Topic: ⭐⚽⭐ Sportsbet's Bitcointalk Sports Fanatics League (BSFL) – 10000$ rewards ⭐⚽⭐ - page 490. (Read 107746 times)

I also had Tsitsipas too, along side Medvedev... Tsitstipas being Tsitsipas yet again eliminated flawlessly in the second round, I really should have stuck to my initial choice of Jannik Sinner or Zverev, they've been more consistent for me than Tsitsipas, I just always decide to learn my mistakes the hard way, don't I ?

Jannik Sinner had to come from being one set down to win the game in good rhythm, I'm sure the amount of players that choose Sinner as one of their  finalist must feel some awkward after he dropped the first set, but he didn't look nervous or phased and still play as though it was an even game. That's  how exactly how to earn people's trust if you ask me.

Meanwhile my opponent is actually one of the few users that picked neither Medvedev, nor Tsitsipas / Sinner, so I'm already at a disadvantage for that question, however,  I still can't back his pick of Hurkacz vs Zverev, Hurkacz, simply because Hurkacz could still face Rublev and Medvedev in the Quarter final and semi finals consecutively, that's quite a huge task to ask of him imo, while Zverev is also likely to face Sinner too, It's going to be tough, so I have to commend him for his predictions too because I don't think they're only just some gutsy picks, but rather some insightful ones. Had he not been my opponent for this week, I really would have wished he would win the round or at the very least that tennis section.


Elsewhere, Alcaraz is still proving to be a formidable force to be reckoned with in London, he's having a walk in the park against Lehecka here, so imo, he already should be looking forward to who is next opponent would be (I'd say Cerundolo)...

it is not just that, I had Belgium not to lose, but didn't thought that it will be goalless
expected goals on that match, but they didn't meant to be, probably several others thought the same, and no one with both to score - NO

regarding tennis, De Minaur won against Schwartzmann with ease on grass, and would probably be exactly opposite on clay

Thank you; I didn't know these are vital details to consider before making a prediction. I've been answering tennis questions based on top seed rankings and odd favourites all this time,  I had no idea that the playing surfaces had an impact on how the players performed. Now I understand why I've never gotten them right.

Surprisingly, no one in the league earned a point from the Belgium-Netherlands U-21 match. This is the only time I've ever seen a pool with 100% zero points. Nobody thought the Belgium team would at least manage a draw.

The one sided matches in paper ended with some goals, even if not by the favorite team. I doubt he will have u2.5 goals in both matches combined, at least in the u20 WC the Israeli games happened to be goal feasts, so my pick of over 5.

Yep, the surface is extremely important. Clay is more slow, meaning that there's more time to return the ball, meaning that the points are longer and that the possibility of a break is quite more common.
If you take a player that's dominant on the serve, on faster surface he'll be difficult to break - whereas on clay you will have your chances.

Most players are specialists either for hard (faster surfaces) or clay (slower ones). Usually it goes with physique - smaller players tend to be better on clay because they are faster and don't have that much of an advantage on their serve.

Federer for example had almost 10% higher win percentage on hard surfaces than on clay, Nadal has 15% higher on clay than on hard and Đoković is fairly balanced on all surfaces.

Tsitsipas has under 65% win rate on hard, and only 57% on grass. He's mostly a clay player.

Just couldn't resist looking at spreadsheet in the end because I was sure I got all wrong, luckily, I have 1 green line there but even more lucky my opponent has all wrong so far!

But Wow Belgium guys, just 2 of you picked them AND picked under 2.5 goals. Amazing pick. Now I'm worried about England Germany cause I went for high goals lol.

I don't understand about tennis but it is not difficult to find answers about your questions easy to find it on Google, the conclusion is for each court/area then it will need a different playing style of course not all players can adjust for example Rafael Nadal, known as the king of clay he has won various tournaments even in 36 years he was still dominant.

Same here day 1, 2 bad for me luckily on day 3 I got it, I was surprised from 50+ participants only 2 users who got points including me and @arallmuus yeah maybe just luck.

Tsitsi may have a playing style or skill set that is suited to clay if he has had success there in the past. It doesn't necessary follow, though, that he can't perform well on swift surfaces. it’s important to keep in mind that players' performances can vary from season to season and depend on various factors, including their form, injuries, and competition.
Fortunately, Tsitsi was among my opponent's choices for this round.

Does the field and clay court have any affect on the performance of these tennis players? I saw a write-up like this while doing some research and I was thinking, does it really matter? I mean, if you're exceptional, I expect you to play well on any court, or does the nature of the surface influence ball speed? Could someone please explain the grass and clay courts to me? This is the third time Tsi has screwed me over, and it will be the last time I choose him; he seems inconsistent to me.

Day 2, 3 games, 0 point.

Tsitsi on grass, always a bad choice..

He had good results last season though, but I trust him only on clay. He's not the best on fast surfaces.

And Tsitsipas lost and ended the only hope for Bonta winning q8. Now if Mendveded wins I win, otherwise we draw.
Another shock result, but so far my tennis picks aren't among them.

Haha true, your track record hasn't been great so far and I do hope that you will continue with the same perfomance in this round as well.  

If you do, then I might have some chance, but problem is that we very similar answers on majorify of question and on top of that I started with -1 due penatly for being late.

I had Zverev, but have waited to see what will he play against Thiem, and due to late start had to submit answers earlier, and went with Sinner
there is a Shapovalov also, he is not in top form, but always dangerous on grass, and on Zverev route

but yeah, I asked is that tactics for tennis allowed earlier, and yeah, it can give you advantage if two title favorites are in same part of the draw (didn't use it, and probably will not, but have nothing against it)

Medvedev almost had a win in tie-break, but decide to leave it and it is third set now

Welcome! Glad to have you.

Kanapka is filling wwsocki's spot, he's starting from this round because he submitted on time and will play the Round 1 and Round 2 games vs bullrun2020bro and entebah in Round 12 and Round 13, same as Bonta.
Games against wwsocki from Rounds 1 and 2 will be voided, so bullrun2020bro and entebah will lose these points and these games will be rescheduled.


We will allow it for now, it gives another strategic element to the game.
If we decide to change these rules it will be between the seasons and you will be notified about the changes.

Damn, arallmuus... you really didn't have to give such a walkover, would have been 2-1 now and quite a number of different answers so I'm definitely "relieved" for the free pass as it looks at the moment. Still hoping I earn it on merit anyway, would make me feel a hell lot better.

Only 5 people including myself have 2/2 so far, Austria was a really tight game, even if they deserved it in the end, but "YES" to all favourites, as I suspected, not a great call to make twice in a row.

Notice many went for Tsitsi -- meself included -- but I see a handful of Sinners and even one Zverev. My kind of pick so in a round that it won't matter, I'm going to hope the pure underdogs score!

I agree with Trofo on legit tactics on tennis finalist/winner. IIRC I saw last round a few people put 2 guys in the finals from the same side of draw and initially I thought: huh, what a waste! But then again, what if it's a legit gamble to ensure at least 1 point when you're not sure which side's favs will go through. I believe it's legit and all answers should be accepted for the gamble.

e.g. anyone who thought it was Alcaraz last time out would have lost 1 point, and it wasn't for certain if it would be Rune/Ruud from the other side. Hence a "guaranteed point would be to put both Alcaraz and Djoko as finalists, even if they're on the same side of the draw.

Are we maybe getting combat next round? @notblox1 any big games coming up? I won a nice prize on the last UFC prediction, for no other reason than picking 50% favs and 50% underdogs haha

Bonta is new and this is his first try at the answers so we will be lenient if possible.

We are not computers and we allow for some discrepancies, I will take a look at answers when I get home and discuss them with my colleague. Format is here to make it easier for us to grade. But if we can see from his answer what was intended we will allow it no matter if it is not properly formatted.

For 8th question. It is not usual but it is allowed. I was discussing something similar last season when we had much stronger upper half of the draw. Like it is legit tactic to pick both finalists from same side of the draw if you are sure one of them will reach the final. That way you have guaranteed 1 point instead of gambling for 0 or 2 points.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Hev3jtlSdBrdaCEKEaTqHE0sEJdVJCJi-Lav4xjqnI0

cheers

Hi mate
Where I can see the answers?!! Link pleaae

I took a look on Bonta's answers.
His 10th answer was not in the format and should give me automatic win, but his 8th answer has 3 different players for finalists and winners, is this even allowed? I see why someone would do it, to increase the odds of getting any points at the expense of the possibility of getting all of them, but is it even allowed?

This made this round again quite difficult when you are someone who really has no idea about DOTA. I think doing research on soccer is much easier when you usually have no idea about the sports. You immediately find tables, trends, betting analyses pre-game, odds on outrights usually far in advance etc. It was difficult even when I had a look at the group stage 2 who is going to make the cut and who is not. For example, the Garmin Gladiators were lagging behind and they have a game against EG. I was trying to find out what the better team is when it comes to comebacks or regaining strength during a tournament.

Do any of you guys here actually really play DOTA or understand all the mechanics? I saw a twitch stream and I think it takes too long to get a proper understanding of the sport in order to give educates guesses on outcomes afterwards. It is the same here as with every other sport. Following a sport for tens of years is definitely an advantage, but DOTA seems to be more complex than soccer