Dubai, Acapulco, Sao Paolo 2017

Federer & Murray playing Dubai, Djokovic, Stan & Nadal Acapulco.

Interesting last minute WC for Djokovic who never played in Mexico.

Should be a good week of tennis!


Dubai (hard)
Order of Play:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2017/495/op.pdf

Acapulco (hard)
Order of Play:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2017/807/op.pdf


Sao Paolo (clay)
Order of play:

http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2017/533/op.pdf

Stan is playing Dubai not Acapulco.

Paire has turned out to be such disappointment. No corazon about him.

Fed having a perfect match though...immaculate serving, and yes, that backhand is simply aaaaaaaaaahhhhhh

Who had the MTO?

I didn't see any MTOs, though I started watching at 1:0 in e second set.

There was one at 4-1 1st set, obviously first thought was the upper leg. Hopefully not.

Dammit, the Colonel lost. No records this week.

That woudl be a strange record. Is it held by Lendl? I think Lenl's record is different he has beaten connors 17 times in a row or something like that.

Tenez wrote:That woudl be a strange record. Is it held by Lendl? I think Lenl's record is different he has beaten connors 17 times in a row or something like that.

You're right, Lendl did him 17 times in a row (Jimmy was 40 by the time of the last match, to be fair). Where did I get that 16 match streak thing from? 

Perhaps it's about never losing to the player because Federer is 16-0 vs both Youzhny and Ferrer. The old "nobody beats......" quip. I'm sure that must be it.

I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

bogbrush wrote:I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

Flakiness + niggling injury + long layoff from tennis = Stan loses early

Don't worry, he can play out of the world when he needs to. So let this 'uncertainty' about him be as it is.

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:That woudl be a strange record. Is it held by Lendl? I think Lenl's record is different he has beaten connors 17 times in a row or something like that.

You're right, Lendl did him 17 times in a row (Jimmy was 40 by the time of the last match, to be fair). Where did I get that 16 match streak thing from? 

Perhaps it's about never losing to the player because Federer is 16-0 vs both Youzhny and Ferrer. The old "nobody beats......" quip. I'm sure that must be it.

I think Nadal has or had a bunny like that too. Ferrer?

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

Flakiness + niggling injury + long layoff from tennis = Stan loses early

Don't worry, he can play out of the world when he needs to. So let this 'uncertainty' about him be as it is.

Stan is on the slide - no longer the player he used to be.

Hasn't played at his highest level since the FO final in 2015 - then again ALL of the top players are sliding - the tour is weaker now than it has been in years.

TMF wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

Flakiness + niggling injury + long layoff from tennis = Stan loses early

Don't worry, he can play out of the world when he needs to. So let this 'uncertainty' about him be as it is.

Stan is on the slide - no longer the player he used to be.

Hasn't played at his highest level since the FO final in 2015 - then again ALL of the top players are sliding - the tour is weaker now than it has been in years.

...So are some commentators.

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:That woudl be a strange record. Is it held by Lendl? I think Lenl's record is different he has beaten connors 17 times in a row or something like that.

You're right, Lendl did him 17 times in a row (Jimmy was 40 by the time of the last match, to be fair). Where did I get that 16 match streak thing from? 

Perhaps it's about never losing to the player because Federer is 16-0 vs both Youzhny and Ferrer. The old "nobody beats......" quip. I'm sure that must be it.

I think Nadal has or had a bunny like that too. Ferrer?

Dunno but it isn't Ferrer. He's 24/6 there. 

That said poor Daveed is W6 - L40 vs Federer/Nadal.

Raonic - a top 5 player

Monfils - lol - the biggest clown ever, the most pathetic, gutless, useless player in the history of the ATP - world number 6 - haha - what a joke.

Thiem and Nishikori - top 8

Most recent slam won by a 35 yr old

Other finalist, Nadal, half the player he was 4 or 5 years ago - what a joke

TMF wrote:Monfils - lol - the biggest clown ever, the most pathetic, gutless, useless player in the history of the ATP - world number 6 - haha - what a joke.

That's Berdych, Monf at least gives us a great match once a year.

I watched Monfils the other day. Or at least I tried to, as he was so far back he was quite lost in the shade right back with the line judges. I'm not exaggerating, I couldn't see him. It made it novel to see the ball just coming back as if by magic.

The guys a novelty act but not a serious tennis professional worth watching to see a title winner.

Jahu wrote:

TMF wrote:Monfils - lol - the biggest clown ever, the most pathetic, gutless, useless player in the history of the ATP - world number 6 - haha - what a joke.

That's Berdych, Monf at least gives us a great match once a year.

As has been pointed out a few times, Berdych has beaten Fed, Djok, and Nadal in Slams and made Wimbledon final.  Monfils has not. Monfils is a gutless, useless player. I want him banning from tennis.  Monfailure.

Berdych was a more solid top 10nner....but much more boring than Mofils. Monfils game is awful tactic/brain wise but at least he can be fun to watch. There is no sadder spectacle than seein Berdych to lose.....or maybe there is...Monfils tanking a match like he did v Djoko at the USO16.......

Anyway those 2 are not worth discussing or arguing.

TMF wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

Flakiness + niggling injury + long layoff from tennis = Stan loses early

Don't worry, he can play out of the world when he needs to. So let this 'uncertainty' about him be as it is.

Stan is on the slide - no longer the player he used to be.

Hasn't played at his highest level since the FO final in 2015 - then again ALL of the top players are sliding - the tour is weaker now than it has been in years.

Okay Ihope you know who won the US open 2016 / You see the level of tennis he played in semis and the final.

Haha, nah Raiders, he was shite

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

TMF wrote:

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I see Stan is out. Usual Stan flakiness, or exposure of his big shots when the Court is quicker?

Flakiness + niggling injury + long layoff from tennis = Stan loses early

Don't worry, he can play out of the world when he needs to. So let this 'uncertainty' about him be as it is.

Stan is on the slide - no longer the player he used to be.

Hasn't played at his highest level since the FO final in 2015 - then again ALL of the top players are sliding - the tour is weaker now than it has been in years.

Okay Ihope you know who won the US open 2016 / You see the level of tennis he played in semis and the final.

Yes, I watched both matches and he didn't play anywhere near the level he played at in the FO final. Djokovic was awful in the USO final - Stan just had to turn up. Stan has been sliding in form for a couple of years. He is no longer the player he used to be - it's not just about results, it's also about performance.

The truth is the tour is weaker now than it has been in years. That's why a 35 yr old (doesn't matter who it is) can come back on tour after more than 6 months out and win a slam. That's ridiculous - it should never happen, and if this had been, say, 2012, it would not have happened. This Federer would have been mauled by Nadal/Djokovic of 2012.

The tour is a joke at the moment.

bogbrush wrote:I watched Monfils the other day. Or at least I tried to, as he was so far back he was quite lost in the shade right back with the line judges. I'm not exaggerating, I couldn't see him. It made it novel to see the ball just coming back as if by magic.

The guys a novelty act but not a serious tennis professional worth watching to see a title winner.

Haha, exactly.

A joke.

But he got to number 6 in the world by just pushing the ball into play from the stands. I think Caroline Wozniacki could get into the current men's top 10.

Federer is playing so relaxed and confident.

It's scary to say, but I think his backhand has caught up with his forehand, it may be even better than it, actually.

Serving - pure beauty.

Really? final set tiebreak vs DOnskoy and the russian served for the match!

And he lost

Fed choked it big time, but this russian git did keep it tight and clean when it mattered and no fear to to hit hard.

luvsports! wrote:Really? final set tiebreak vs DOnskoy and the russian served for the match!

Really.
That's how he played in the first set.

Don't kow what happened adter that. Went to the gym.

I know it will sound stupid but I feel gutted.

In the absence of Maestro...allez Lucas!

Nitb, you still sweaty? 

Jahu wrote:Nitb, you still sweaty? 

Why do you ask?

No sweating at the Gym then?

Did you just enjoy the view then?

Jahu wrote:No sweating at the Gym then?

Did you just enjoy the view then?

No, I am the view!

hahahaha, nice one.

1 remote kiss for you then

Tactical loss to prepare for Wimbly

Same in Miami and Indian Wells please

NITB wrote:Federer is playing so relaxed and confident.

It's scary to say, but I think his backhand has caught up with his forehand, it may be even better than it, actually.

Serving - pure beauty.

LOL.. maybe it was the neo BH?

Wow Federer was 63 and 4/3 up when I went for diner. Did not expect that result....clearly he is still not 100%.

TMF wrote:Yes, I watched both matches and he didn't play anywhere near the level he played at in the FO final. Djokovic was awful in the USO final - Stan just had to turn up. Stan has been sliding in form for a couple of years. He is no longer the player he used to be - it's not just about results, it's also about performance.

Why do you think that players can continuously play at high level and all the time tournament after tournament? The margins are very small in tennis, 1-mm decides the difference between a great shot and an UE. You show me any player who could play high level attacking tennis months after months and in all matches. It doesn't happen. No one can do it.

Also one doesn't always need to play high level to win. 

And what is this slide for Stan? Before winning RG 2015, he played extremely poor in all the clay tournaments. Then comes and wins RG.

Same story for US open 2016, losing all USopen series events early and beating everyone in USopen 16. And I would differ with you and ls that he played poor. One needs to play good in important points, and he did those in QF, semis and finals.


Stan was never a consistent player all his pro career, nor will be. Its juts not his game.

TMF wrote:The truth is the tour is weaker now than it has been in years. That's why a 35 yr old (doesn't matter who it is) can come back on tour after more than 6 months out and win a slam. That's ridiculous - it should never happen, and if this had been, say, 2012, it would not have happened. This Federer would have been mauled by Nadal/Djokovic of 2012.

If one an come out after 6 months and play the tennis that Fed played in AO, 17, then he can win slams in any era.

TMF wrote:

NITB wrote:Federer is playing so relaxed and confident.

It's scary to say, but I think his backhand has caught up with his forehand, it may be even better than it, actually.

Serving - pure beauty.

LOL.. maybe it was the neo BH?

No, it wasn't the neo backhand. The BH was outstanding while I was watching.

I am surprised you can't see how much better it is now.

I assume he probably still had some physical issues.

AceofDeath wrote:Tactical loss to prepare for Wimbly

Same in Miami and Indian Wells please

Yes, there is always that possibility.

AO run took a lot out of him.

I can't complain. I had my fix in his match vs Paire. It was great.

What yesterday's loss told me is that it's going to be physically tough for him to compete next year.

But if he can somehow manage the schedule where he still keeps reasonable ranking and plays fresh in Wimbledon and USO, than I am happy.

He has zero chance in anything slow.

M
I saw a few games of Nole-Delpo.

First, it was an agony of how slow Delpo was between the points, wiping sweat etc. His FH was great.

Then the ball was slow.

Compare to Dubai, it was a travesty.

But I did notice Nole served very well and was moving in a lot.

Don't know how he played in 2nd and 3rd set, i.e. when he was under pressure.

Anyway....

Amazing to have such almost two tier events at 500 level.

I suppose that goes under variety and it's good.
On the other hand, we don't want slow ess to be dictated by the size of balls, but determined by the surface.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

TMF wrote:The truth is the tour is weaker now than it has been in years. That's why a 35 yr old (doesn't matter who it is) can come back on tour after more than 6 months out and win a slam. That's ridiculous - it should never happen, and if this had been, say, 2012, it would not have happened. This Federer would have been mauled by Nadal/Djokovic of 2012.

If one an come out after 6 months and play the tennis that Fed played in AO, 17, then he can win slams in any era.

Fed didn't play at a standard of 2006 (not even close in terms of court coverage or forehand or serve or consistency) and nor did Nadal. Federer played very poorly for 2 of the 5 sets, and was v lucky to get away with dropping serve in the 5th.  He played very well overall in the tournament and the performance was enough that it could snatch a slam here and there in most eras, but it was not the master class people are declaring it. Djokovic (before his dip) wouldn't have lost. For a 35 year old, it was the best I've seen. Outdoing Agassi's run at the US Open.

I have to agree that this is a particularly weak era.  The most remarkable thing though is in Fed's favour... he took out four top 10 opponents, including Wawrinka and his nemesis Nadal - and he did it at 35.  We won't see his like again.

Tenez wrote:Wow Federer was 63 and 4/3 up when I went for diner. Did not expect that result....clearly he is still not 100%.

He's 35. He's never going to be "100%" again. When will that sink in? 2006 Federer lose to him? lol.  He likely didn't give it all he's got this tournament either, because ... he's old.  He'll save himself for the slams, but the Federer book is being closed. Sadly. Slowly but surely.

Tenez wrote:Wow Federer was 63 and 4/3 up when I went for diner. Did not expect that result....clearly he is still not 100%.

he underestimated his opponent,a lesson i would rather have him learn at a tournament like this rather then at a slam

ok guess Dubai is a must for Fed, being a lot there and rich arabs stashing his coffers, but Fed was asleep.

Veejay wrote:

Tenez wrote:Wow Federer was 63 and 4/3 up when I went for diner. Did not expect that result....clearly he is still not 100%.

he underestimated his opponent,a lesson i would rather have him learn at a tournament like this rather then at a slam

I doubt he underestimated it. He has too much experience for it. Either not 100% or just did not fancy lining matches in a row. He said on Monday he was happy to have a day rest after the first match....that's telling me he has not recovered from AO....or that he will never be able to play 2 matches in a row now.

My take is that he may have realised his pain the following day/match would be too great and did not want to give a W.O. for the spectators' respect so decided to lose instead. He has done that in the past when he wanted to pull out of a tournament, in particular to a local player.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

TMF wrote:Yes, I watched both matches and he didn't play anywhere near the level he played at in the FO final. Djokovic was awful in the USO final - Stan just had to turn up. Stan has been sliding in form for a couple of years. He is no longer the player he used to be - it's not just about results, it's also about performance.

Why do you think that players can continuously play at high level and all the time tournament after tournament? The margins are very small in tennis, 1-mm decides the difference between a great shot and an UE. You show me any player who could play high level attacking tennis months after months and in all matches. It doesn't happen. No one can do it.

Also one doesn't always need to play high level to win. 

And what is this slide for Stan? Before winning RG 2015, he played extremely poor in all the clay tournaments. Then comes and wins RG.

Same story for US open 2016, losing all USopen series events early and beating everyone in USopen 16. And I would differ with you and ls that he played poor. One needs to play good in important points, and he did those in QF, semis and finals.


Stan was never a consistent player all his pro career, nor will be. Its juts not his game.

Who's talking about playing continuously at a high level for tournament after tournament? Stan hasn't been at the same level as the FO final... since the FO final. That was more than 20 months ago. Like I said he was average at the USO last year. Djokovic was just rubbish. If Federer had played that Djokovic a year earlier he would have won in str8 sets.

IMO Stan appears to be sliding. He is no longer seems capable of reaching the same heights as he was able to in 2014 and 15. That's hardly surprising - he's gonna be 32 this year. Most players have declined way before then unless you're another one that seems to subscribe to the idiotic theory that professional tennis players as a cohort are better in their 30s than in their 20s.

As for Federer, he played an average tournament this years in OZ. It was only spectacular given his age. Peak Federer doesn't lose sets to Nishikori, Stan (and that match between the 2 of them at OZ this year was a poor standard), Melzer at the slams.

I didn't see it, but poor Kholi....to lose a TB 20:18, and serve for the match 7 times....

And Djoko losing to Kyrgios.......