Miami 2018

gallery play wrote:

summerblues wrote:

gallery play wrote:At least 10 players have a decent chance to beat Federer in that sandpit.

Hah.  Maybe that is why bookies have Nole as the favorite to win the USO (!).  But no, I do not agree.  If Fed plays well he will have a very decent chance to win it.

You know what?  Put 500 dollars on him!  It's a very decent chance eh?

You are confusing me.  You bolded the part about Nole being the fave but quoted my "decent chance" about Fed.  What are you disagreeing with - Fed's or Nole's chances?

summerblues wrote:

gallery play wrote:

summerblues wrote:

gallery play wrote:At least 10 players have a decent chance to beat Federer in that sandpit.

Hah.  Maybe that is why bookies have Nole as the favorite to win the USO (!).  But no, I do not agree.  If Fed plays well he will have a very decent chance to win it.

You know what?  Put 500 dollars on him!  It's a very decent chance eh?

You are confusing me.  You bolded the part about Nole being the fave but quoted my "decent chance" about Fed.  What are you disagreeing with - Fed's or Nole's chances?

Right, i was referring to your last comment.

Yeah, I thought it was more likely you meant that.  I am not a betting man and $500 is a lot of money for me, so I will not do that

But to me Fed is certainly the #1 favorite to win it (unlike what bookies show).  I would not give him even odds against the field - not even close - but I think he has around 25-30% chance to win.  That is not a lost cause and worth fighting very hard for.

Not one of the Big 4 in the round of 32.  Must be a long time when that last happened (?).

summerblues wrote:Not one of the Big 4 in the round of 32.  Must be a long time when that last happened (?).

So I checked.  It has been a long long time.

2004 Paris.  None of the big 4 entered, so none of them made the 3rd round.  In fact, they were not the big 4 then yet.  There was only Big 1.  Rafa was around #50, Nole well outside top 100, and Murray was around #500 and would only turn pro in 2005.

In slams, one needs to go even further back to FO 2013.  Fed lost in Rd 1 to Luis Horna (who was, btw, only one year older than Fed) in straight sets.  He was not yet #1 and had never been past QF of a slam.  Rafa/Nole/Andy were not playing.

While we have to go quite far back to find a Masters where none of them made Rd 3, they came close once in more recent history.  In Paris 2012, Fed and Rafa were absent, and Nole lost in Rd 2.  Andy did only slightly better and lost in Rd 3.

Anyway, maybe the change of guards is finally upon us.  But no new guard is on the horizon, so only the empty guard posts will remain.  I wonder how much tennis I will watch once Fed rides into the sunset for good.  I did not watch very much between the mid 90s and Fed's arrival.  Mostly just slams, and even those not always (of course, internet watching was not ubiquitous then).

What a strange loss that was.

To me it looked like Fed’s mind was all over the place, his shot selection was dodgy and he struggled with focus.

If he could play the match again, I am sure he’d win...as if it came too quickly for him, the quality of opponent was more R3 or 4.

He played worse vs Delpo and nearly won.

Definitely time for a lengthy rest.

In retrospect, he should have missed the entire “sunshine double” this year.

(if it was down to me, I’d scrap it from the calendar!)

Last year, I can understand why he played it, the unexpected, great level of tennis and win in AO simply carried him through.

Have you checked Paris 2007 (I believe)..the year Davy won it?

summerblues wrote:Yeah, I thought it was more likely you meant that.  I am not a betting man and $500 is a lot of money for me, so I will not do that

But to me Fed is certainly the #1 favorite to win it (unlike what bookies show).  I would not give him even odds against the field - not even close - but I think he has around 25-30% chance to win.  That is not a lost cause and worth fighting very hard for.

I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Fed won’t win any more tournaments.

noleisthebest wrote:What a strange loss that was.

To me it looked like Fed’s mind was all over the place, his shot selection was dodgy and he struggled with focus.

If he could paly the match again, I am sure he’d win it...as if it came too quickly for him, the quality of opponent was more R3 or 4.

He played worse vs Delpo and nearly won.

Definitely time for a lengthy rest.

In retrospect, he should have missed the entire “sunshine double” this year.

(if it was down to me, I’d scrap noth from the calendar!)

Last year, I can understand why he played it, the unexpected level of play and win in AO simply carried him through.

He was simply very tired. That's how long it takes him to recover from 2 successive gruelling matches and the reason Djoko kept beating him in GS finals in 2014/2015.

noleisthebest wrote:

summerblues wrote:Yeah, I thought it was more likely you meant that.  I am not a betting man and $500 is a lot of money for me, so I will not do that

But to me Fed is certainly the #1 favorite to win it (unlike what bookies show).  I would not give him even odds against the field - not even close - but I think he has around 25-30% chance to win.  That is not a lost cause and worth fighting very hard for.

I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Fed won’t win any more tournaments.

He had 3 MPs last week! He shoud have played one only instead of both...and should have been Miami cause the best players are exhausted from IW and he has a day rest between Semi and Final.

noleisthebest wrote:I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Fed won’t win any more tournaments.

Yeah, that's more likely than winning USO.

gallery play wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don’t know why, but I have a feeling Fed won’t win any more tournaments.

Yeah, that's more likely than winning USO.

It's more likely that Fed will win quite a few more tournaments, but whether any are slams is debatable.  It's ridiculous to suggest he won't win another ATP 500 or 250 and even 1000. Dear god, one early loss and you lot are like fried chicken! 

All this showed was that he needs the schedule to be very carefully managed and don’t play on slow crappy courts unless it’s the USO.

The writing was on the wall from the struggle with Delbonis. Hopefully a nice rest until grass and he can make a run at Wimbledon. I’ve got Centre Court tickets with the family for a great day out and a look at the great man at his personal Court on opening day so I certainly hope so!

Come on, Nishi!

I reckon Nishi could serve much better if he tossed the ball low and in front of him like Dolgo. He’s got the ballstriking talent for it.

Actually Fed should of skipped the whole IW/Miami, he got No1 in Amsterdam anyway, even if he would win both of these, come clay time Nadal will regain No1, so apart from traveling with family/sponsorships/money etc. he had no Tennis reason to be in US.  

I'm sure WTF entry is safe so he should rest till Halle. Nadal is crumbling, Djoko is just traveling for fun, Andy back before W.

Nishi’s actually a bit on the thick side.

Delpo playing well, though I can only take his lumbersome style in small doses.

noleisthebest wrote:Nishi’s actually a bit on the thick side....

A good shot every five!.....not good enough at this level. He clearly has a mind problem. Shame cause it would not take much to bring him back to winning ways. But he has to be more positive.

Q. You switched to a bigger frame three years ago
and there has been a lot of talk about how it has
helped you come over the backhand. How has the
bigger, larger frame helped in your serve? That
was such a weapon throughout your career. How
do you compare the two frames for serve?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, I just feel like -- so there are
three frames. The 85, the 90, the 97. I had the 85 to
2002, the 90 from 2002 to 2014, and the 97 from then
on. I just feel like the one I play right now, RF97, is just
easier to play on every single day. It gives me easier
power on the serve, allows me to attack the backhand
more, allows me to hit easier backhand half-volley as
well.

I have had to do some minor adjustments maybe on
the slice and on the forehand, you know, which were --
it was always working, so I just had some adjustments
to make there, but I feel like it's helped me just overall
on every single day that it's just easier to play tennis.
The other ones you had to feel really good, focus,
move your legs, you had to be on at all times to play
with it. So this one seems a bit easier, and I think it's
helped me to keep my confidence up for longer periods
of time maybe

Chardy looks so French! 2 beautiful girls are sitting on his box. I believe his sister and girlfriend.

Beats toothless Dimi in the process.

Q. In the third set, you still looked like maybe you had it, getting on his service game. Were you surprised you couldn't break maybe?
ROGER FEDERER: No, I mean, honestly in the third anything could have happened. I feel like I wasn't feeling good. The ball, I wasn't feeling. With my movement, things weren't absolutely working.

I felt like the third could be a tricky one, of course. I feel like every time I had chances, something bad happened for me, wrong decision making by me, good decision making by him. Who knows what happened. It just felt like I could be paying the price for opportunities missed.

I feel like it already started beginning of the second set when I had breakpoints first game, and he almost wanted to give me that game, and I couldn't take it. After that I played a bad -- from that moment on, I played maybe a bad 10 minutes, which cost me the second set, maybe the match.

Look, it's disappointing. Don't know why I could never get to any level that I was happy with today. Sometimes you have these matches. Sometimes you find a way through. I just couldn't get it done today.

Q. You say you didn't feel well today. When is the last time you felt this way, given the success you've been having lately?
ROGER FEDERER: Oh, last week. Didn't play great last week either, I felt, overall. Nothing new, in my opinion. I'm trying to figure things out, so... Have time now.
===============================
That's why I guess he is not playing clay either.

Q. How do you feel losing the first position in the ranking?
ROGER FEDERER: I deserve it after this match. That's how I feel. Just so bad.
====================
I would agree but Nadal has not done much better.

Tenez wrote:Q. You say you didn't feel well today. When is the last time you felt this way, given the success you've been having lately?
ROGER FEDERER: Oh, last week. Didn't play great last week either, I felt, overall. Nothing new, in my opinion. I'm trying to figure things out, so... Have time now.
===============================
That's why I guess he is not playing clay either.

Yes, his FH was letting him down more than usually, and that must be a worry.

Was it a result of tired footwork or stg else...I suppose that’s the bit he needs to work out.

In the meantime, we have Kyrgios -Fognini and Shapo-Querrey to look forward to.

Well he is fragile...this is what some of us have been saying. It's amazing he manages to get to slams finals without losing a set. But even by that AO18 final he was not the same after that first set.

For a first match of a tournament, I didn’t think Fed played too badly. I only saw the third set but he was completely untroubled on serve and applying constant pressure to Kokkinakis. Whilst there were a few wayward shots, Kokkinakis also came up with some incredible points when under pressure. I thought it was a really good match. 

Overall, I thought this was a really good result for tennis. We had a youngster playing good attacking tennis going toe to toe with Fed and coming up with the goods when needed. Given Kokkinakis has been out of action for large parts of the last two years, it was an exceptional display. Hopefully, he can back it up with some more wins and stay injury free - he will soon be into the top 20 playing at that level.

It's a shame you cannot see the difference between that Federer and it's normal version.

I would look past the comment on Federer's performance and look at his comment around Kokkinakis's performance. I think it's glee that a youngster took his chance and didn't fluff it, even if it was against a sub-par Federer.

So many youngsters have fluffed it big time against sub-par big 3 performances. Tide might just be turning.

I don’t divide players as youngsters or not, just as good and bad...

If the youngster as you said have “fluffed it”, it usually means they were not good enough.

Even a subpar Federer is better to watch than just about any youngster.

legendkillar wrote:I would look past the comment on Federer's performance and look at his comment around Kokkinakis's performance. I think it's glee that a youngster took his chance and didn't fluff it, even if it was against a sub-par Federer.

So many youngsters have fluffed it big time against sub-par big 3 performances. Tide might just be turning.

If you look at Kokki's perf in that first set, he looked resigned. It's only when he saw Fed struggled that he took heart. So mixed feelings about Kokki there.

Tenez wrote:It's a shame you cannot see the difference between that Federer and it's normal version.

Clearly he wasn’t at his best, as my post made clear, and I’m only judging his performance on the 3rd set. Of course, had he played near his best he’d have won. However, you seem to expect him to be at or near his best in every match and any time he isn’t it’s due to “fitness”. That isn’t realistic, even for Federer there is going to be the odd occasion, particularly in his first match in a tournament, when he is slightly out of sorts. 

The last two Federer matches I’ve seen were the Del Bonis and Coric matches in IW, when I thought he was poor by his standards. I certainly thought he was playing better against Kokkinakis than in either of those matches. He just ran into an opponent who was a level above that opposition and couldn’t quite find the break of serve which would have got him over the line.

Anyway, as LK rightly says, the main point from the match was the performance of Kokkinakis. A breath of fresh air in a year which has, so far, seemed to be a case of one step forwards and two back for the youngsters.

Tenez wrote:

legendkillar wrote:I would look past the comment on Federer's performance and look at his comment around Kokkinakis's performance. I think it's glee that a youngster took his chance and didn't fluff it, even if it was against a sub-par Federer.

So many youngsters have fluffed it big time against sub-par big 3 performances. Tide might just be turning.

If you look at Kokki's perf in that first set, he looked resigned. It's only when he saw Fed struggled that he took heart. So mixed feelings about Kokki there.

I'd see it as he had the confidence to take his chance when presented. 

How many times in the past have we seen likes of Nadal, Djokovic, Murray dead to rights only for the opponent to succumb to the mental pressure as well as the physical (note I left Federer's name out that list )

Look at Paire vs Djokovic. Paire nearly did what he could to throw that match.

noleisthebest wrote:I don’t divide players as youngsters or not, just as good and bad...

If the youngster as you said have “fluffed it”, it usually means they were not good enough.

Even a subpar Federer is better to watch than just about any youngster.

I do as it's in their early years if they suffer enough battle scars, it causes their self doubt to come in matches or encounters against players they are actually better than.

You could be brutal and say they weren't good enough, but if they avoid really damaging defeats, they might well prosper.

Look at Shapovalov. Should he not fulfil his promise, will it be down to him not being 'good' enough?  

Ivanisevic is a classic example of a player suffering quite damaging defeats and taking an age to get over that and prevail on the biggest stage.

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don’t divide players as youngsters or not, just as good and bad...
If the youngster as you said have “fluffed it”, it usually means they were not good enough.
Even a subpar Federer is better to watch than just about any youngster.

I do as it's in their early years if they suffer enough battle scars, it causes their self doubt to come in matches or encounters against players they are actually better than.
You could be brutal and say they weren't good enough, but if they avoid really damaging defeats, they might well prosper.
Look at Shapovalov. Should he not fulfil his promise, will it be down to him not being 'good' enough?  
Ivanisevic is a classic example of a player suffering quite damaging defeats and taking an age to get over that and prevail on the biggest stage.

Shapo has a long way to go before he can fullfill his potential.

It is unfair to compare him to 30+ year old players whose games are more mature, who have more shots, more experience, better footwork etc.

Scars etc should not break strong characters, on the contrary.
Look at young Nole...he sustained some bruising losses, banging his head on glass ceiling of Fedal for many years and persevered.
I expect nothing less from young players.

When they become good enough, they’ll start winning.

Kyrgios and Shapo have already some big scalps under their belt as they are the most talented.

But let’s see how good their heads are in adversity.

Fabio’s hands are pure magic!

am watching Shapo...bit lucky but so far works.

Here you have the x factor again. Querrey is sadly not supported by his own crowd cause they want Shapo to win.

Very lucky Shapo here but Querrey played really poorly. He may have been upset by the sided crowd....being American!

I watched Snapo-Querrey until I could watch no more...that’s how boring Querrey was, so no wonder his own crowd cheered Shapo.

So many players can't keep the ball in court! Jack Sock in particular....amazing he got into the top 10.

37 shot rally in Zverev vs Ferrer.  I think there was a 39 shot rally in Zverev vs Medvedev.  Zverev was never the most exciting player to watch, but he used to hit the ball with more conviction.  Now he is just pushing it back - even when the ball is sitting up begging to be put away, he will not do it.

Remaining 4 players in the second quarter:

Zverev vs Kyrgios
Shapovalov vs Coric

A few years from now, this could be a grand slam SF line-up.

noleisthebest wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I don’t divide players as youngsters or not, just as good and bad...
If the youngster as you said have “fluffed it”, it usually means they were not good enough.
Even a subpar Federer is better to watch than just about any youngster.

I do as it's in their early years if they suffer enough battle scars, it causes their self doubt to come in matches or encounters against players they are actually better than.
You could be brutal and say they weren't good enough, but if they avoid really damaging defeats, they might well prosper.
Look at Shapovalov. Should he not fulfil his promise, will it be down to him not being 'good' enough?  
Ivanisevic is a classic example of a player suffering quite damaging defeats and taking an age to get over that and prevail on the biggest stage.

Shapo has a long way to go before he can fullfill his potential.

It is unfair to compare him to 30+ year old players whose games are more mature, who have more shots, more experience, better footwork etc.

Scars etc should not break strong characters, on the contrary.
Look at young Nole...he sustained some bruising losses, banging his head on glass ceiling of Fedal for many years and persevered.
I expect nothing less from young players.

When they become good enough, they’ll start winning.

Kyrgios and Shapo have already some big scalps under their belt as they are the most talented.

But let’s see how good their heads are in adversity.

I'm not comparing him to 30 year olds. The point I am making was for example Ivanisevic was 21 when he lost his first Slam final. He had to wait another 9 years to win his only Slam. However, he suffered harsh losses in those finals. 

Even strong characters find it difficult if they suffer tough defeats. 

Yes Kyrgios and Shapovalov have some scalps under their belts, however for every Federer or Djokovic that Kyrgios beats he loses to a Seppi or Querrey. 

They need to build up consistency and maintain. I am not talking winning Slams, but just being at the business end of tournaments. Gradual process. Ala for example Djokovic who was at the business end and winning tournaments and then he started to win big. 

If they start doing that, then I'll start to believe in a new guard emerging.

Tenez wrote:So many players can't keep the ball in court! Jack Sock in particular....amazing he got into the top 10.

Yes, he is lazy and heavy on his feet.
Then you have another top tenner - Busta who can move fast and keep the ball in play.

Pretty grim and low quality from both.

At the same time, the talent is lingering in the 20s and 30s.

A bit of an ugly transitory/injury patch salvaged exclusively by Federer.

TDs must be in the state of panic and I am glad they are!

summerblues wrote:Remaining 4 players in the second quarter:

Zverev vs Kyrgios
Shapovalov vs Coric

A few years from now, this could be a grand slam SF line-up.

I am annoyed that all talent is always squashed in one quarter in Federer’s half.

I hope Kyrgios learns some manners before he enters slam finals and semi-finals.

I don’t know what is it with these young Aussies, so much talent so little brain.

Even Kokkinakis reffered to his father as a “ my fu**ing dad” in a spat with Verdasco last night.

That aside, I’d love Shapo to get through that quarter, it will be tough as Kyrgios is serving out if this world.

I quite like the sober, neutral and orderly approach of Chung. Not a brilliant tennis but he could be my new Borg!

Shapo v Coric should be quite fun. ....though not sure I will be able to watch it.

Chung cruising....unlike Dimi and his generation.

Coric is worse to watch than Nadal. Grinding his games while grunting like a moron.

Shapo, on the other hand has the instant x factor.
He was born to fly and have fun at the same time.

Shapo serving well...if only his returning was half as good, he seems to be super relaxed on every single shot, like he is knocking on a Sunday afternoon.
A bit of focus would not go amiss.

He really is anti percentage in every possible way.

And Shahpo's happy go lucky style "pays off" in the cheaply squandered TB.
Including a super long rally from Coric.

A better player manages to lose the set. 

I wish Shapo's mother cut the umbilical cord.

Happy for Tiafoe, well done, Berdy should quit tennis, omg most annoying fuk ever to have a won $30M in tennis and be remembered for nothing.

Good that Raonic won too.

Good that Cilic lost.

Delpo looking nice.

Even better Coric now winning.

Sloane should date me, you know the old Black & White stuff etc etc for gender equality, I even see TV adverts now with white father & black mother family stuff, even new Spiderman had a black GF, so all equal....on TV I guess