Home  »     »   Bartoli’s chances of another shock are slim but not 50/1

Bartoli’s chances of another shock are slim but not 50/1

| 15.07.2013

Marion Bartoli defied it all to win Wimbledon but the layers could not be accused of overreacting, having priced the Frenchwoman at 50/1 to continue the fairy tale at Flushing Meadows and win the US Open.

Despite reaching the final at SW19 back in 2007 Bartoli’s facile route to this year’s Saturday showpiece – the 28-year-old didn’t drop a single set during the championships – was undoubtedly a shock to the system of women’s tennis having been dismissed at prices upward of 100/1 at the beginning of the fortnight.

When looking at Bartoli’s record in New York, where she has played every year since 2002, it becomes easier to see why big odds are available. Only once in her eleven appearances in the Big Apple has the Le Puy-en-velay resident reached the quarter-finals with all but two of her other attempts finishing in the first week.

Despite that poor track record, the nerveless manner of her victory in south west London makes the 50/1 quote appealing, simply because mental resilience is in short supply in the women’s game.

The majority of the ladies are notoriously fragile when chances beckon or tight situations arise, and even without considering some formidable weapons from the racquet, Bartoli’s great advantage over the majority could be in the mind.

The Wimbledon Champion’s first and second serve are rarely different in pace which does not result in as many double faults as might be imagined with that type of approach. Factor in winner-producing groundstrokes from both wings and there is a game that can challenge on any surface. The potency of her shots were more lethal on grass but there is no reason why they shouldn’t still be effective in their current condition on the hard courts.

The chances of Bartoli winning at Wimbledon were appropriately long and so the propensity for her to win a second Slam in succession is also low. However, odds of 50/1 about a player who has proven it at the highest level both on the court and in the head is of interest nonetheless.

All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.



Sam Foster