Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» ATP 1000 Shanghai Masters.
Yesterday at 8:30 pm by Tenez

» Wimbleodn adopts final set TBs
Sun Oct 21, 2018 4:34 pm by Daniel

» Guerrilla, not gorilla, warfare: Fired tennis analyst who nearly died to have his day in court
Wed Oct 17, 2018 8:55 am by bogbrush

» How good is Stefanos Tsitsipas?
Wed Oct 10, 2018 11:11 am by Tenez

» Murray and his future.....
Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:15 pm by mcekovic

» Laver Cup - seriously?
Mon Sep 24, 2018 10:35 pm by DEC1M7

» Men's Final - USO 2018
Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:36 pm by legendkillar

» Ladies Final - USO 2018
Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:48 am by bogbrush

» Why the big 3 Slam tally might never be matched
Thu Sep 13, 2018 9:26 pm by Jahu

October 2018
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Calendar Calendar

Affiliates
free forum


Men's final prediction

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by raiders_of_the_lost_ark on Mon Jul 16, 2018 9:37 am

noleisthebest wrote:Boris and Tim bearing me out for Kev needing to be more at the net and avod 6 hour matches....

This is a such a limitation in his game. Someone with that kind of serve, coming to the net less that 5% of the points is ridiculous. He didn't make some of the best skills, perhaps better coaching would have helped. 

Its not impossible, but net skills are difficult to learn so late in career.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark

Posts : 3171
Join date : 2012-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by Slippy on Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:24 am

Yes, I was surprised to see someone (I think it was SB) saying before the SF that Anderson had more to his game than Isner. To me, Anderson is far more one-dimensional. He makes no real attempt to get to the net or introduce any variety. In contrast, Isner has looked to improve his net game and tries to get forwards (although he’s still not great at it). 

Anyway, great to see Novak back winning slams. His match against Nadal will go down as one of the great matches, just a shame it had to be split over two days. Phenomenal display to come through that one.

Slippy

Posts : 412
Join date : 2016-10-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by barrystar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 10:45 am

Anderson is a decent enough honest hard-working pro, but from point of view of tennis as entertainment, what on earth is the point of him?  He is a moderately interesting obstacle in the draw for better players, to see if they can handle his power, but as his career shows, when he manages to beat someone better than him and gets to the highest elevations a nose-bleed is the inevitable result.  Fair play to him - he's better at what he does than I'll ever be at anything and he's maxed out his talent - two slam finals is not to be sniffed at (joining the likes of Pioline....) - but really, we need far less players like him cluttering up the latter stages of men's draw.  TD's need to avoid conditions that ask of players only that they have a huge serve and moderate baseline game to get through to big finals.

As Tenez has said, matches like the Isner/Anderson and Isner/Mahut marathons on the one side, and the Nadal/Djoko slugfests at USO 2011 and AO 2012 on the other show how fine the margins are to create conditions that ensure the widest possible range of good matches between different playing styles.

It's obviously desirable on grass and clay not to neuter the characteristics inherent in those two surfaces, but as far as hard is concerned the Australian Open has a v. good balance between different styles (not just because Fed has won recently - Nadal got to a final, and it seems to throw up a lot of good matches).

If they can't get the balance right, then introduce a tie-breaker in the final set - but not at 6-6, try 10-10 or 12-12, just something to show that Slams are a bit different.

In this era of #metoo the we may end up with bo3 at slams - as Billie Jean argues today.

barrystar

Posts : 563
Join date : 2017-11-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by gallery play on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:02 am

barrystar wrote:TD's need to avoid conditions that ask of players only that they have a huge serve and moderate baseline game to get through to big finals.


Anderson has a very predictable game, all shots crosscourt from both wings. But it's not his fault he's still making finals despite his limitations nor the TD's. 
The problem is here is the nextgen. Or in fact 2 consecutive nextgen's

gallery play

Posts : 2620
Join date : 2012-09-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by AceofDeath on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:32 am

Maybe instead of over arm serving to start points off, just start a point off with a FH? Then guys like Isner, Raonic and Anderson would have to show more variety.

AceofDeath

Posts : 374
Join date : 2015-04-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by naxroy on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:33 am

Great from Novak

he is back, so it will be very difficult for rafa and federer to add many more slams

interesting second half of the year ahead of us

Nadal will be world number one for a couple of months at least (until usopen is over)

naxroy

Posts : 720
Join date : 2017-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by legendkillar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 11:46 am

barrystar wrote:Anderson is a decent enough honest hard-working pro, but from point of view of tennis as entertainment, what on earth is the point of him?  He is a moderately interesting obstacle in the draw for better players, to see if they can handle his power, but as his career shows, when he manages to beat someone better than him and gets to the highest elevations a nose-bleed is the inevitable result.  Fair play to him - he's better at what he does than I'll ever be at anything and he's maxed out his talent - two slam finals is not to be sniffed at (joining the likes of Pioline....) - but really, we need far less players like him cluttering up the latter stages of men's draw.  TD's need to avoid conditions that ask of players only that they have a huge serve and moderate baseline game to get through to big finals.

As Tenez has said, matches like the Isner/Anderson and Isner/Mahut marathons on the one side, and the Nadal/Djoko slugfests at USO 2011 and AO 2012 on the other show how fine the margins are to create conditions that ensure the widest possible range of good matches between different playing styles.

It's obviously desirable on grass and clay not to neuter the characteristics inherent in those two surfaces, but as far as hard is concerned the Australian Open has a v. good balance between different styles (not just because Fed has won recently - Nadal got to a final, and it seems to throw up a lot of good matches).

If they can't get the balance right, then introduce a tie-breaker in the final set - but not at 6-6, try 10-10 or 12-12, just something to show that Slams are a bit different.

In this era of #metoo the we may end up with bo3 at slams - as Billie Jean argues today.

I think that is rather harsh. Like saying why have only baseliners on Clay clogging up one side of the draw. 

Whilst the Isner/Anderson match wasn't a clinic and it literally rested on Isner being knackered of the 2 at the end of it, what I found impressive in that match was Isner going big and bailing himself out several times at 0-30 with the odd ace, un-returnable serve or a serve that allowed him to set the point up. It was similar with the Nadal/Djokovic match whereby you were waiting for one player to wilt. Both matches for me were a battle of wills. 

Isner never made a SF at Wimbledon which hardly lends credit to the assertion that the conditions favour his big serve. Simply the perceived better ball strikers in his section didn't perform. You had Dimitrov in there and Wawrinka and they both fluffed it. Pouille and Cillic fluffed it in Raonic's section. Tsitsipas couldn't beat Isner. I didn't see any complaints when Schwartzman and Busta made the QF's of the US Open last year.

I don't think simply putting emphasis on TD's to massage conditions is a credible solution. I don't think we'll see such matches next year that's for sure. 

As GP said, the lack of quality players coming through is the issue, not the balance of draws.

legendkillar

Posts : 2506
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by barrystar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:07 pm

naxroy wrote:Great from Novak

he is back, so it will be very difficult for rafa and federer to add many more slams

interesting second half of the year ahead of us

Nadal will be world number one for a couple of months at least (until usopen is over)

The dymanic of the rankings and will be interesting from now on - Nadal remains in pole position.  Djokovic is 2,405 behind in the race and that's a lot to make up even though he tends to do very well in the coming part of the season.  Fed, I'm sure, will not be chasing #1, just managing his schedule to peak at the important events - which may mean that he takes points 'off' Nadal or Djokovic at Cincinnati, USO, Shanghai or WTF.

Nadal slightly over-did himself chasing #1 last year with an apparent knock-on effect on the 2018 early HC season.  If Djoko gets close and Nadal does the same thing this year, he may end up over-extending himself more severely with worse results.

barrystar

Posts : 563
Join date : 2017-11-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by barrystar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 12:36 pm

legendkillar wrote:
barrystar wrote:Anderson is a decent enough honest hard-working pro, but from point of view of tennis as entertainment, what on earth is the point of him?  He is a moderately interesting obstacle in the draw for better players, to see if they can handle his power, but as his career shows, when he manages to beat someone better than him and gets to the highest elevations a nose-bleed is the inevitable result.  Fair play to him - he's better at what he does than I'll ever be at anything and he's maxed out his talent - two slam finals is not to be sniffed at (joining the likes of Pioline....) - but really, we need far less players like him cluttering up the latter stages of men's draw.  TD's need to avoid conditions that ask of players only that they have a huge serve and moderate baseline game to get through to big finals.

As Tenez has said, matches like the Isner/Anderson and Isner/Mahut marathons on the one side, and the Nadal/Djoko slugfests at USO 2011 and AO 2012 on the other show how fine the margins are to create conditions that ensure the widest possible range of good matches between different playing styles.

It's obviously desirable on grass and clay not to neuter the characteristics inherent in those two surfaces, but as far as hard is concerned the Australian Open has a v. good balance between different styles (not just because Fed has won recently - Nadal got to a final, and it seems to throw up a lot of good matches).

If they can't get the balance right, then introduce a tie-breaker in the final set - but not at 6-6, try 10-10 or 12-12, just something to show that Slams are a bit different.

In this era of #metoo the we may end up with bo3 at slams - as Billie Jean argues today.

I think that is rather harsh. Like saying why have only baseliners on Clay clogging up one side of the draw. 

Whilst the Isner/Anderson match wasn't a clinic and it literally rested on Isner being knackered of the 2 at the end of it, what I found impressive in that match was Isner going big and bailing himself out several times at 0-30 with the odd ace, un-returnable serve or a serve that allowed him to set the point up. It was similar with the Nadal/Djokovic match whereby you were waiting for one player to wilt. Both matches for me were a battle of wills. 

Isner never made a SF at Wimbledon which hardly lends credit to the assertion that the conditions favour his big serve. Simply the perceived better ball strikers in his section didn't perform. You had Dimitrov in there and Wawrinka and they both fluffed it. Pouille and Cillic fluffed it in Raonic's section. Tsitsipas couldn't beat Isner. I didn't see any complaints when Schwartzman and Busta made the QF's of the US Open last year.

I don't think simply putting emphasis on TD's to massage conditions is a credible solution. I don't think we'll see such matches next year that's for sure. 

As GP said, the lack of quality players coming through is the issue, not the balance of draws.

I agree it's harsh, and in part I was expressing myself deliberately provocatively.  I also agree on the point about the depressing absence of players in the draw good enough to beat mastodon plodders like Anderson.  I don't want TD's to 'massage' conditions, but it's always worth asking what contribution they have made.

I agree that the bottom half of last year's USO was similarly dreary for sure, but at least their turgid matches ended in a reasonable time and they did not have a game style which resulted in the Final being shafted because they had (admirable) determination but not the wit to find a way to win beyond exhausting the opponent.  Anderson has an unsatisfactory combination of being a huge predictable hitter with an allergy to the net - to be fair Isner is similar.

Whilst I agree that this is unlikely to be repeated next year, it's the second such 'unusual' match in a decade, each of which affected schedules and the draw beyond just the original match.  I don't think that the authorities will want to take the risk of there being a similar occurrence in the later stages of Wimbledon and have it pointed out that they have had two warnings.  Gonzales v. Pasarell resulted in changes, and I think this SF will too.  It's also worth pointing out that this doesn't only happen to matches involving plodding lesser mortals - Federer v. del Potro at the Olympics was a similar nonsense - and meant that Fed was totally cooked for the final.  Federer v. Roddick in 2009 is described by many as a 'classic' - and it was not in my book, more like  never-ending bore-fest.  Ultimately one carried on watching because having invested so much time in a disappointing match you were jiggered if you would be out the room when the winner emerged limping &  shattered from the wreckage.  Imagine if that had been a semi-final - we'd have been in a similar position to this year and the Olympics in 2012.

It's a Wimbledon-specific problem.

barrystar

Posts : 563
Join date : 2017-11-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by legendkillar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:55 pm

barrystar wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
barrystar wrote:Anderson is a decent enough honest hard-working pro, but from point of view of tennis as entertainment, what on earth is the point of him?  He is a moderately interesting obstacle in the draw for better players, to see if they can handle his power, but as his career shows, when he manages to beat someone better than him and gets to the highest elevations a nose-bleed is the inevitable result.  Fair play to him - he's better at what he does than I'll ever be at anything and he's maxed out his talent - two slam finals is not to be sniffed at (joining the likes of Pioline....) - but really, we need far less players like him cluttering up the latter stages of men's draw.  TD's need to avoid conditions that ask of players only that they have a huge serve and moderate baseline game to get through to big finals.

As Tenez has said, matches like the Isner/Anderson and Isner/Mahut marathons on the one side, and the Nadal/Djoko slugfests at USO 2011 and AO 2012 on the other show how fine the margins are to create conditions that ensure the widest possible range of good matches between different playing styles.

It's obviously desirable on grass and clay not to neuter the characteristics inherent in those two surfaces, but as far as hard is concerned the Australian Open has a v. good balance between different styles (not just because Fed has won recently - Nadal got to a final, and it seems to throw up a lot of good matches).

If they can't get the balance right, then introduce a tie-breaker in the final set - but not at 6-6, try 10-10 or 12-12, just something to show that Slams are a bit different.

In this era of #metoo the we may end up with bo3 at slams - as Billie Jean argues today.

I think that is rather harsh. Like saying why have only baseliners on Clay clogging up one side of the draw. 

Whilst the Isner/Anderson match wasn't a clinic and it literally rested on Isner being knackered of the 2 at the end of it, what I found impressive in that match was Isner going big and bailing himself out several times at 0-30 with the odd ace, un-returnable serve or a serve that allowed him to set the point up. It was similar with the Nadal/Djokovic match whereby you were waiting for one player to wilt. Both matches for me were a battle of wills. 

Isner never made a SF at Wimbledon which hardly lends credit to the assertion that the conditions favour his big serve. Simply the perceived better ball strikers in his section didn't perform. You had Dimitrov in there and Wawrinka and they both fluffed it. Pouille and Cillic fluffed it in Raonic's section. Tsitsipas couldn't beat Isner. I didn't see any complaints when Schwartzman and Busta made the QF's of the US Open last year.

I don't think simply putting emphasis on TD's to massage conditions is a credible solution. I don't think we'll see such matches next year that's for sure. 

As GP said, the lack of quality players coming through is the issue, not the balance of draws.

I agree it's harsh, and in part I was expressing myself deliberately provocatively.  I also agree on the point about the depressing absence of players in the draw good enough to beat mastodon plodders like Anderson.  I don't want TD's to 'massage' conditions, but it's always worth asking what contribution they have made.

I agree that the bottom half of last year's USO was similarly dreary for sure, but at least their turgid matches ended in a reasonable time and they did not have a game style which resulted in the Final being shafted because they had (admirable) determination but not the wit to find a way to win beyond exhausting the opponent.  Anderson has an unsatisfactory combination of being a huge predictable hitter with an allergy to the net - to be fair Isner is similar.

Whilst I agree that this is unlikely to be repeated next year, it's the second such 'unusual' match in a decade, each of which affected schedules and the draw beyond just the original match.  I don't think that the authorities will want to take the risk of there being a similar occurrence in the later stages of Wimbledon and have it pointed out that they have had two warnings.  Gonzales v. Pasarell resulted in changes, and I think this SF will too.  It's also worth pointing out that this doesn't only happen to matches involving plodding lesser mortals - Federer v. del Potro at the Olympics was a similar nonsense - and meant that Fed was totally cooked for the final.  Federer v. Roddick in 2009 is described by many as a 'classic' - and it was not in my book, more like  never-ending bore-fest.  Ultimately one carried on watching because having invested so much time in a disappointing match you were jiggered if you would be out the room when the winner emerged limping &  shattered from the wreckage.  Imagine if that had been a semi-final - we'd have been in a similar position to this year and the Olympics in 2012.

It's a Wimbledon-specific problem.

I'd say just do as the US Open. Make 5th set a TB at 6-6. Eliminates potential situations in where you could end up with a 7 hour snooze fest. 

I wouldn't say it's a Wimbledon specific problem. Look at the issues the FO runs into annually with gruelling 5 setters that distort the schedule. Like Wimbledon, they don't have night time schedules which can go a long way to alleviating potential conflicts in the schedule. 

Yes the Anderson/Isner was a servefest, but I'd say that was a true one off. 

All I hope for is a new brigade that can push through this generation.

legendkillar

Posts : 2506
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by Jahu on Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:47 pm

Becker says Djoko is unloved at the level of Fed/Rafa so it hurts him, guess silly acting and gurus did not help much  Laugh

https://www.bbc.com/sport/tennis/44841243

Jahu

Posts : 2935
Join date : 2016-02-23
Location : Egg am Faaker See

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by bogbrush on Mon Jul 16, 2018 2:58 pm

I think the ideas to go to a tie break at 10-10 or something, and perhaps make it a first to 10 point breaker appeal more than the normal one. I feel you have to give the 5th set every chance it can have to be decisive.

I also think this shouldn't apply to a final. This is really about knackering up players for the next round so where there isn't one it should stay as is.

bogbrush

Posts : 2422
Join date : 2015-03-30
Location : England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by legendkillar on Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:08 pm

I feel 12 games should be decisive enough. Essentially we'll end up relying on knackering players win out rather than letting skill and guile win out smiley

legendkillar

Posts : 2506
Join date : 2012-10-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by naxroy on Mon Jul 16, 2018 3:41 pm

I think 5th set tie break is the best option

naxroy

Posts : 720
Join date : 2017-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by AceofDeath on Mon Jul 16, 2018 6:27 pm

Nadal will never win 20 slams. 19 is his max.

AceofDeath

Posts : 374
Join date : 2015-04-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by summerblues on Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:33 am

AceofDeath wrote:Nadal will never win 20 slams. 19 is his max.
Glad to hear that.  I was starting to worry.

summerblues

Posts : 3926
Join date : 2012-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by summerblues on Tue Jul 17, 2018 1:35 am

I think they should have a fifth set limit before the final.  I would be quite happy with a regular TB in set 5 - but if they think it is too soon, maybe allow the set to go to somewhere around 12-12.

Definitely would not want to see TB in the decider in the final.

summerblues

Posts : 3926
Join date : 2012-05-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Men's final prediction

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum