Grand Slam Australian Open 2025 Match Day (closed)

Winner Mens and Women

  • Sinner

    Votes: 16 39.0%
  • Carlos Alcaraz

    Votes: 15 36.6%
  • Novak

    Votes: 6 14.6%
  • Zverev, Danill, Fritz

    Votes: 1 2.4%
  • Anyone else Men)

    Votes: 4 9.8%
  • Savalenka

    Votes: 16 39.0%
  • Gauff

    Votes: 6 14.6%
  • Iga

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Rybakina, Zheng, Muchova

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Anyone Else Women

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • Total voters
    41

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
This thread is now closed. We will move to separate threads for both finals, See below


 

Australian Open Day 10

Rod Laver Arena

Day Session
  • (19) M. Keys (USA) vs. (28) E. Svitolina (UKR)
  • (8) E. Navarro (USA) vs. (2) I. Swiatek (POL)
  • (21) B. Shelton (USA) vs. L. Sonego (ITA)
Night Session
  • (1) J. Sinner (ITA) vs. (8) A. de Minaur (AUS)
  • AO Legends' Cup - Men's Doubles Round 1
    • )
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Australian Open Day 10

Rod Laver Arena

Day Session
  • (19) M. Keys (USA) vs. (28) E. Svitolina (UKR)
  • (8) E. Navarro (USA) vs. (2) I. Swiatek (POL)
  • (21) B. Shelton (USA) vs. L. Sonego (ITA)
Night Session
  • (1) J. Sinner (ITA) vs. (8) A. de Minaur (AUS)
  • AO Legends' Cup - Men's Doubles Round 1
    • )

But disappointed they haven’t gone like tonight’s with a WTA before the men’s at night but I get it
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Why would winviz be more accurate? Just curious if you have a knowledge of how it operates (curiosity, not being aggy).

Another misintepretation. I didn't say it was "more accurate". I just added what it stated, which you presented the betting market which is fine because it adds to the story.

Nothing wrong there either way. 👍
 
Another misintepretation. I didn't say it was "more accurate". I just added what it stated, which you presented the betting market which is fine because it adds to the story.

Nothing wrong there.
Just stop with saying things like this repetitively - clarify without the condescension. I know you are capable of it.

You said he was the favourite and leaned on winviz. I offered an alternative system that said otherwise. It's fine if you, like me, are unaware of which system would be a more accurate predictive device.

Things like that can be discussed without patronisation.
 
Just stop with saying things like this repetitively - clarify without the condescension. I know you are capable of it.

You said he was the favourite and leaned on winviz. I offered an alternative system that said otherwise. It's fine if you, like me, are unaware of which system would be a more accurate predictive device.

Things like that can be discussed without patronisation.

It's not condescending for me to say that you have misinterpreted my post. That is just pointing out a fact and highlighting where the miscommunication is here. Not here to patrionise you either.

Predictive devices are just that, predictions. At the end of the day, one of them will be wrong.
 
It's not condescending for me to say that you have misinterpreted my post. That is just pointing out a fact and highlighting where the miscommunication is here. Not patrionising you either.

Predictive devices are just that, predictions. At the end of the day, one of them will be wrong.
Starting off with "yet again you've misinterpreted" is condescending, and it's not a polite way to clarify things. Just the information is fine.

I was wondering whether you would have a reason to disregard the betting markets and favour winviz - "that's why he's favourite". It's fine if you didn't have a reason. We got there in the end.

Thumbs down a really petty way to end that exchange.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top