, the likes of Kubica, Rosberg and Alonso will be eagerly anticipating brighter futures with stronger teams, while the struggling Nakajima, Grosjean and Kovalainen must be fearing the worst.

At the head of the betting this time around is the rejuvenated Lewis Hamilton, who is currently trading at 28.5–31.5 on the race index and at 23–29 on Spreadex’s fixed odds spreads, which make up 100 to the winner. The McLaren has been seriously pacey in recent weeks and it was only a desperate lunge for second place which resulted in a dramatic last lap crash for Hamilton in Monza. This weekend it’s hard to see him off the podium. Elsewhere, Barrichello is ranked ahead of Button for the first time this season after their contrasting recent form for Brawn. If Jenson does go on to win the Driver’s Championship – and he’s still a strong favourite with a 14 point lead and 4 races less – then he really will have taken the expression ‘limping over the line’ to a whole new level. It’s reminiscent of Aesop’s fable of the Tortoise and the Hare…but with the hare winning by a neck. On a related note, Button is 6/4 favourite for Sports Personality of the Year. Now, even if he was a marginally less vile human being, that would still scream ‘lay’. As it is, surely Button can only win if, come polling day, the Great British Public collectively loses leave of its senses. Then again, renowned ‘personalities’ Nigel Mansell and Michael Owen have won the award in the not-so-distant past, so on reflection, it’s a probably a market to avoid getting involved in whatsoever.

JW

Liverpool vs Aston Villa, Premier League, 24/08/09

Ever get the impression that you just have a little too much interest in a game? That’s how I was feeling as kick-off approached on Monday night for the match between
Liverpool and Aston Villa.

My interest was four-fold, seeing as:

1) I’d bought Aston Villa points at the start of the season (see article below)
2) I’d decided to BUY STEVEN GERRARD GOAL MINUTES AT 26 for this match so was cheering him on.
3) I support one of Liverpool’s title rivals (won’t say who) so was keen to see the Scousers fall to their second defeat of the season.
4) I was involved in a particularly competitive fantasy football competition and this match was crucial.

So not only was my interest excessive in the match, but it was also heavily conflicted, basically coming down to four variables - £££ (long-term), £££ (short-term), pride (long-term) and pride (short-term). It was evident that there was no chance in hell of everything going my way so it was a question of prioritising, compromising and cutting deals with myself in search of a vaguely acceptable end result.

In the battle of the £££s, money in the future is never as useful as money right now, so I would have happily sacrificed a decent result for Villa for a couple of late Gerrard screamers.

What I’ve loosely described as ‘pride’ is more difficult to quantify and mixes poorly with gambling at the best of times. Supporting a club – and I mean really supporting here, living and breathing results and undergoing violent mood swings dependent on the weekend’s events – is a labour of love, but laborious none the less. Winning and losing money off a set of football results can bring similar feelings of joy and despair, though these feel distinctly more hollow than the genuine feelings of fandom – or so I’d always told myself.

Your emotional success in mixing gambling and supporting probably depends on your ability to internally differentiate between the two: while many, myself included, would flatly refuse to bet against their own team in a match, I know of people who do this every week for what they describe as an ‘emotional hedge’. But how much does the cash you win offset the pain of a defeat? And how much money would you have to lose on a bet to entirely knock the shine off a win? I suspect the amount is less than some would care to admit.

Before we get too bogged down in hypothetical questions of emotion, the more eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that the fourth ‘interest’ listed above was fantasy football? Now surely a silly game, which is basically betting but without any material reward, can’t be a serious consideration here? Not as simple. The fantasy football in question is a head-to-head league played among an intensely competitive group of office colleagues. With two defeats out of two so far, another losing week was nearly unthinkable.

As it transpired, I had Liverpool’s left-back Emiliano Insua (pictured above) whereas my adversary was fielding Villa centre-back Curtis Davies. As we were tied on points, in effect it was a straight match-bet between Davies and Insua. With Liverpool playing at home and firm favourites, any home win would be enough to send me through.

So what was I actually cheering for? By this stage, I had absolutely no idea. I resolved to just sit back and let the football come to me. Liverpool started the brightly and Gerrard had a couple of excellent chances in the eighth minute to score. There is a theory that if you’ve bought a player’s goal minutes then you don’t want them to score early on but I’ve never really gone along with this. After all, even an eighth-minute goal is worth a few points and I refuse to believe that it means Gerrard has somehow ‘used up’ his allotted quota of goals for the game. However, seeing as Gerrard missed both times, this never became an issue. Indeed, it was Villa who took the lead through an OG from the hapless Lucas – great news for Villa points, but a disaster for Insua, who lost his valuable clean sheet bonus thanks to the incompetence of his team-mate.

Then, as the first half ebbed towards a close, Villa amazingly scored again – this time through, of all people, Curtis Davies, my fantasy football nemesis. With this week’s contest now almost certain to end in another defeat, I consoled myself in the thought that everything else was going swimmingly: Villa were set to win away at Liverpool, which was wonderful news for their season points. Liverpool in turn were looking precariously poised in the title race, just three games in, which was wonderful news for my football club. And if they were going to launch a comeback, who better to lead it than Steven Gerrard, captain marvel?

Ah yes, about that. Gerrard went close a few times in the second half, but not in the last 20 minutes, when PGM buyers are most handsomely rewarded. This was no-one’s fault but his own: just after Torres had scored to put Liverpool back in the game at 2-1, Gerrard launched into a mad, bad and dangerous tackle inside his own penalty area, upending Nigel Reo-Coker and conceding the penalty that would cost Liverpool the game.

At 3-1 with 15 minutes left, the comeback was officially over. Gerrard and his team-mates meandered through a tepid last 15 minutes, without coming close to scoring. Bad news then for buyers Gerrard goal minutes, which made up zero, and terrible news for the fantasy football, but the convincing Villa win was more than beneficial elsewhere. All in all, a confusing night’s work.

JW

Holland v England, international friendly - 12/8/09

If it is a cliché to suggest that post of England manager is a poisoned chalice, then it’s one that has stood the test of time. The first incumbent this century, Sven-Göran Ericsson had by most standards a broadly successful reign, consistently breezing through qualification and leading England to three consecutive quarter-finals. Regardless, the erudite Swede was forced out by a rabid, xenophobic press-pack for the heinous sin of supposedly lacking that English panacea: ‘passion’.

And so we replaced Sven for Steve, who apparently possessed this great intangible, only to decide that he lacked, well, practically everything else. The usual vitriol began to fly towards McClaren: he was out of his depth, tactically naïve, in thrall of his players, too conservative, not conservative enough. His teeth were too white.

Worst of all, he dared to put up an umbrella while getting drenched by a thunderstorm on a chilly November evening. As often is the case with England, negativity begat fear, which in turn begat underachievement; England produced a listless display at home to Croatia on said chilly November evening and went on to miss Euro 2008.

Despite the subsequent outbreak of hysteria, Euro 2008 managed to survive without England and was all the more enjoyable for it. But the good times couldn’t last for ever and soon England were back in action. We had a new manager, Fabio. Erudite and passionate, the perfect mix. World Cup qualifying began and a wave of optimism spread across the nation. We started winning matches again: 4-1, 5-1, 6-0! Take that Croatia, Kazakhstan and Andorra!

And so, with seven wins out of seven we sit dazzling atop World Cup Group 6, a once-proud nation now proud again. Everything is wonderful with Don Fabio at our helm: it’s sure going be a wrench getting rid of this one, he’s a keeper. And you know what? This could really be ‘our year’. No really, it could.

Ah yes, we’ve sure been here before. From glory to despair and back again. Build ‘em up and knock ‘em down – nobody does it better than the English. Make no mistake, we’re building ourselves up again right now. It’s not like we don’t even realise what we’re doing, it’s just that it’s so ingrained within English football that they’re powerless to stop it. Take these quotes from Frank Lampard last week: “I’m wary of falling into the trap where people ask if you can win it, you say you can, and then expectations rise”, he starts promisingly. “Of course we can win it, though”, he ends inevitably.

Well we can, yes, but so can everyone from Spain at the top of the betting (5/1) to Sudan right at the bottom (5000/1). It doesn’t mean that we actually will though, but if you believe the bookies – who, don’t forget, are nothing more than a reflection of the expected views of the punters – then England are 8/1 fourth-favourites for the World Cup. This is behind Spain, Brazil and Argentina (which in itself must have required an inordinate degree of restraint) but ahead of the likes of Germany, Italy and France – you know, countries that have actually won major trophies in the last 20 years.

England played Holland on Wednesday night in an international friendly, that most pointless of match. I BOUGHT SUPREMACY AT 0.3, getting with Holland, in my own miniscule attempt to prick the pomposity of the England hype machine. Holland went two-nil up and I was enjoying myself very much. Then England scored two and it started again. The excitement, the exuberance, the endless hype. I lost my bet, but when it comes to England, I lost my will a long time ago.

JW

Premier League Points Predictions 09/10 - 5/08/09

Love it or loathe it – and plenty of people do both – the Premier League is only 10 days away and now seems as good a time as ever to try and size up what lies in store. One of the most popular spread betting markets available is Season Points, where the firms try and predict the final league table before the season has even begun. It’s not an easy market to play, but the rewards can be substantial – if you’re right, naturally. Spreadex’s quotes can be found on their website and everyone will have their own ideas over who to sell or buy, but here were a few bets that I fancied myself:

1) BUY ASTON VILLA POINTS AT 56.5

The quote offered on Aston Villa this season is 55-56.5 so if, like me, you fancy them to perform decently again this season, buying their points seems a no-brainer. I really thought this would be higher: Villa were flying for two-thirds of last season and looked set for a Champions League spot ahead of Arsenal before a horrendous late collapse. This was commonly ascribed to their small squad size, and while this is still a problem, it has to be remembered that their season began last year in mid-July with the (now-defunct) Intertoto Cup.

This European campaign lasted until late-February when, already showing signs of struggling to compete on several fronts, they lost to a useful CSKA Moscow side and embarked on a winless streak of nine league games, earning only 11 points from their last 13 games. Despite this, they still ended up with a very respectable total of 62 and I see little reason why they can’t maintain that kind of level of performance this time around. The squad has been more-or-less kept intact, bar the expected loss of Gareth Barry, the sale of Zat Knight and the retirement of Martin Laursen – who missed around half of last season due to injury anyway.

In have come Stewart Downing (crocked until December) and Leeds starlet Fabian Delph. What’s more, the dynamic duo of Young and Agbonlahor – who were so pivotal to the Villa’s impressive start but faded away more than most after Christmas – should be refreshed after the summer break and all the stronger for their experience last season. As a last thought – since Martin O’Neill took over in 2006, Villa have scored 50, 60 and 62 points. I see little reason to anticipate any imminent decline from the Villans this year.

2) SELL MANCHESTER CITY POINTS AT 65.5

OK, this is a little more dangerous, I admit. Man City’s recent exploits in the transfer market have been well-documented and in theory, backing a team which contains Robinho, Adebayor, Tevez, Barry et al. to struggle seems to fly in the face of logic. The key to this bet though is the level at which you can sell: 65.5 points is an awful lot for a team to reach, given that they scored only 50 last year. Quite evidently this is a new Man City side, but until the signings are fully integrated within whatever formation Mark Hughes chooses to play (it’s looking like 2-2-6 at the moment with the amount of strikers he’s bought), it’s doubtful that the team will play to its full potential.

City’s current spending spree has been described as unprecedented within history of the English game, but the same was said about Chelsea before the 2003-2004 season, just after Roman Abromovich had taken over and handed Claudio Ranieri the keys to his treasure chest. The result was a 12-point improvement from the season before last – impressive, but it took a change of manager (to Jose Mourinho) and another season of heavy spending before Chelski FC was fully formed and won its first league title. With question marks still hovering over Mark Hughes’ ability to manage big names, and indeed over his long-term future as manager. I’m happy to take a chance and get short of City points for now, with a view to a potential close later in the season when things are a little less chaotic at Eastlands.

3) BUY BURNLEY POINTS AT 32

Middlesbrough scored 32 points last season and won 7 of their 38 games in the Premier League. Meanwhile, Burnley won 5 of their 8 games against Premier League opposition, even though they were playing in the Championship. They also achieved promotion, despite a marathon season that involved 12 cup ties and a successful Play-off campaign. Nevertheless, they are favourites across the board to finish at the foot of the pile in their first Premier League season and this is reflected in their points quote of 30.5-32.

Now let’s say that the bookies are right to dismiss their chances this season and they do indeed finish in the bottom three. In the last five years, the average number of points scored by a relegated side is 30.5, but this is skewed by two exceptionally bad teams: Derby County in ’07-08 who scored just 11 points, and Sunderland in ’05-06, who reached 15. If these are disregarded, the average rises to 33.1. So basically, providing that Burnley avoid the kind of catastrophic seasons that befell Derby and Sunderland – and their solid squad and previous results against Premier League sides suggest this is likely – then they are in for over 32 points even if they get relegated.

On top of this, there is a more than fair possibility (about 40% according to the bookmakers) that Burnley will stay up, in which case the sky’s the limit when it comes to their season points. Well, maybe not the sky – probably more like 50 – but it still looks like a buy with limited downside and decent potential.

So there we go – check back here at the end of the season when Man City are Champions, Burnley are the new Derby County and Villa have replaced Martin O’Neill with the highly-touted Dr Jozef Venglos. Don’t say I didn’t warn you!

JW

Glorious Goodwood - 28/7/09 until 1/8/09

Day Two of this year’s Glorious Goodwood dominated the pages of Wednesday’s Racing Post, especially the Sussex Stakes which offered the exciting prospect of the so-called ‘super filly’ Ghanaati battling this year’s leading colts, including Rip Van Winkle and Paco Boy. However, all of the races across the day promised to be competitive and it seemed an exceptionally tough day to try and pick a winner.

Instead, I decided to get myself involved with card markets available with the spread betting firms, which aggregate the results of all seven races in the day. Total winning distances caught my eye: the quote of 10.5 – 11.5 seemed high on a day with few short-priced favourites and a number of short, competitive looking races. I would have had the quote in for perhaps a point lower so, rather speculatively I CHOSE TO SELL DISTANCES AT 10.5.

Here’s how the day went, race by race:

1) 14:10: 2m 5f handicap. Oh God, what a race to start with – an epic staying race run over about as long a distance as you ever get on the flat. I’m assured by my pal who knows these things that the handicapper over the years has ensured it’s a tight contest, rarely making up over 1.5 lengths. Naturally, Sweetheart is absolutely smashed out by Jimmy Fortune and wins by 3.75 lengths. Not an ideal start, to say the least.

2) 14.45: 7f sprint. Xtension, the 7/2 favourite, is nowhere to be seen 2 furlongs out but suddenly starts storming its way past the field along the outside. I thank the Lord the finishing post appears when it does, as this horse was travelling, extending its lead at a quite scary rate. In the end I escape with just 1.25.

3) 15.25: 1m Sussex Stakes. The definite highlight from the day’s card and probably the biggest race from the whole Glorious Goodwood festival. Perhaps surprisingly, Johnny Murtagh sends 6/4 favourite Rip van Winkle out early, with a good 4 furlongs still remaining. Undeterred. he charges past a high class field and built up a decent 3 length lead which his rivals, despite my urging them on fail to make much of a dent in. A most impressive performance leads to an unwelcome 2.5 length victory.

I’m on 7.5 lengths with four races still remaining and this is already looking like damage limitation.

4) 16:00: 1m 4f handicap. A standard enough race won by Classic Vintage, under Jim Crowley, who takes the lead 2 furlongs out and holds on for a 2.25 length win. Except for reasons I fail to understand, it’s given as 2.75 lengths! It might only make half a point’s difference for me, but at this stage every extra millimetre is painful.

We’re on 10.25 after four and I have a quarter of a length to play with and three races remaining. This could get ugly.

5) 16:35: 6f Maiden Fillies stakes. Ah, wonderful news – I’m already in trouble and now have a maiden race full of untried fillies, one of which could be the new Rainbow View. Fortunately Beyond Desire, the eventual winner by 1.25 lengths, probably isn’t.

The in-running quote is now 13.9 – 14.4, so I can close out for a 4 point loss. But where’s the fun in that? I take my chances on the last two races.

6) 17:10: 1m 1f handicap. We’re getting into the grittier end of the card – race-goers are starting to stumble home after one too many G&Ts and terrestrial TV coverage is but a distant memory. Nonetheless, I sit transfixed to Racing UK and watch my best result of the day so far, with 9/2 joint-favourite Alsace Lorraine holding off the pack to sneak home by a neck. This equates to 0.3 lengths, apparently, which doesn’t make a lot of a sense to me. I mean, in what messed-up universe does a neck count towards 30% of a horse’s length? It’s not a bloody giraffe! But I digress.

7) 17:45: 7f ‘Lucky Last’. And so, on 11.8 after 6 races, it all comes down to this. Not to see if I win or not – that was probably decided after race one - but rather to see exactly how much I lose. This doesn’t make it the most enjoyable cheer in the world, but as Frankie Dettori guides home 4/1 shot Axiom to win by just half a length, I heave a sigh of relief.

A 12.3 make-up means a 1.8 point loss, but after 4 races things were looking a lot worse. Indeed, it’s such a turnaround by the end the small loss almost feels like a winner. Almost.

JW

England v Australia, second Ashes Test - 16/7/09 to 20/7/09

First of all, apologies for the lack of updates on the blog in recent weeks, but even the most committed punters need a break from their constant diet of live sport every once in a while. Since I last wrote, Wimbledon transformed from being a poor tournament betting-wise into a total disaster – needless to say, getting short of total games in the final was not the greatest idea I’ve ever had, especially when that final turned out to be the longest in Wimbledon history! Still, it could have been worse: I could have sold cross-courts like a friend of mine did. He sold at 100, it made up 351 for a painful 251 point loss. Ouch!

I decided to ease myself back into the fold with an interest bet on the Ashes. My initial instinct at the start of series had been to get with Australia and the first Test did little to dispel me of that notion – despite England escaping with a draw, there appeared to be a clear a gulf in class between the sides. This was borne out in the betting for the next test at Lord's, where the layers made Australia strong favourites on a ground where they hadn’t lost an Ashes test in 75 years. Their 25:10 price (which makes up 25 for a win and 10 for a draw) was 13-14.5, while England’s was at 8-9.5.

However, one nagging doubt put me off piling into Australia – this was the last wicket stand between Anderson and Panesar which had saved the first Test for England. Cricket series often turn on a single moment and I had a feeling that this epic, unexpected escape could be one. Thus I took the unusually sensible decision to watch the opening session of the day to see how England were getting on before making my move.

From England’s point of view, this could hardly have gone better. Strauss and Cook propelled their side to 126-0 at lunch with a supreme batting performance. Although it was still early days, that final wicket stand in Cardiff was starting to look pivotal. I had successfully talked myself out of backing Australia for the match, but did I have the courage to push my chips towards England instead?

I umm-ed and err-ed for most of the lunch break and just before Ben Hilfenhaus’s opening over of the second session I decided to BUY ENGLAND’S 25:10 AT 13.5. With such a solid platform to build off, and rain forecast for later in the week, I found it hard to see how England would lose the game from this position. I later rethought that theory, and decided that, with England being England, I could see them losing a game from almost any position, but by that stage the bet was on.

For once, my bet was not the signal for the familiar tumble of England wickets – totally the opposite in fact, as Strauss and Cook pushed on all the way to 196-0 before Cook fell lbw to the otherwise appalling Mitchell Johnson. The inevitable English collapse took until the second morning to occur, with Strauss failing to add to his 161 of the previous day and two more wickets falling for 14 runs leaving England rather precariously balanced at 378-9. But then came Jimmy Anderson’s second important contribution with the bat in two innings as he and Graham Onions put on a thoroughly entertaining, Lord’s record of 47 for the last wicket.

England suddenly had some momentum going into the change of innings and, sensing that the bowling attack would be galvanised by their collective effort with the bat, I played the ‘momentum’ card again and topped up my earlier position by BUYING ENGLAND’s 25:10 at 13.

If at that stage you’d offered me Australia to be 156-8 at the close of play – well, the phrase ‘I’d bite your hand off’ springs to mind. But that’s exactly where they were thanks to four wickets from Anderson, who was fast becoming my own betting hero. England chose not to enforce the follow-on once Australia were eventually all out for 215, instead putting on 311-6 themselves and effectively batting Australia out of the game.

With my worst case result now effectively a draw, and a make-up of 10, I was happy to sit out the rest of the Test and watch England – a few hairy moments aside – clinch a reasonably comfortable 115-run victory over the Old Enemy. Scenes of jubilation erupted around Lord’s – and my television screen too – as a 75 year curse was finally lifted. And to think that my initial instinct had been to back Australia...

JW

Wimbledon 2009 – the story so far

Strawberries and cream. Manicured grass courts. Tennis whites. Pimms. Mediocre performances from mediocre British players. Yes, there’s a lot of reasons to like Wimbledon and I haven’t even mentioned yet the myriad of betting opportunities. With 254 matches played in the Men’s and Women’s singles events, surely it can’t be that hard to turn a profit from a few wise spread bets…?

Well, that’s the theory at least. For as we rejoin The Championships halfway through, it has been something of a struggle betting-wise. Things weren’t helped by a self-imposed handicap before the tournament had even begun: I foolishly backed Rafael Nadal to win the tournament with one of the fixed odds firms that were not offering ‘non-runner, no bet’. Even by recent standards, to be in deficit before the tournament had actually begun was particularly impressive.

Since the tennis actually started, my tournament strategy has consisted of three major tenets:

1) Get with Juan Martin Del Potro
2) Get with Juan Carlos Ferrero (pictured above)
3) Get against Ivo Karlovic

I’d like to think there was sound reasoning behind all of these, but they have produced mixed results. Ferrero’s recent resurgence has come as little surprise to his most loyal fans (i.e. me) who never lost faith in the former French Open Champion and World Number 1. This grass-court season, Ferrero has lent further credence to his own theory that fast courts now represent the former clay-court specialist’s best chance of success.

So far, he has recorded victories over Youzhny, Santoro and, most recently, Fernando Gonzalez in a phenomenal five-set contest full of attacking brim and sensational shot-making. Scheduled to face Gilles Simon in the 4th round, Ferrero’s ‘so-far’ currently stands at 5 on the tournament outright index, ensuring that those of us who bought him at 2.5 pre-tournament will at the very least double our money.

(FYI, the outright index makes up: 60 to the tournament winner, 40 to the losing finalist, 20 to the semi-finalists, 10 to the quarter-finalists and 5 for making the last 16)

King Juan Carlos has represented all that’s good about my Wimbledon so far. Unfortunately, he’s been pretty much my only success story. Most disastrous was my brief flirtation with the fifth-seeded Juan Martin Del Potro. Doubts had been raised pre-tournament concerning the French Open semi-finalist’s lack of experience on grass and, in particular, how the 6’6” giant would cope with the skidding, low bounce of the balls.

A first round 6-3 6-1 6-2 demolition of last year’s quarter-finalist Arnaud Clement was enough to persuade me that these fears were unfounded and so, fatefully, I piled into the Argentine, buying him on the outright index at 13. To say I didn’t get a run for my money would be an understatement; Del Potro lasted just three further sets in the tournament, all won by his second round opponent, Lleyton Hewitt. While the tennis world marvelled at the class demonstrated by the 2002 Wimbledon Champion – who looked far more at home on the grass of SW19 than his gangly opponent – I was left to come to terms with a 13 point loss.

Talking of big men looking ill at ease at Wimbledon, the 6’10” Croat Ivo Karlovic has struggled more than most in recent years. Despite regularly performing well at Queen’s and Nottingham in the lead-up to Wimbledon, he had suffered four straight first round defeats at the All England Club, most of which were against unheralded opponents. With such a record, the chance to sell his 25:0 at 21.5 against the Slovak Lukas Lacko was too good to turn down.

Karlovic promptly won in straight sets meaning another losing bet for me. Undeterred. I sold his 25:0 again in the next round, this time against Steve Darcis, a quarter-finalist at Queen’s. Karlovic again won in three. Sensing a pattern, I dodged his third round match against Jo Wilfried Tsonga, in which Karlovic’s unplayable, unbreakable serve was the key to another victory. Old habits die hard however and I’m already lining up a way to get against Dr Ivo in his fourth round clash with Fernando Verdasco – a match, which, amazingly to my eyes at least, the Croat is set to go off favourite.

So that’s the week that was for me at Wimbledon. Pretty disastrous so far, but at least – unlike every Brit bar Andy Murray – I’m still in the game, with a chance to turn things around. What price Juan Carlos Ferrero 2009 Wimbledon Champion?

JW

England vs Pakistan, Twenty20 World Cup – 09/06/09

God bless the England cricket team. Just when you think that they can’t plunge new depths of ignominy, they crash to a defeat so unexpected, so downright humiliating that it temporarily usurps all of their previous efforts. It doesn’t take long however for the latest shock to subside to merely another ignoble inscription on the pantheon of Great England Cricketing Disasters.

And so alongside Zimbabwe ’92, New Zealand ’99 and Australia ’07, we can add Holland ’09, after a memorable Friday night’s cricket at Lords when the Netherlands managed to defeat England off the last ball in the opener of this year’s Twenty20 World Cup. Never mind that England put on 100-0 off their first 11 overs, never mind that Stuart Broad had three run out chances and a potential caught-and-bowled in his shambolic final over; no, England still managed to achieve an impossible looking defeat.

As the Dutch celebrated their most unlikely triumph, captain Paul Collingwood was left with the unenviable task of trying to rally his men for their upcoming match against Pakistan at the Oval. This contest was suddenly transformed from a meaningless tie between two sides guaranteed qualification into a must-win match for England, lest they depart their own T20 tournament at the earliest possible stage.

And yet, despite all of this, England amazingly started the match against Pakistan as slight favourites. Now I don’t profess to be any great expert on cricket (or any other sport for that matter), but this just didn’t seem right. Pakistan have always struck me as a quality, if slightly erratic outfit, whereas England are – well – England, an erratic outfit distinctly lacking in quality. Having chosen to get with Pakistan for this match I had a couple of options: either I could simply back them to win at 11/10 with a choice of fixed odds firms or, more interestingly, I could back them on the spreads. It is often remarked that cricket is the perfect spread betting sport and on this occasion I liked the look of the supremacy market, which makes up 1 point per run, or 10 points per wicket won or lost by. The quote here was England / Pakistan 0-8, meaning it was possible to SELL THE SUPREMACY AT 0 and, in other words, back Pakistan off scratch.

DURING THE MATCH

Oh dear. This was one of those bets that was in trouble from pretty much the first ball of the match. England batted first and got off to a blistering start through Luke Wright, who pinch-hit an impressive 34 off 16 balls. What’s more, Kevin Pietersen was playing worryingly well on his return to the side, finding the boundary with what seemed like every shot. Non-stop sixes may be entertaining for the fans in the crowd, but they’re a merciless bombardment on your wallet when you’ve backed the bowling side. Even more frustrating was the Pakistani fielding, with dropped catches and mis-fields galore, not to mention the infuriating habit of attempting the unlikeliest run-out, regardless of potential overthrows. This all contributed to England setting a challenging target of 185, which in truth, Pakistan never got close to chasing. Wickets fell all too frequently in the reply, many of which were brought on by iffy shots, even by the standards of a Twenty20 slogathon.

As I was on course to lose a point per run that Pakistan trailed England’s by, a bit more spirit from the Pakistanis would have been welcome; instead, they meekly made their way to 137 and a 48-run defeat. As the rest of the country celebrated England’s resurgence as a cricketing superpower, I looked back on a Great England Cricketing Disaster of my own making.

JW

Williams vs Kuznetsova, French Open quarter final - 3/6/09

The last of the women’s singles quarter-finals at the French Open promised to be the best. Serena Williams, the 2002 Roland Garros champion faced the 2006 finalist, Svetlana Kuznetsova of Russia in a match which the bookies were having trouble calling. Kuznetsova’s form over the clay season had been more solid than Serena’s, who as usual had undergone an in-and-out campaign marred by fitness issues and inconsistent performances in the lesser events.

Serena had wobbled a couple of times en route to the quarter-finals, dropping sets to unsung journey-women Klara Zakopalova and Maria Martinez Sanchez, while Kuznetzova, in contrast, had continued her impressive form, dropping just the one set in her first four matches while asserting herself as the clear second favourite for the tournament (behind the seemingly unbeatable Dinara Safina).

There is little doubt that were this match taking place in your average non-descript stop on tennis circuit then Kuzzie (as she’s known to her mates) would have started as clear favourite. However, as followers of women’s tennis know all too well, Serena in a Grand Slam is a different animal to at any other time: her motivation and competitive spirit is unquestionable and her performances speak for themselves (she has just the 10 Grand Slam titles to her name). Thus, a match where Kuzzie seemed the clear jolly was now more open for interpretation. One spread betting firm, taking a view on the match at odds with much of the market, went so far as to make Serena favourite.

Now, as good as her Grand Slam form may be, this seemed a step too far for me and, putting my faith in the Russian’s solid all-court game and praying that she would, for once, be able to close out a match against a top player, I DECIDED TO SELL SERENA’S 25:0 AT 12.75.

This meant that I would win 12.75 points if Serena lost and lose 12.25 points if she won – in other words, I was taking umbrage with the firm’s view that Serena was slight favourite for the contest and putting my faith in the talented, if flaky, Russian.

DURING THE MATCH

Kuzzie came flying out of the blocks on Court Suzanne Lenglen, winning the first three games of the contest and quickly asserting herself as a warm favourite for the match. After barely 10 minutes, my bet was seriously onside and I was tempted to close out there and then by buying Serena at 7.25 for a fast 5.5 point win. But then, I thought to myself, why? The bet was in great shape, Kuzzie was playing solidly and Serena didn’t look at the races. No reason to close, I reckoned; instead I’d let the bet ride and continue to enjoy watching this Kuzzie demolition job.

Big mistake, as it soon transpired, for while Serena had started the match looking like she’d just got out of bed, it was unrealistic to believe her sloppy play would continue forever. Williams forced the match into a first set tie-break and, despite a phenomenal series of points which Kuzzie put together to take it 7-3, was still looking in good shape to mount her inevitable charge.

Instead, history repeated itself in the second set: again Kuzzie took a 3-0 lead and at one stage led 5-3, with a chance to serve for the match. But again Serena came storming back, and Kuzzie’s inability to close out matches returned to haunt her as Serena broke twice more to take the set 7-5.

And so the match entered a third and deciding set and by this stage, there was little doubt who was favourite. The market clearly expected Serena to continue apace with her comeback and to close at the start of the set would have required buying Serena at 17, i.e. a loss of 4.25 points.

Instead, I again chose to hold on and let my bet ride, hoping beyond hope that Kuzzie would perform better from behind than she did as a front-runner. At 3-1 to Williams things were looking bleak, but now it was Kuzzie’s turn to mount a stirring comeback of her own. She wasted two match points at 4-5 in the final set after some strong serving from Serena kept her in the match, but Kuzzie refused to be denied and finally clinched the match in Serena’s next service game.

In a topsy-turvy match that showed the very best of the women’s game, it was the Russian who happily prevailed handing me a satisfying, if nerve-jangling, 12.75 point win.

JW

Nadal v Federer, Madrid Masters Final - 17/5/09

It took until the last of 2009’s three clay court Masters Series for it happen, but the two dominant tennis forces of recent times were ready to once again collide. Of course, as rivalries go, what Rafael Nadal vs Roger Federer exudes in intensity, it lacks in equality. For this was a ‘rivalry’ with one protagonist clearly superior to his opponent: Nadal had won his last five matches against Federer, including a draining five setter in Australia which left Federer beaten, battered and quite literally in tears.

Their head-to-head record on clay made even more sobering reading for the Swiss: Federer had only once triumphed out of 11 meetings, and that was in Hamburg two years ago. Since then, Nadal had racked up four consecutive wins, including a 6-1 6-3 6-0 pulverisation in the 2008 French Open final. In short, Fed-ex’s prospects could barely have looked worse.

However, according to the bookmakers, the Swiss had a fighting chance. His 25:0 (which makes up 25 if he wins the match and 0 if he loses) was 6.5 – 8, which was a couple of points higher than I had expected it to be. Nadal, it must never be forgotten, is pretty much Superman on clay – his record since 2005 was a mind-boggling 150 wins and four defeats. Add to this the hoodoo he seemed to hold over Federer and there was just no way that I could see the Swiss winning this match. And so, despite a usual reluctance to pile into short prices, I CHOSE TO SELL FEDERER’S 25:0 AT 6.5.

DURING THE MATCH

The contest started off as expected, with Nadal looking his usual supreme self on the red stuff and Federer struggling a little, saving break points in both his second and third service games. Then, however, the tide slowly began to change, with Federer exerting his own pressure on the Nadal serve and the King of Clay, unusually, finding it hard to respond. Federer duly took the first set 6-4 and another factor came into play. For in the semi-finals, Nadal played one of the matches of the year against Novak Djokovic, saving three match points before winning a 3rd set tie-break 11-9 to clinch a memorable triumph in four hours and three minutes.

Now, less than 24 hours later, he was being asked to come back again from one set to love down, this time against an inspired Roger Federer. Now, normally the words ‘Nadal’ and ‘fatigue’ go together about as well as ‘Murray’ and ‘charming’ or ‘Kim Clijsters’ and ‘in shape’. On this occasion, however, Nadal worryingly looked absolutely knackered. Backhand passes that he’d normally rip cross-court were landing in the tramlines, second serves were being buried in the net.

Nadal was looking like a shadow of himself and playing like one as well. Federer, sensing blood, seized upon his fatigued opponent and broke again midway through the second set, before serving out the match for a 6-4 6-4 victory. A shock result in many ways and not a good outcome for my bet, although it did offer much needed confirmation that Nadal is not quite Superman. Yet.

JW