ATP Masters 1000: Madrid

summerblues wrote:

TMF wrote:Should Federer enter Rome as a WC?

I think he should give it serious thought. He could just use it as clay prep for RG and who knows he may be able to gain some useful points.

There is no such thing as "useful points" at this stage in his career.  There are only "useful grand slam titles".  He should see how RG goes and he should work hard to try to win W or USO.  If he gets to #1 in the process, so much the better, but he should waste exactly zero extra effort towards that.

I'm not so sure. I don't think adding one tournament is going to disrupt his schedule too much given that he's intending to practice on clay for the next couple of weeks anyway.

The reward 'of a few extra points' may be another YE number 1 - which at the age of 36 - and also tying Sampras for possibly the only major record he doesn't hold - would be a considerable addition to his legacy.

It would be remarkable to be the oldest number 1 in the history of the open Era.

If we're just considering 'useful grand slam titles' then playing RG without any clay prep doesn't sound like a very smart way of adding to that tally.

Waiting 'till after the USO leaves less opportunity in the way of scheduling to make gains given that he has a fullish schedule anyway after RG.

Whereas adding a clay masters now when he hasn't played in 2 months seems like a much more viable option.

Seeing Thiem today he reminded me of Muster. And I remembered that both are Austrian. So it is interesting to see again a "country" style.

summerblues wrote:

summerblues wrote:

TMF wrote:Should Federer enter Rome as a WC?

I think he should give it serious thought. He could just use it as clay prep for RG and who knows he may be able to gain some useful points.

There is no such thing as "useful points" at this stage in his career.  There are only "useful grand slam titles".  He should see how RG goes and he should work hard to try to win W or USO.  If he gets to #1 in the process, so much the better, but he should waste exactly zero extra effort towards that.

Maybe let me dial that back a little.  He should not waste any time thinking about #1 until after the USO.  If, after the USO, he is still in with a chance, then he can think about what, if anything, he wants to do to specifically chase #1.  But we are getting well ahead of ourselves.  He is 36 and an injury can be round the corner any moment.  So I will just take it one tourney at a time for now.

But if Fed plays RG and wins it, then is almost guaranteed to end up #1 at en of the year. He should play RG 100% committed.

Given how poor the field is at the moment this actually gives Federer the best chance he's had at RG for many years. Even the prospect of a match against Nadal (which I'd expect him to lose) is more intriguing than it has been for about a decade.

Tenez wrote:But if Fed plays RG and wins it, then is almost guaranteed to end up #1 at en of the year. He should play RG 100% committed.

He should play the first 3-4 rounds easy to see how it goes, and if he is feeling good about his game he should go 100% for it thereafter. I did not expect to be saying it this time 12 months ago, but I think he does have a decent chance.

Thiem holding up ok at the moment, but as usual, playing from the stands.

TMF wrote:Should Federer enter Rome as a WC?

I think he should give it serious thought. He could just use it as clay prep for RG and who knows he may be able to gain some useful points.

roger should have played madrid if he wanted a clay warm up.the conditions suits him perfectly and a confidence boost going into a major is something that's always helped him win majors
I would have fancied my chances against nadal today if I was him
rather skip roma and go into RG really fresh

7-6 Nadal. How nadalish can a tie break get?

Thiem got 2 sp's but it never looked like he was going to win one.
Nadal couldn't have had a better prep for RG. It's been an ideal clay season for him so far. He faced ok players but none of 'm had the guts and skills to make him nervous.

Breaks early in second. This is looking over.

gallery play wrote:7-6 Nadal. How nadalish can a tie break get?

Thiem got 2 sp's but it never looked like he was going to win one.
Nadal couldn't have had a better prep for RG. It's been an ideal clay season for him so far. He faced ok players but none of 'm had the guts and skills to make him nervous.

Yes but can he have played too much before RG?

Thiem seems like he's giving it a good go but more break points not taken.

Tenez wrote:

gallery play wrote:7-6 Nadal. How nadalish can a tie break get?

Thiem got 2 sp's but it never looked like he was going to win one.
Nadal couldn't have had a better prep for RG. It's been an ideal clay season for him so far. He faced ok players but none of 'm had the guts and skills to make him nervous.

Yes but can he have played too much before RG?

True, but didn't we expect him before to crack before the finnish line?  Usually in vain..

Thiem's FH is not flat enough to beat Nadal on clay. Especally when hit from that far behind the baseline. BH is even worse. He hits it 5 yards behind the baseline. It's typical clay court tennis, but useless against Nadal. No one beats Nadal with classic clay court tennis.

Poor Thiem...
great fight!

Nadal's safe formula works yet one more time...

Yeah, like Djoko for 4 years had a mega attack formula 

Not bad for Theim to go to Final, obviously beating Nadal in a clay final took some years for Djoko, let alone Thiem.

And Fed should rest till RG, and then win it

gallery play wrote:Thiem's FH is not flat enough to beat Nadal on clay. Especally when hit from that far behind the baseline. BH is even worse. He hits it 5 yards behind the baseline. It's typical clay court tennis, but useless against Nadal. No one beats Nadal with classic clay court tennis.

Exactly. Even if he had won that first set, he would have lost in 3. Very disappointed by his game. Just another Gasquet without the flair, though certainly fitter.

So who can challenge Rafa at Rome?

Are we at a stage that we all hate Rafa now cause he is winning all of it like Djoko did 3-4 years in a row? 

I for once am happy it's not Djoko wining, sure I'd love to see others win and not Rafa, at least fed gave us some happy moments this year.

RG will be different beast from these clay tournies, I'm sure Stan will wake up, and will a few big hitters.

If Fed can preserve his energy to the final (like he did in 2015) then he has a (good) chance.

I also expect Djoko and Murray to have recovered by then.

He has no chance, Tenez.  You're deluding yourself into believing this is Federer 2006.  It isn't.  He's got no prayer on clay where his serve will not get him any freebies and he will be forced into rallies he can no longer win.  

The good news is that Nadal is not at all certain to win the FO. Slam level is a different ball game, especially in your 30s.  So don't be surprised to see him getting booted.

The only talking points here are Djokovic and how lazy and useless he has become, and the younger generation, who are the most pitiful mental midgets I have ever witnessed. They all seem to be able to get set points, but I don't ever see them being taken. Goffin, Theim... forget it.  These two seem utterly hopeless to me. Dimitrov needs to die.  Zverev is promising on all surfaces.  Kyrgios is a massive threat on grass and hc, but useless on clay.  

I was optimistic of the future last year, but not anymore.  These players will get better, and someone will dominate sooner or later (imho it's going to be zverev and kyrgios), but it's taking its sweet time.  Especially considering you have two grandpas on court winning everything.

Daniel wrote:He has no chance, Tenez.  You're deluding yourself into believing this is Federer 2006.  It isn't.  He's got no prayer on clay where his serve will not get him any freebies and he will be forced into rallies he can no longer win.  

The good news is that Nadal is not at all certain to win the FO. Slam level is a different ball game, especially in your 30s.  So don't be surprised to see him getting booted.

The only talking points here are Djokovic and how lazy and useless he has become, and the younger generation, who are the most pitiful mental midgets I have ever witnessed. They all seem to be able to get set points, but I don't ever see them being taken. Goffin, Theim... forget it.  These two seem utterly hopeless to me. Dimitrov needs to die.  Zverev is promising on all surfaces.  Kyrgios is a massive threat on grass and hc, but useless on clay.  

I was optimistic of the future last year, but not anymore.  These players will get better, and someone will dominate sooner or later (imho it's going to be zverev and kyrgios), but it's taking its sweet time.  Especially considering you have two grandpas on court winning everything.

XD

Daniel wrote:I was optimistic of the future last year, but not anymore.  These players will get better, and someone will dominate sooner or later (imho it's going to be zverev and kyrgios), but it's taking its sweet time.  Especially considering you have two grandpas on court winning everything.

Some wise words at last. 

30 is the new 26! Every single results have proved me right since I started that discussion in 2009.

Daniel wrote:He has no chance, Tenez.  You're deluding yourself into believing this is Federer 2006.  It isn't.  He's got no prayer on clay where his serve will not get him any freebies and he will be forced into rallies he can no longer win.  

The good news is that Nadal is not at all certain to win the FO. Slam level is a different ball game, especially in your 30s.  So don't be surprised to see him getting booted.

The only talking points here are Djokovic and how lazy and useless he has become, and the younger generation, who are the most pitiful mental midgets I have ever witnessed. They all seem to be able to get set points, but I don't ever see them being taken. Goffin, Theim... forget it.  These two seem utterly hopeless to me. Dimitrov needs to die.  Zverev is promising on all surfaces.  Kyrgios is a massive threat on grass and hc, but useless on clay.  

I was optimistic of the future last year, but not anymore.  These players will get better, and someone will dominate sooner or later (imho it's going to be zverev and kyrgios), but it's taking its sweet time.  Especially considering you have two grandpas on court winning everything.

So you're basically saying: No one will win RG this year?

I'm saying Federer won't and Nadal is firm favourite, sadly (even though I still think it's nowhere near as certain as most people are saying. At 31, nothing is certain.  Predicting who will win the FO is impossible this year, to be frank.).  And he is 100% not going to win now, as he has pulled out.  A smart move.

Well I can say for certain this year Federer won't win RG  It's a fact!

Daniel wrote:He has no chance, Tenez.  You're deluding yourself into believing this is Federer 2006.  It isn't.  He's got no prayer on clay where his serve will not get him any freebies and he will be forced into rallies he can no longer win.  

The good news is that Nadal is not at all certain to win the FO. Slam level is a different ball game, especially in your 30s.  So don't be surprised to see him getting booted.

The only talking points here are Djokovic and how lazy and useless he has become, and the younger generation, who are the most pitiful mental midgets I have ever witnessed. They all seem to be able to get set points, but I don't ever see them being taken. Goffin, Theim... forget it.  These two seem utterly hopeless to me. Dimitrov needs to die.  Zverev is promising on all surfaces.  Kyrgios is a massive threat on grass and hc, but useless on clay.  

I was optimistic of the future last year, but not anymore.  These players will get better, and someone will dominate sooner or later (imho it's going to be zverev and kyrgios), but it's taking its sweet time.  Especially considering you have two grandpas on court winning everything.

dimitrov turns 26 today...doesnt look like he is ever going to live up to the hype or expectation