#1
|
|||
|
|||
which is the better bet to win ? hewitt or roddick
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
RODDICK i think hewitt is past his best maybe to much spare time with kim might be a problem too!!!! hehehe
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
i was taking a multi and knowing my luck 1 will win and 1 will lose, so i want to take the better option
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
That was my weird sense of humour coming into play goldmember but i have a lot of time for roddick as a player its just a pity he is american. He could be anything if he could curb his anger. But then again the same can be said about a lot of players on the tour including hewitt. Good luck with your bet.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
so you would go roddick anyway
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
No Hewitt would be better value.
Chip is dangerous and Roddick is more of a publiv player (ie bookies will shade him more than a few cents). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The Hewitt bit I understand. Could someone please translate. "Chip","publiv","shade". Owboutcha Unlucky Phil. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Chip is the nickname for Srichaphan.
publiv is a typo, should read 'public'. Shade is devaluing devalue. I.e, if a book knows the majority of action will come on a favourite, he'll make him a little shorter to get more value out of it. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Hewitt of course, not Andy Pandy! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
i'll say hewitt
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|