Every sport has its nuances, quirks and unique aspects, differences that challenge both the bet maker and bet taker. One constant, however, is that it very much matters where the game or event is played.
In football, a home field advantage can be worth as much as three or four points, especially where rabid fans or weather become determining factors. Visiting quarterbacks who cannot call audibles on the line of scrimmage because of crowd noise are at a distinct disadvantage. Teams that are unaccustomed to the thin air in Denver, the humidity of Miami, New Orleans or Houston, pelting rain in Seattle, or the often windy and snowy conditions in New York, Chicago, New England or Cincinnati also may suffer.
The advantage is less pronounced but still viable in baseball. Teams that have good bunters can slant the infield lines so balls that roll toward third or first base will stay in fair territory. Teams lacking in speedy runners can water the base paths, making it more difficult to steal. And, of course, familiarity with the various nooks and caroms of the outfield walls, as well as the inherit advantage in batting last, add to the home team's edge.
With a change in venue, there can be as much as a 10-point swing in college basketball lines where playing before a frenzied and vocal home court throng often can unnerve visitors.
Since professional basketball players (with the exception of Ron Artest) are less prone to be affected by crowd provocation, in the NBA, the home court advantage has more to do with the debilitating travel involved in reaching the site than the actual court itself.
In hockey, if it ever resumes, home ice means having the last line change and getting the matchups you want. Such an advantage always is reflected in the line.
Individual sports such as boxing, golf, auto racing and horse racing, are not immune from the home venue advantage either. Agree to face a boxer on his home turf and you'd most likely better knock him out because earning a decision, no matter how much you dominated the fight, will be difficult.
In golf, long courses generally favor long hitters while courses with narrow fairways and small greens tend to favor those with more accuracy than length to their game. Beyond the obvious, other subtleties of the course, such as whether there are more doglegs left or right, will help determine the winner. Right-handed golfers who hit hooks, will enjoy a course with more left than right doglegs. Right-handed golfers who hit fades, will prefer the reverse conditions.
Different race car drivers perform better at some courses than others based on their own talents and abilities while horses often improve or regress based on their adaptability to the surface of each particular racetrack oval.
But while odds, pointspreads and prices on almost all team and individual sports are influenced to one degree or another by subtle differences among various fields, arenas, courses, settings and conditions, none is so dramatically affected by the type of playing surface as tennis.
So while it's true, as in the evaluation of any other sport, that the price makers at
The Greek Sportsbook consider a myriad of factors before posting their numbers, it is the surface that really dictates the odds in tennis. With a season that stretches from January to November, that takes into account three main playing surfaces:
Grass: By far, this is the fastest of the three surfaces. Beyond that, the ball doesn't bounce very high on grass; it squirts. Grass not only favors players who serve and volley effectively, but those with quick reflexes and reactions. The most effective way to play tennis on grass is to never let the ball hit the surface. Get to the net and put it away. That helps explain why tremendously quick and agile sorts such as Roger Federer as well as big servers such as Andy Roddick always are highly regarded by the oddsmakers.
Hardcourt: Slightly slower than grass with a bit more bounce, a high quality player does not have to have a booming serve to succeed on a hardcourt surface. Athleticism counts on hardcourt. Except for a six or seven-week period from late March to mid May, most major tennis tournaments, including the Australian and US Opens, are conducted on hardcourt surfaces.
Clay: The ball bounces highest and is slowest on clay. The surface favors players from South America, Eastern Europe and Spain who grew up playing on that surface. There are virtually no clay courts in California and most Americans hone their tennis skills on hardcourt surfaces, an explanation of sorts as to why Americans do so poorly on clay surfaces. The exception was Chris Evert. Her father was a teaching pro on Ft. Lauderdale's clay courts so she grew up practicing 8-10 hours on that surface. No wonder Evert won the French Open six times.
Another variable on clay is the balls. They use a lighter, faster ball on clay that helps to mitigate against the slow surface. It's not an equalizer by any means but it is a factor.
Still another factor that must be considered when making tennis odds on clay is conditioning. Because players have much more difficulty setting up their shots and ending a point quickly on the slow surface, rallies are longer, games are lengthier and players spend a greater amount of time on the court. For that reason, stamina and endurance are huge factors on a clay court.
Let's examine just how big of an impact a tennis playing surface can have on the odds.
Federer was an even money choice (see chart) at the 2004 Wimbledon championship, the premier tennis event held on grass. Roddick was the 11/4-second choice.
Contrast that with each player's odds at the 2004 French Open, played on a very slow clay course. Federer was issued odds of 3/1 by
The Greek Sportsbook while Roddick was offered at a lofty 25/1. Although ranked No. 1 in the world heading into this year's French Open, Federer had never advanced past the fourth round (2000) and on three occasions had been dismissed in the first round. Despite a No. 2 world ranking, Roddick had failed to get past the third round in four previous appearances at Roland Garros and was ousted in the second round last year by French nobody Olivier Mutis. Heading into the 2005 French Open,
The Greek Sportsbook assigned a future book price of 52.50/1 to Roddick.
Tim Henman and Andre Agassi are two more men whose chances greatly are enhanced on grass and vastly undermined on clay. Henman simply doesn't have the game for clay while at age 35, Agassi may no longer have the requisite stamina to endure the painfully long rallies associated with play on clay. Hence, Henman was 4/1 at Wimbledon last year and triple digits in Paris. Agassi did not play at Wimbledon in 2004 but was a serious contender on hardcourt while being sent off at odds of 20/1 for the 2004 French Open.
The Greek Sportsbook quoted Agassi at 65.50/1 to win the 2005 French Open.
On the other hand, as the chart illustrates, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Guillermo Coria and Gaston Gaudio are far more efficient on clay and less likely to threaten on grass or hardcourt surfaces.
Interestingly, while there are minor price variations, because there hasn't been a significant serve-and-volley player since Martina Navratilova, surface is less of a factor in the women's game. That being said, players such as Lindsay Davenport and Maria Sharapova are far more effective on grass or hardcourt surfaces than on clay. Davenport doesn't have good footwork--a must on clay--while Sharapova likes everything fast. In fact, though ranked No. 1 in the world, Davenport began the 2005 French Open at odds of 18.50/1.
Rankings figure into the oddsmaking process only to the extent that they're used to seed players in the major events. The rankings neither evaluate nor differentiate a player's proficiency on the game's disparate surfaces. Thus, if Andy Roddick is ranked No. 2 in the world he'll be seeded second at the French Open even though his game does not suit the clay surface. So bookmakers give the tennis rankings about as much credibility as they do football polls. The exception is Wimbledon where unlike the Australian, French and US Opens, officials consider the affects of the grass surface and seed players according to what they believe are their actual chances of winning.
So seedings matter only to the extent that one player has dominated another on a particular surface and both players are in the same bracket. Bookmakers assess the likelihood of those players meeting, checking the history of that individual pairing on that surface before posting future book odds for an event.
When it comes down to it then, both betting and booking tennis is all about scratching the surface.
MAJOR DIFFERENCES IN 2004 TENNIS ODDS
