Well, Boulter lost, and also Dan Evans just lost 2-0 against a lower-ranked opponent, so maybe ignore me!

Seriously though, I do still think it's worth keeping an eye on the British players, who are playing above their level at the moment. The only one I'd definitely steer clear of is Raducanu, who has been very flaky this year - there's probably a decent chance of her retiring injured at some point during Wimbledon.

One thing I've never really understood with this particular insane conspiracy theory is just why the people who are already in control would want to reduce the number of ordinary people they can exploit. It's like a pharaoh or a plantation owner complaining that he has too many slaves.

I won't deny that much of the world (and certainly my own country) is ruled by an effectively closed club of people, who exploit the remainder of the population... but why would they want fewer people to exploit? If your source of wealth is the people you exploit, why would you want to diminish that? The ruler of a large kingdom is more important and powerful than the ruler of a small kingdom.

One possible interesting effect with these popular animal predictions (and similar) is that, whilst they are of course entirely random, they may influence betting patterns, and so affect the odds. If a million people see a video of an octopus picking a winner in a world cup match, then that could potentially result in a lot of people making a lot of real money bets based on this prediction... which can then cause the odds to change, and make betting for the opposition more favourable.

I've no idea if there is much of an effect on betting patterns or not, but it's certainly possible.

If you make a ridiculous claim, without any evidence to support it, then it's unlikely that people will believe you. Please gather some evidence.

I do, of course, understand that any evidence that you may present will be carefully selected and divested of context in order to further a narrative that is at odds with reality, so here's a cherry-picker to assist you in your efforts. I've made the image quite small, because I'm not expecting you to gather much.

I think this is just talk, there's next to zero chance of Mercedes challenging for the title this year.

Most races follow the same pattern, Leclerc takes pole, Verstappen just behind him. Verstappen in the faster race-distance car overtakes Leclerc and wins. Leclerc takes second or retires the car. Perez and Sainz bumble about lower down the order, in cars that should finish 3rd and 4th every race... Mercedes are ultra-reliable but slow, and finish 5th/6th unless Ferrari have issues or Perez/Sainz perform badly... in which case the Mercs can move up a couple of places.

But there's no chance of Merc winning a race unless both Verstappen and Leclerc retire their cars.

It's not just Peniston, it seems like almost all UK tennis players are destroying everyone they meet on grass at the moment, some very surprising results recently. Draper is the other obvious one on the men's side, but on the women's side, just yesterday Katie Boulter beat Pliskova and Jodie Burrage beat Paula Badosa... two Brits outside the top 100 both beating top 10 players on the same day. It's worth keeping an eye on this phenomenon. Obviously UK players being stronger on grass is a bit of a cliche, but the results keep coming...

Edit: And just in the last 30 minutes, Harriet Dart (rank 103) has beaten Teichmann (rank 23). Meanwhile Boulter (r.127) is currently a set up against Petra Kvitova (r.31).

I'm not sure where you get the '1% effective' data from, please could you provide a link? And I'd add that no-one has suggested that the vaccine becomes fully effective within a week, anyway. Data on vaccine efficacy can be found from many reputable sources, here's one example: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccine-effectiveness

The vaccines are safe and effective. I don't think there's any reasonable doubt about this anymore.


Contracting the virus does confer a strong immune response, yes. But the point of the vaccines is that you get the immunity without having to catch the virus. Given that contracting the virus comes with a decent percentage chance of serious illness, long-term health effects, or even death... I'd argue that taking the vaccine is the more prudent approach.

Even if you're young and healthy, and in a very low-risk group, it's still better to take the vaccine rather than contracting the virus and potentially passing it on to more vulnerable people. This is why vaccination against a contagious disease is more a social responsibility issue than an individual liberty issue.

This is definitely true, teamwork is vital in football, not just at international level. Often you see club teams just spending big money on big name players who just won't fit into the side properly. If you buy the best 11 individuals in the world, chances are you're not going to end up with the best team. It's how the individual parts fit together that is key, and Germany are indeed often very good at this. It's not as simple as saying e.g. who should play at left-back, and then picking your best individual left-back... you need to pick the one that will fit well with the other players you're picking.

I'd disagree. Mercedes have a reliable car, so it's likely to finish a race... but it's also not as fast as a Ferrari or an RB. The natural position for a Merc driver at the moment is 5th or 6th, they have no chance of finishing above a Ferrari or an RB unless some mishap befalls Leclerc or Verstappen, or the car is driven by a less competent driver (Sainz, Perez).

You need to understand what a comorbidity is. Look it up. It's not surprising that people with a pre-existing condition are more susceptible to death from Covid, and no-one would challenge that. But look at excess death figures (from any reason). There wasn't a sudden pandemic of cancer, heart disease etc that just happened to occur at the exact same time as the Covid outbreak.

^{[CITATION NEEDED]} (a proper citation, not freedomphoenix/freethekraken/freethedragon/whatever)

True, he does look solid on grass, but I think there may be more to him that just that surface. He ran Rublev pretty close in the Madrid masters on clay about a month back, losing in a close third set 6-2 4-6 5-7. He's also only 20, so plenty of time to improve... and he is improving all the time, this time last year he was ranked 250.

Peniston may be a bit different, as he's 26yo.

Also some unfamiliar faces. Jack Draper continues his fine form. He took Taylor Fritz apart quite easily in the last tournament, and at Eastbourne he's beaten Jenson Brooksby 6-2 6-2. Brooksby is ranked #34... Draper meanwhile is ranked #108. Perhaps one to watch at Wimbledon, might be good value for a couple of wins against higher ranked players... depending on the draw, of course.

This seems highly unlikely. There is a vast vast gulf between the top teams (Man City, Liverpool) and Man United. First Man U have to improve to get up to the level of Arsenal/Spurs, then improve further to get up to the level of Chelsea, then improve again to get to the level of Man City and Liverpool.

Maybe the new manager can improve the Man United team, so they win more games and score more goals... but this is a very different proposition to getting them back to the top where they can realistically challenge for top honours.

This is fair enough. It is up to the individual whether they want to get vaccinated or not, it is totally within their control. But an individual cannot control where they are born.
It's Djokovic's personal choice not to get vaccinated.
Whereas Medvedev etc have no control over the fact they were born in Russia.

Putin needs some sort of way out where he can maintain a facade of victory, and proclaim such to the people back in Russia. Not sure what this might entail, presumably some concessions in the east, and promises about future NATO membership/expansion.

Putin may be willing to talk if he believes he can be offered something acceptable. What he says in public and what he might agree to in private could be two quite different things. But I would think it's better for the two sides to be talking rather than not talking. Communication channels need to remain open.

I can't really see anyone beating Swiatek, my concern was more about her fitness. I think she's had a shoulder injury recently, and I'm wary of betting on her to make it through 7 matches in a fortnight without that injury flaring up. If she stays fit, yes, the 2.5 looks good.

Don't know what to think about Serena, in a way it's similar to the situation Nadal has been in a few times this year, he basically won the French Open on one leg, simply because "It's Nadal at Roland Garros"... a similar argument could be advanced for "It's Serena at Wimbledon" (although her record doesn't quite compare with Nadal's absurd dominance in France).

The problem for Bayern is that they're losing Lewandowski on a free, so a world-class striker is leaving and they're not getting any money for him.
There are relatively few world-class strikers that Bayern can get without paying a huge transfer feee, so they're probably limited to those, like Mane, who are nearing the end of their contracts. I'm not sure they could afford the huge financial outlay on someone like Nunez.
Unfortunately for Bayern, everyone knows they're desperate, and that could cause them to pay over the odds for whoever they bring in.

I notice that all the talk is on the men's side... is that because everyone knows that Swiatek will win the women's?  

It seems she's listed at around 2.5... not sure if that's good or bad. Obviously there is always some uncertainty around a player making it safely through 7 matches in 14 days, irrespective of how good they are. TBH though I did probably expect something less than 2.5.

Serena seems to be around 17-19, but obviously no-one knows what sort of condition she's in.

I always try to avoid thinking about streaks, as really each bet is independent, and if you've say won 10 in a row or lost 10 in a row, it doesn't make you any more or less likely to win the next bet. Whilst streaks can sometimes mean that you are making good decisions (especially if it's a streak in a certain specific area where you have a lot of knowledge), more often a streak is simply brute luck, almost like flipping a coin 10 times and getting 10 heads... it doesn't make the chance of getting heads next time any more or less likely.

I suppose it's not just transfer fees, but also wages. I think de Jong is on something like 10m Euros per year, so if they sell him they also lose that commitment to the wage budget. I think they let Coutinho leave for Villa on a cheap fee mainly so that they could shift the wage burden. If Barca need more money to fund Lewandowski's wages, they might eventually let de Jong (as one of the top earners) leave for cheaper, if they don't have any other options... but for the moment they are seeing just how much they can get out of United.