Grass Season - Expectations

"It's the most wonderful time of the year". Well in the tennis calendar it definitely is. So here we are. The grass season, much longer than yesteryear which I most welcome. So wish for a Masters event on the green stuff. Come on ATP make it happen you barstewards!

So we have:

Stuttgart and Hertogenbosch this week.
Halle and Queens next week.
Eastbourne the week after before the main event.

Enough to keep all you grazers keen and lean

Now the tour has been a crazy one. Not sure what odds you would've got on 1st January this year for Federer and Nadal winning the opening Slams this year. You have Djokovic who's lost his mojo in true Austin Powers fashion except it isn't groovy baby and Murray is one 5 hour match away from a daily morning Deep Heat session to get out of bed for life!

So I guess the question is: Who do we see as the grass season's biggest winners and losers? Will the Federer Clay gamble pay off?

So who do we see being in the strongest position leading into Wimbledon? Who do we see winning the main event? Who will come out of the grass in a worse position than entered?

Halle and Queens looked packed full of the big names. Federer in Halle will have to starve off the new brigade in Zverev and Thiem. Murray has Nadal coming to Queens, shall be an interesting one to watch. Djokovic might be wining and dining it in Monaco with Jahu on his love boat!

Going for Federer to win Wimbledon. Think there will be a new finalist.

Murray to suffer an early exit I reckon. Be the grass's biggest loser.

I dont expect Murray to lose early. He is way too solid. Dont forget that his shots are getting better too....well if his arm holds on.

Well that's the big IF isn't it? He doesn't look at 100%. Grass is his best surface, but to do well needs the confidence he has shown at RG.

Lets see has this pause made any damage to Fed, been 2 months not playing from his high form, bit scared he has lost that flow he was on till clay season.

Well it's a question of can he gain enough in Germany to get that 4th seeding for Wimbledon.

i would be great if 1 of the grass court warm up events could be turned into a masters 1000
unfair that clay and hard courts have so many but not even a single 1 on grass
i think that the tournament is pretty wide open,quite a few players in the conversation for the title but i dont think that murray will defend the title

I would rank the top contenders for Wimbledon as:
1. Federer, because he's Federer. But i do realize he's not red hot fav.
2. Murray, because it's his best slam. And he found some of his winning ways back at RG, just in time.
3. Nadal. Yes Nadal. His fitness at RG scared the living daylights of me. It doesn't matter the dynamics will be very different on grass, he made that switch succesfully before. A beasty fit Nadal is a confident Nadal. That combo will always make him very hard to beat.
4. Wawrinka. The only slam he hasn't won. Played great in Paris,  improved his netplay and i heard he's very serious about this year's grass season

Bubbling under: Raonic, Djoko

I must say that if Nadal gets past the first week, he will be one of the favourite. If the grass dries up, Wimbledon is actually a slower court than teh FO.

Tenez wrote:I must say that if Nadal gets past the first week, he will be one of the favourite. If the grass dries up, Wimbledon is actually a slower court than teh FO.

True.
If he gets past the first week, all pressure will be on Federer. He's the only one who can stop him from the second week on.

My concern is Fed arriving tired at Wimby after his 3 grass tournaments....i hope he does not play them all.

There's quite a few wild cards these days who can dump the top boys out. Nadal will be desperate to avoid some really big hitters in week 1.

Tenez wrote:
My concern is Fed arriving tired at Wimby after his 3 grass tournaments....i hope he does not play them all.

Who said he'll play three tournaments prior wimbledon? It's just Stuttgart and Halle right?

Meanwhile Nadal is already making excuses for a possible failure on grass. Winning RG like that and then raising questions about the knee.

gallery play wrote:

Tenez wrote:
My concern is Fed arriving tired at Wimby after his 3 grass tournaments....i hope he does not play them all.

Who said he'll play three tournaments prior wimbledon? It's just Stuttgart and Halle right?

Meanwhile Nadal is already making excuses for a possible failure on grass. Winning RG like that and then raising questions about the knee.

i didnt see ANYTHING wrong with the knee yesterday 
he played like a guy who has never ever ever been injured ever before!!

All eyes are on Federer. If he comes back in IW's form then he's gonna be very hard to beat and would start favourite against anyone.

Kyrgios and Zverev could be spoliers

Flops: Thiem, Wawrinka, Nadal (hopefully )

I have a complete blank with the grass season.

I just know it will be much more interesting than RG.

I hope Fed can tune his form for it so he can play hs best tennis there.

I also hope Nole somehow presses reset button.

And I just want to see a fair draw.

There...not much to ask, is it?

... wrote:
And I just want to see a fair draw.

There...not much to ask, is it?

Nadal got an easy run in at the French, but that's not the same as a favourable draw.
Nadal could have got Djokovic or Murray at the semis, he got Djokovic. (pre tournament most would agree that's harder)
Quarters he got Raonic (other options were Kei, Cilic, Thiem)- Thiem was the hardest of those 3 and Nadal rekt him in the semis anyway.

So you still think the draw was rigged in favour of Nadal? Would you say that whatever the draw is?

I don't believe in draw rigging.

There is just no depth on clay. On grass or HC any number of players can cause upsets - on clay it's vanishingly small number.

If Federer had played I would have made him favourite against everyone in the draw except Rafa and possibly Wawrinka (given that Novak is MIA)

Emancipator wrote:I don't believe in draw rigging.

There is just no depth on clay. On grass or HC any number of players can cause upsets - on clay it's vanishingly small number.

If Federer had played I would have made him favourite against everyone in the draw except Rafa and possibly Wawrinka (given that Novak is MIA)

Draw rigging has been proved....beyond reasonable doubt by ESPN.

I am glad some question everything, even if sometimes to the point of becoming paranoid, but at least if everybody was paying attention the world woudl be a better place. Credulity of the masses is why 1% hold 99% of the wealth of the world.

OK I take that back. I'm not aware of the evidence for draw rigging and in all honestly haven't really looked at the possibility. So it could happen although it seems unlikely. 

I'm certainly aware of mass propaganda, in particular the politics of fear, as well as the manufacturing of consent through the media, education and mainstream discourse which determines what is allowed to be said and what is consigned to the margins, thus leading to the patently brainwashed mentality of some (Abu-Daniel is a good example) which leads them to become vocal advocates of right wing (eg. Tory) policy that has always been anathema to the interests of any working person.

Emancipator wrote:OK I take that back. I'm not aware of the evidence for draw rigging and in all honestly haven't really looked at the possibility. So it could happen although it seems unlikely. 

I'm certainly aware of mass propaganda, in particular the politics of fear, as well as the manufacturing of consent through the media, education and mainstream discourse which determines what is allowed to be said and what is consigned to the margins, thus leading to the patently brainwashed mentality of some (Abu-Daniel is a good example) which leads them to become vocal advocates of right wing (eg. Tory) policy that has always been anathema to the interests of any working person.

I don;t think it is still going on much.....if at all....but we can thank a couple reports highlighting some very strange facts.

I'll give you an example: you remember the longest match in history between Mahut and isner a few years back....well strangely enough they were drawn to play teh first round of Wimbeldon the very following year. Could be pure coincidence or maybe set up to provide an exciting first round which are usually typically dull. I don;t know the answer to that (whether fixed or not) but it is always good to keep an open view and not dismiss at hand the possibility that events can be forced or twigged.

Emancipator wrote:I'm certainly aware of mass propaganda, in particular the politics of fear, as well as the manufacturing of consent through the media, education and mainstream discourse which determines what is allowed to be said and what is consigned to the margins

Sure, but that does not mean that one can make up whatever conspiracy theory happens to suit them and it will become true.

That said, ESPN did have an article a few years back that showed that (if I remember it correctly) - in the early rounds - top players were getting easier opponents than a random chance would create and that probability of getting such easy opponents in a truly random draw was miniscule.  So that did give at least some credence to the draw rigging possibility.

Here we go again...  The latest winner and finalist of a Slam suddenly projected to dominate the world.  V unlikely to happen.  There's a reason Stan is 28-1 for Wimbledon... his backhand is shocking on low fast bounces. He will never win Wimbledon.

Federer, Zverev, Kyrgios, Murray are favourites by a mile. Nadal has failed against rank 100s for the last 4 years running for a reason. He's whining about his knees again for a reason.  He is v unlikely to win.

I have a bet on Kyrgios from ages ago at I think 14-1.

Also, NITB's idea of an easy draw is any tournament Nadal wins in.  Mine is escaping most of the good players, win or lose.

Here is the link to the ESPN article.  It looks at 10yrs of USO draws for men and women, and checks the difficulty of the 1st round opponents for top two seeds.  If I read it correctly, it seems to be saying that there is only 4 in a million chance of getting as easy opponents at random as they got in reality.

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/6850893/espn-analysis-finds-top-seeds-tennis-us-open-had-easier-draw-statistically-likely

But, going back to this year's RG.  Thiem and Wawrinka were - on current form - probably the two most difficult opponents that Rafa could have faced and he played them both, and destroyed them both.

I think Rafa would have been much more nervous facing Murray and Djoko as they can last the distance and know how to play him.

No way could Murray have dealt with Rafa on this form on clay. Also, he has by a distance the worst endurance out of the top 5 (I think he's now lost his last three five setters and noticeably faded in the fifth in each of them), so I don't see why Rafa would be concerned if the match went long. 

An on form Novak would be different but the shadow that lost to Thiem would have been no threat to Rafa.

Slippy....once again...what do you see that everyone doesnt? Hiw can you say Murray has the worse Stamina of the top 5? He us 3rd in that department behind Nadal and Djoko. But way ahead of everybody else.

Indeed, which is why something like 'rigged draws' requires more evidence than one study and I certainly wouldn't point fingers based on circumstantial evidence. As with anything, you take everything on it's merits and weigh up the evidence. 

The advocates for such an idea (rigged draws) need to provide more than one (dubious) study and a one off occurrence of two players being drawn together in the same tournament in consecutive years. I found it amusing that Tenez seemed to imply that W rigged that draw to get a repeat of Isner-Mahut: I think the whole world had had enough of that for a lifetime after the first match.

What dont you understand Emancipator? How many studies do you need? The study out of memory was saying a chance in 3 milliin and not a 4 in a million...but regardless it is absurd evidence to me. .so riggung was certainly going on. The other stufy (Rafa/Djoko draws) was pretty weird too especially in view that rigging was going on in the USO.

But anyway people will always be gullable ...i prefer to keep an open eye on everything even if i might be called a conspirationist at times.

Emancipator wrote:The advocates for such an idea (rigged draws) need to provide more than one (dubious) study

This study does not strike me as dubious.  It is not an absolute proof but it probably should raise eyebrows a little.  There was another "study" that was at one point a few years ago making rounds, and that was trying to show that Rafa and Nole were intentionally put in the same half of the draw.  That study was rubbish.  But this one seems reasonable.

Tenez wrote:Slippy....once again...what do you see that everyone doesnt? Hiw can you say Murray has the worse Stamina of the top 5? He us 3rd in that department behind Nadal and Djoko. But way ahead of everybody else.

Murray could not last five sets vs Stan, no way he could last vs Rafa. On current form, Thiem and Stan were the two most dangerous opponents Rafa could have faced. Yes, an in-form Djokovic would have been a far bigger threat, but Djokovic that loses in straight sets to Thiem would have had zero chance vs Rafa - he would have been demolished just like in Madrid.

Kyrgios.  Plays his best and he will win.
Zverev. Is going to be a danger across all surfaces from now on.
Federer.  Has belief and the game and the experience.
Murray. Showing a bit more form and has the home crowd.

I'll be amazed if someone besides those four win Wimbledon, assuming Djok doesn't suddenly come great.

Tenez wrote:Slippy....once again...what do you see that everyone doesnt? Hiw can you say Murray has the worse Stamina of the top 5? He us 3rd in that department behind Nadal and Djoko. But way ahead of everybody else.

Because I've watched him play and it's fairly obvious. It's probably close with 35 year old Fed but the other three clearly have much greater stamina. As I've mentioned, he's lost his last three five setters and his level has clearly dipped in each match. The other top players simply don't have that problem. I doubt he's in the top 50% of the top 100 in terms of pure stamina. 

Just because you don't like a player does not mean they automatically have much greater "fitness" than the players you do like. You just fail to understand that the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are all phenomenal tennis players, not just great athletes.

Slippy wrote:

Tenez wrote:Slippy....once again...what do you see that everyone doesnt? Hiw can you say Murray has the worse Stamina of the top 5? He us 3rd in that department behind Nadal and Djoko. But way ahead of everybody else.

Because I've watched him play and it's fairly obvious. It's probably close with 35 year old Fed but the other three clearly have much greater stamina. As I've mentioned, he's lost his last three five setters and his level has clearly dipped in each match. The other top players simply don't have that problem. I doubt he's in the top 50% of the top 100 in terms of pure stamina. 

Just because you don't like a player does not mean they automatically have much greater "fitness" than the players you do like. You just fail to understand that the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are all phenomenal tennis players, not just great athletes.

Obvious? Which Murray are you talking about? We are talking about Andy Murray?

Seems like you have watched a different Murray than anyone else. See all his interviews how much they talk about getting fitter and working hard on fitness. 

Murray has highest stamina than anyone out there, he continuously plays very lung busting rallies point after point. That's his game.

He runs and defends more than anyone.

Yes, because it was a clear area of weakness for him. He has worked on it and clearly now has good fitness - sufficient to get him through most matches without issue. However, he obviously isn't at the same level as the super-human fitness of Novak, Nadal or Stan. Stan out-lasted him, whilst both ran more or less the same distance, just last week. There is no basis for saying that he's the fittest guy on tour - he clearly isn't.

Anyway, my expectations for Wimbledon are:

- Federer : clear favourite - with his serve and all-round game, he will be very hard to stop. I could only see Kyrgios, Nadal or Murray having a shot.

- Nadal : I think he will make at least the SF this year. The form he had at RG was beyond anything I've seen from him since he last made the final at Wimbledon. 

- Murray : Probably second favourite behind Fed and has showed signs of returning to top form. Needs to have his serve firing if he's to have a chance against Fed though.

- Djokovic : I can't see him turning around his dismal exit in Paris on the grass. Depends on the draw but I don't think he will get past the QF. 

-Wawrinka : Long swings don't really suit the grass and could go out early again. Unlikely to be a factor.

- Kyrgios : If his head is back in the right place, no one will want him in their draw. Took a sensational display from Murray to mentally break him last year. I can only see him losing to Fed or Murray (or Nadal if it's late in the tournament).

- Zverev : Query how well he will play on the grass. May be a year too early for him to be a factor.

I can't see anyone else being a genuine threat.

Slippy wrote:Yes, because it was a clear area of weakness for him. He has worked on it and clearly now has good fitness - sufficient to get him through most matches without issue. However, he obviously isn't at the same level as the super-human fitness of Novak, Nadal or Stan. Stan out-lasted him, whilst both ran more or less the same distance, just last week. There is no basis for saying that he's the fittest guy on tour - he clearly isn't.

i agree wth slippy murray never used to be the athlete he is,he has worked really hard under the coaching of llendl to improve his fitness
for a while he was up there with the likes of djokovic and nadal,but i still wouldnt say that he was the fittest guy on tour
his level of fitness clearly dropped with this injury he just recovered from which is totally natural
i expect him to be near his best by wimbledon cause RG showed a massive improvement already

Murray is definitly extremely fit, but he runs too much and is too heavy on his feet; great fitness but horrible efficiency (he makes it look hard..). Plus:  he moves his opponant not as much around as the other roadrunners. It was easy to see he was bound to lose the fifth set last week against Stan. 
Had he met Nadal at RG, he would have ran out of gas after 2 hours of play.

GP i agree horrible efficiency but he is so fit that he can outlast a lightweight like Ferrer! No small job. To me Murray looks the most doped with Nadal. Both using power and stamina. No other player uses both on the tour.

Tenez wrote:GP i agree horrible efficiency but he is so fit that he can outlast a lightweight like Ferrer! No small job. To me Murray looks the most doped with Nadal. Both using power and stamina. No other player uses both on the tour.

True, but Murray finds himself -playing that way- in trouble at some point. He's visually breathless quite often in matches. Nadal not, at least not at RG. I thought his court coverage combined with the power of his groundstrokes was shocking to see. I have never seen anything like it. He played well at the AO, but physically, this was a different pers.. uh... animal.

Yes certainly Nadal and Djoko can outlast him. Nadal cause he is a shorter player and Djoko cause he is not as heavily built. But besides those 2 he can outlast everyone else. Look at the way he won WTF last year.

Tenez wrote:Yes certainly Nadal and Djoko can outlast him. Nadal cause he is a shorter player and Djoko cause he is not as heavily built. But besides those 2 he can outlast everyone else. Look at the way he won WTF last year.

Had Djokovic made that match go long then Murray would have been struggling - he was starting to show signs of tiredness towards the end of the second set and was fortunate that (by Djokovic-Murray standards) the rallies were relatively short. 

Better examples would be to look at the way he lost from 2 sets to 1 up against Nishikori and DP last year. He looked out on his feet in the 5th set in both. He has good but not exceptional fitness levels by top tennis player standards.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

Slippy wrote:

Tenez wrote:Slippy....once again...what do you see that everyone doesnt? Hiw can you say Murray has the worse Stamina of the top 5? He us 3rd in that department behind Nadal and Djoko. But way ahead of everybody else.

Because I've watched him play and it's fairly obvious. It's probably close with 35 year old Fed but the other three clearly have much greater stamina. As I've mentioned, he's lost his last three five setters and his level has clearly dipped in each match. The other top players simply don't have that problem. I doubt he's in the top 50% of the top 100 in terms of pure stamina. 

Just because you don't like a player does not mean they automatically have much greater "fitness" than the players you do like. You just fail to understand that the likes of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray are all phenomenal tennis players, not just great athletes.

Obvious? Which Murray are you talking about? We are talking about Andy Murray?

Seems like you have watched a different Murray than anyone else. See all his interviews how much they talk about getting fitter and working hard on fitness. 

Murray has highest stamina than anyone out there, he continuously plays very lung busting rallies point after point. That's his game.

He runs and defends more than anyone.

So why did he completely tire out in that set then against Wawrinka?  Wawrinka keeps points short.  Murray was totally knackered.  Why are you all denying reality around here?

Why? Cause Stan pulled winners after winners in that last set. Thats what i have been saying when it comes to shotmaking. Huge sifference . Of course Stan is a much better shotmaker! Who can't see that again?
Of course Murray was tired in that last set. Like Nadal in the same final set in that AO final. ...and this is where the shotmakers can make all the difference. As the physical players tire, the goal posts get wider for the attacking player.

What is it that you dont understand?

Tenez wrote:Why? Cause Stan pulled winners after winners in that last set. Thats what i have been saying when it comes to shotmaking. Huge sifference . Of course Stan is a much better shotmaker! Who can't see that again?
Of course Murray  was tired in that last set. Like Nadal in the same final set in that AO final. ...and this is where the shotmakers can make all the difference. As the physical players tire, the goal posts get wider for the attacking player.

What is it that you dont understand?

What you would expect, as Stan tired, would be for his footwork to become less precise and the errors to start to flow. Instead, he was able to maintain a level in the 5th which was at least as good as the previous four sets. In contrast, Murray was clearly knackered. Murray ran just over 100m further than Stan in the final - you can't surely be saying that extra 100m was why the "fittest player on tour" looked so much more tired than his opponent? The real answer, of course, is that Stan's fitness levels are higher.

And that's a fact, Tenez.

Non sense slippy. According to your reasoning Federer is fitter that Nadal cause he beat him twice in the 5th set. More ridiculous is that Federer at 35 was fitter than Nadal 31! If you dont understand that the key to shotmaking is forcing upon his opponent a greater physical challenge than the retriever wouls then you have little understanding of the game.

Well, one thing you will have to accept Tenez... is that Murray lost in 5 sets.

Daniel wrote:Well, one thing you will have to accept Tenez... is that Murray lost in 5 sets.

So? Never had problems with that. They all lose 5 setters. Even nadal and Djokovic.

In fact looking at the stats....Murray has a better 5th set record than Nadal over his career!

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/performance-zone/win-loss-index/career/5thset/all/?sortByField=Index&ascending=False

Federer being ranked 99th in that department!!! Considering he has the best TB record, it shows that's his problem is clearly fitness and not mental.

OH and Wawrinka teh super fit player comes #109!!!!

This is what I find amazing discussing in a forum: SOme are completely oblivious of reality and facts!

You see I did not know those numbers but once again they are confirming what everybody sees!