Want to advertise on the Daily Picks page? Contact ridimon@gmail.com
Tuesday
Shelton over Alcaraz in 4
Tiafoe over Michelsen in 4
Monday
Zverev over Darderi in 3
U.S. Open record: 89-29 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 37 out of 89)
Also be sure to check out the Grandstand’s Best Bets of the Day. On most days during the tennis season there will be Best Bets of the Day with analysis, pick explanation for the top ATP matches listed on this Daily Picks page, plus WTA picks, occasional Challenger picks, likeliest upsets of the day, best value plays, and more.
(daily WTA picks are on the Best Bets of the Day page)
2026 results
Winston-Salem record: 26-18 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 16 out of 26)
Cincinnati record: 58-33 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 36 out of 58)
Montreal record: 55-36 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 32 out of 55)
Washington record: 21-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 21)
Los Cabos record: 11-15 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 11)
Estoril record: 15-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 15)
Kitzbuhel record: 20-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 20)
Bastad record: 18-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 18)
Umag record: 15-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 15)
Gstaad record: 12-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 4 out of 12)
Wimbledon record: 89-36 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 38 out of 89)
Eastbourne record: 13-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 13)
Mallorca record: 14-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 14)
Halle record: 20-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 20)
Queen’s Club record: 18-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 18)
Stuttgart record: 18-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 18)
‘s-Hertogenbosch record: 16-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 16)
French Open record: 81-40 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 28 out of 81)
Hamburg record: 21-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 21)
Geneva record: 17-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 17)
Rome record: 53-40 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 35 out of 53)
Madrid record: 65-28 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 42 out of 65)
Barcelona record: 22-7 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 22)
Munich record: 22-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 22)
Monte-Carlo record: 35-17 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 21 out of 35)
Houston record: 16-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 7 out of 16)
Bucharest record: 15-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 15)
Marrakech record: 14-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 14)
Miami record: 54-39 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 36 out of 54)
Indian Wells record 65-27 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 42 out of 65)
Dubai record: 20-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 20)
Acapulco record: 15-16 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 15)
Santiago record: 17-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 17)
Rio de Janeiro record: 19-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 19)
Delray Beach record: 18-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 18)
Doha record: 25-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 17 out of 25)
Rotterdam record: 23-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 18 out of 23)
Dallas record: 22-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 22)
Buenos Aires record: 20-7 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 20)
Montpellier record: 15-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 15)
Australian Open record: 92-29 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 44 out of 92)
Adelaide record: 15-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 15)
Auckland record: 17-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 17)
Brisbane record: 18-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 18)
Hong Kong record: 15-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 15)
United Cup record: 12-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 4 out of 12)
2025
NextGen ATP Finals record: 9-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 4 out of 9)
Davis Cup Finals record: 6-2 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 2 out of 6)
Nitto ATP Finals record: 11-4 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 11)
Athens record: 19-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 19)
Metz record: 16-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 16)
Paris record: 42-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 21 out of 42)
Vienna record: 20-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 20)
Basel record: 18-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 18)
Brussels record: 17-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 17)
Stockholm record: 15-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 15)
Almaty record: 16-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 16)
Shanghai record: 59-30 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 33 out of 59)
Beijing record: 19-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 19)
Tokyo record: 23-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 23)
Hangzhou record: 13-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 13)
Chengdu record: 11-14 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 11)
Laver Cup record: 9-2 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 4 out of 9)
Davis Cup record: 4-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 3 out of 4)
U.S. Open record: 89-33 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 41 out of 89)
Winston-Salem record: 19-25 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 19)
Cincinnati record: 52-38 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 36 out of 52)
Toronto record: 52-24 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 34 out of 52)
Washington, D.C. record: 27-17 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 27)
Kitzbuhel record: 16-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 16)
Umag record: 11-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 11)
Bastad record: 13-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 13)
Gstaad record: 14-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 14)
Los Cabos record: 18-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 18)
Wimbledon record: 84-38 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 34 out of 84)
Eastbourne record: 12-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 5 out of 12)
Mallorca record: 17-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 5 out of 17)
Halle record: 23-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 23)
Queen’s Club record: 17-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 7 out of 17)
Stuttgart record: 16-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 16)
‘s-Hertogenbosch record: 16-9 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 16)
French Open record: 89-33 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 38 out of 89)
Hamburg record: 18-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 18)
Geneva record: 17-9 (correct # of sets in winning pick: 10 out of 17)
Rome record: 62-32 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 40 out of 62)
Madrid record: 53-33 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 27 out of 53)
Barcelona record: 15-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 15 out of 15)
Munich record: 15-5 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 15)
Monte-Carlo record: 36-18 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 36)
Marrakech record: 16-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 16)
Bucharest record: 19-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 11 out of 19)
Houston record: 11-11 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 6 out of 11)
Miami record: 52-41 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 33 out of 52)
Indian Wells record: 54-32 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 34 out of 54)
Dubai record: 21-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 21)
Acapulco record: 19-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 19)
Doha record: 19-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 17 out of 19)
Marseille record: 17-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 17)
Delray Beach record: 15-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 10 out of 15)
Buenos Aires record: 16-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 16)
Rotterdam record: 20-8 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 14 out of 20)
Dallas record: 20-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 20)
Montpellier record: 15-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 5 out of 15)
Australian Open record: 97-23 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 36 out of 96)
Adelaide record: 14-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 9 out of 14)
Auckland record: 12-12 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 7 out of 12)
Brisbane record: 19-10 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 12 out of 19)
Hong Kong record: 13-13 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 8 out of 13)
United Cup record: 17-6 (correct # of sets in winning picks: 13 out of 17)
Man thank god Berrettini is out so you can stop using your “best bets” on his matches!
Sonego ML in a parlay XXX
De Minaur spread XXX
Zverev ML XXX
Then you finally bet on Berrettini (not directly but taking Carlitos ov 21.5 games is essentially counting on the Italian) XXX
Maybe steer clear of him in the future! Awful!
Hello,
Will there be any predictions for the remaining Tennis Tournaments this year?
Fucsovics in 3
oops!
Arnaldi in 3
Seyboth Wild in 3
Medjedovic in 3
Shang in 3
Fils in 2
Napolitano in 3
Paul in 2
Hurkacz in 3
De Minaur in 3
Medvedev in 3
Auger-Aliassime in 3
Norrie in 3
Biaz in 3
Rublev in 2
Struff in 3
Rune in 3
Montiero in 3
Passaro in 3
Korda in 3
Shelton in 3
Djokovic in 2
Dimitrov in 3
Zverev in 2
Cerundolo in 3
What bookmaker are you working for?
Can you all post your BEST TOP 5 PICKS of the day?
thats on the best bets of the day page
I’m surprised the picks are still there. When they lose you delete them quickly so no one can see your losing bets.
For Ricky and all. I mean please POST your BEST TOP-TOP 5 PICKS from WTA and BEST TOP-TOP 5 PICKS from ATP out of the 16 bets for each where you expect NO UPSETS. That is 10 out of 32 picks (16 WTA & 16 ATP) so that beginners like me can focus on this TOP 10 bets with so many upsets in the 32 picks (16 WTA & 16 ATP) making us lose everyday.
Thanks a lot Ricky for your hard work in analyzing and posting picks EVERYDAY, DAY-IN & DAY-OUT for the last many years! My Brain hurts just by analyzing 5 to 10 matches per day and picking winners in which I fail atleast 25 to 50% of the times. This is NO EASY task. On top of which you have to run and maintain this highly trafficked website. Hats off to you Ricky for the GREAT JOB that you are doing. Your hard work is greatly appreciated! My knowledge of Tennis has increased a lot by studying your match analysis Ricky.
What is the difference between PLAYER A MONEYLINE bet and PLAYER A -1.5 SETS? Both the bets look same to me. Sorry for asking some basic questions or doubts. I am kinda new to betting. Can someone explain with an example?
you have to win in straight sets.
if you win in 3 sets the bet is lost.
Thanks Ricky for your response ricky. But I am still confused and lost.
I thought in a MONEY LINE bet a player can lose a max of 1 set in a 3 sets match and still win the bet. Right? I thought that the same happens with -1.5 SET SPREAD.
Today Coco Gauff won in 3 sets versus Victorio Mboko like 3-6,6-2,6-1. Bookies said Say Coco Gauff -1.5 sets -300. This means that she should win ATLEAST 2 sets and can lose a maximum of 1 set only OR she has to win ATLEAST 0.5 sets MORE THAN 1.5 = 2 SETS? So CoCo has to win by 2 SETS at a MINIMUM out of 3 sets right….in any combination (win the 1st & 3rd or win 2nd and 3rd etc.)?
Most tennis websites say that the SET BETTING follows the GAME SPREAD BETTING. It follows, right?
So, I am following the ANOLOGY of GAME SPREAD BETTING. Example Svitolina -1.5 games -125. This means that Svitolina has to win by atleast 2 games ( win by a score of 7-6,7-6) for this bet to win or Svitolina should win by atleast 0.5 games more than -1.5 = 2 games. Right?
So the same GAME SPREAD betting should apply to SET BETTING also (which virtually all web sites say) Right? Therefore in a bet like Coco Gauff -1.5 sets -300 wins, if Coco can win atleast 2 sets or lose by a max of 1 set then the Coco Gauff -1.5 sets -300 wins, right?
So what is the difference between CoCo Gauff -1.5 sets and CoCo Gauff 2.0 sets??? I see no difference between the two…..if BOTH mean that a Player has to win the 1st 2 sets or in straight sets. If both bets mean the same then why should the bookies give 2 different bets that is like CoCo Gauff -1.5 -300 and CoCo Gauff 2.0 sets with different or same odds???
I am really really LOST and CONFUSED. Please explain and show me websites which explain the DIEERENCE between Player A winning by -1.5 sets and 2.0 sets with CLEAR and SIMPLE EXAMPLES. Please.
Why is there not a single website in this world explaining set betting with CLEAR and CONCRETE EXAMPLES especially by all the bookies, before offering 100’s of bets like Coco Gauff -1.5 -300 sets everyday???
Ricky I am becoming mad and pulling my hair. Please show me atleast ONE website which has explained SET BETTING in 3 sets with examples for -1.5 set spread. I would love to see examples with set betting in best of 5 set tournaments (Like at The Australian Open, The French Open, The US Open, and Wimbledon.) also with examples for -1.5 and -2.5 sets also.
Thanks Ricky for your above response ricky. But I am still confused and lost.
In a best-of-3 match, both -1.5 set spread and 2-0 set betting require the player to win 2-0.
If the match ends 2-0, both bets win.
If the match ends 2-1, both bets lose.
So yes, in best-of-3 matches, they are effectively the same bet.
However, they are not the same in best-of-5 matches, where:
-1.5 set spread also covers 3-0 and 3-1 (since the player wins by at least 2 sets).
2-0 set betting does not exist in best-of-5 (instead, you’d bet on 3-0).
Detailed Breakdown:
1. -1.5 Set Spread (Handicap Betting)
Meaning: The favorite must win at least 2 more sets than the opponent.
Best-of-3 Example:
2-0 win ✅ (2 – 0 = +2 sets → covers -1.5 spread)
2-1 win ❌ (2 – 1 = +1 set → does not cover -1.5)
Best-of-5 Example:
3-0 or 3-1 win ✅ (win by 2+ sets)
3-2 win ❌ (only +1 set)
2. 2-0 Set Betting (Correct Score Betting)
Meaning: You bet on the exact final score being 2-0.
Best-of-3 Example:
2-0 win ✅ (correct score)
2-1 win ❌ (wrong score)
Best-of-5 Example:
This bet does not exist (instead, you’d bet on 3-0).
Why Do Both Bets Exist If They’re the Same in Best-of-3?
-1.5 Set Spread
Used in both best-of-3 and best-of-5 matches.
Lower odds (since it’s a safer bet in best-of-5).
2-0 Set Betting
Only for best-of-3 matches.
Higher odds (since it’s a precise, riskier bet).
Conclusion:
In best-of-3 matches, -1.5 set spread and 2-0 set betting are identical in outcome.
The difference is in format:
-1.5 spread is a handicap that applies to all match lengths.
2-0 betting is a score-specific bet (only for best-of-3).
Thanks a lot Neck for your detailed wonderful reply. Understanding set betting better now.
Shapavolov has to be the most frustrating player to bet on. Why do I torture myself. Thanks Emma Navaro for not winning in straights. I sometimes wonder if they bet on themselves.