Had Cilic to win in straight sets...woohooo.
Also had another bet of him to win the first set 6-4 into the straight sets win.
As Maxwell Smart would say....missed it by that much!
The first set scores are so hard to get because you got it right with him winning the set by a break but him serving first cost you. And markets get suspended for that as soon as you know who wins the toss.
Great bet to get on Cilic. Can't believe he was the outsider.
If a player's peak is 24 then according to you Federer peaked in 2005. This is in fact quite accurate as he was dominant 2003-2007. So the fact he won anything 5 years after his peak is incredible and a testament to his longevity.
24 is still a little earlier than most other sports. For example we usually say a football's peak is at 26/27. I watch MMA and in that it's common for someone's prime to be even later.
I also said I preferred Federer's style of play, something that is completely subjective and that a case can be made for all 3 players. You are of the opinion that Novak and Nadal are better players, I can't argue that because I honestly think it's possible they are but I just don't know it for sure. I think they are probably the 3 greatest of all time.
We can't put a 2005 Federer vs a 2013 Djokovic. All I know is that it'd be a competitive match.
Novak and Rafa have dominated in the best men's era ever. Federer beat the likes of Roddick, Hewitt, Safin, Baghdatis etc. who all fell away as soon as they new era came through. I think he's pretty lucky to have been around just before the real boom in men's tennis because he was clearly ahead of the rest who proved to be not great.
Anyway I think he should of retired after Wimbledon in 2012, or that 2012 season. Would of gone out on a high, now he won't win another slam.
Logged