Shanghai Thread

by The Special Juan Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:38 pm

Draw here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Shanghai_Rolex_Masters_%E2%80%93_Singles

Is it just me or is the court painfully slow?

by lags72 Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:26 am

OAP and 21st-ranked Tommy Haas proves too strong for 12th-ranked and much younger Almagro ......

Another good win in the autumn (or should that be winter ...??!!) of his years Wink

by slashermcguirk Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:29 am

You have to hand it to haas, some player still and well able to mix it with the best

by lags72 Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:38 am

TSJ - Yes, I think it's just you. I practised on it last night and it didn't seem slow at all.

(sorry, too much time on my hands today....just couldn't resist.... Erm

)

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:13 am

slashermcguirk wrote:You have to hand it to haas, some player still and well able to mix it with the best

Weak era refugee, could never cut it with todays players.

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:14 am

bogbrush wrote:
slashermcguirk wrote:You have to hand it to haas, some player still and well able to mix it with the best

Weak era refugee, could never cut it with todays players.

Well actually looking at his career record alone he can't cut it if we are judging him on tournament wins.

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:24 am

He's past his prime CC, and if not for injury his career stats would be much better than it is.

Still playing very well though, beat Almugro today in 3 sets.

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:28 am

Even before injuries began blighting him he was not a consistent contender for slams. As for him being past his best - I'd probably agree with that but tough to say.

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:33 am

I watched Haas throughout his career, it's clear cut this isn't his best.
Bogbrush is going to say (and I agree with him on this one so might as well save him some time):
That there is a lack in strength of depth beyond the top of the men's game, hence older players such as Haas (and Fish) are still succeeding. There may be four world class players, but it doesn't cover up the fact the likes of Almagro and Monaco really aren't worth their ranking.

by The Special Juan Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:47 am

lags72 wrote:TSJ - Yes, I think it's just you. I practised on it last night and it didn't seem slow at all.

(sorry, too much time on my hands today....just couldn't resist.... )

Bad choice of words then. I knew someone would make a joke.

by The Special Juan Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:48 am

OOP for tomorrow includes this cracker:

K Anderson (RSA) vs [8] J Isner (USA)

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:52 am

There are players not worth their ranking yet conversely players that merit a better ranking than they currently have or are able to hold down. I think the same could be said about any particular time in tennis.

As for Haas being clearly not at his best now. I wouldn't say it is clear. True he has had bouts out through injury in 2003, 2008, 2010 and 2011 but has always came back and won tournies - most recently at Halle so he's evidently fit to play and win when in tournies but has never been able to consistently challenge when it matters - in slams.

It is also worth mentioning that in his relatively injury free seasons from 1997 to 2005 his average year ending finish was just inside the top 20. In his relatively injury free seasons (omitting injury-blighted seasons) from 2004 to 2009 was just inside the top 30 so not a massive difference there. In addition so far this year which has not been so injury ravaged he currently stands at 21 in this year's rankings so you see not so far away from his early career average at all.

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:10 am

CaledonianCraig wrote:Even before injuries began blighting him he was not a consistent contender for slams. As for him being past his best - I'd probably agree with that but tough to say.

Yeah, at 35 and after loads of injuries I'd agree its tough to decide whether he's passed his peak yet. That's a toughie.

Of course, his ranking might just suggest there's a load of ordinariness down there after the teens.....

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:40 am

It Must Be Love wrote:I watched Haas throughout his career, it's clear cut this isn't his best.
Bogbrush is going to say (and I agree with him on this one so might as well save him some time):
That there is a lack in strength of depth beyond the top of the men's game, hence older players such as Haas (and Fish) are still succeeding. There may be four world class players, but it doesn't cover up the fact the likes of Almagro and Monaco really aren't worth their ranking.

...

bogbrush wrote:
Yeah, at 35 and after loads of injuries I'd agree its tough to decide whether he's passed his peak yet. That's a toughie.

Of course, his ranking might just suggest there's a load of ordinariness down there after the teens.....

Yeah, pretty much got that spot on Cool

(apart from the sarcasm bit).

by hawkeye Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:52 am

The Special Juan wrote:OOP for tomorrow includes this cracker:

K Anderson (RSA) vs [8] J Isner (USA)

Zzzz...

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:54 am

BB he is 35....so? Players can still be competitive at such an age you know. Throughout time there have been a scattering of players well into their 30's who have remained competetive. Evidently, Haas is one of those players as his average year ending status (in years unhindered by injury has remained a constant). In his early twenties his year ending average was around an average of No.19, in his late 20's it was around No.29 and this year at the moment stands at No.21. Much of a muchness if you ask me.

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:55 am

Mister Anderson....

I can't help it. Every time I see Kevin Anderson's name I have to say 'Mister Anderson' - see, it's just happened again!

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:13 am

CaledonianCraig wrote:BB he is 35....so? Players can still be competitive at such an age you know. Throughout time there have been a scattering of players well into their 30's who have remained competetive. Evidently, Haas is one of those players as his average year ending status (in years unhindered by injury has remained a constant). In his early twenties his year ending average was around an average of No.19, in his late 20's it was around No.29 and this year at the moment stands at No.21. Much of a muchness if you ask me.

You're serious aren't you?

I mean lets run through this one more time. Tommy Haas, former #4, cursed by injuries through his career, gets to 35 and puts a decent stretch together to reach #21, and that means he's at his peak?

Come on, I know you're a big fan of promoting this period but you're pushing it now.

by socal1976 Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:57 am

It Must Be Love wrote:He's past his prime CC, and if not for injury his career stats would be much better than it is.

Still playing very well though, beat Almugro today in 3 sets.

Almagro stinks on indoor hardcourt he is still really a clay court specialist who can win a couple of rounds at hardcourt tournament and that is just about it. Same goes for Monaco. Haas at 40 could beat Almagro on an indoor hardcourt, but that isn't really much of an accomplishment, Almagro could have easily lost to Giles Muller on an indoor hardcourt.

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 9:58 am

Haas is playing good tennis though, in general. Almagro is top 15 I believe, he can't be that bad can he?

by socal1976 Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:04 am

He has never won a single hardcourt tournament in his life, and indoor hardcourts are probably even worse for him than outdoor. I think Mcenroe might be able to take a set off him at 55 on an indoor hardcourt. Pete would roll off the golf course right now and beat him 4, and 2 for you.

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 10:11 am

socal1976 wrote: I think Mcenroe might be able to take a set off him at 55 on an indoor hardcourt. Pete would roll off the golf course right now and beat him 4, and 2 for you.

lol
Don't think so.

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:55 pm

And BB are you any less guilty of being a fan of trying to promote the early 2000’a? Besides that isn't my point here. Look at the facts in that Haas (when he has injury-free spells) has been fairly consistent in his year ending finishes as I have clearly pointed out. If you are trying to say because he is not a No. 4 now he is not the same player will his spells out through injury were always going to prevent him getting back to that rank again. Look at his career and it follows a similar pattern of some smaller tournament wins, then injury with long spells out then a comeback with more small tournament wins before more injuries and then back with more small tournament wins. The only thing that breaks the pattern is slam performances. Early in his career he had a scattering of sporadic semis but now they have dried up. Stronger competition or dip in form I will let you decide but the latter doesn't really hold up considering the patterns in other competitions in his career.

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:35 pm

35

That holds up.

Seriously, if you really refuse to notice that then I can't help. I'm not sure I'd want that argument on my cv.

by CaledonianCraig Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:14 pm

And if you can't accept the topography of his career stats regardless of age that is your look out. You do seem overly obsessed about this weak era thing. Whenever Haas wins a match against a younger player you either start a topic on it or make a passing comment on it unlike me on the other side of the coin. Did I wet myself with glee when a player outside the top four won in Japan and pronounced it as a sign of great strength in depth - of course not. You really need to let this obsession drop about trying to talk up and down eras much of the time.

by hawkeye Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:18 pm

Cough... I think what CaladonianCraig is trying to say in his own subtle way is that the last half of 2012 is a very stong era indeed with the likes of Haas playing as well as he did when he was ranked 4 in the world. That he is only ranked 46 only serves to emphasize the relative strength of the 45 players ranked above him. This all goes to prove that Murray's forehand has improved by leaps and bounds. Or something along those lines anyway...

by socal1976 Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:50 pm

hawkeye wrote:Cough... I think what CaladonianCraig is trying to say in his own subtle way is that the last half of 2012 is a very stong era indeed with the likes of Haas playing as well as he did when he was ranked 4 in the world. That he is only ranked 46 only serves to emphasize the relative strength of the 45 players ranked above him. This all goes to prove that Murray's forehand has improved by leaps and bounds. Or something along those lines anyway...

What are you people talking about how does Tommy haas prove the strength or weakness of anything? How many grandslam trophies have been decided by Tommy Haas? I think it is hilarious that instead of focus on a still strong and viable GOAT, the greatest clay courter of all time, one of the all time greats in Djoko and two other relatively youthful slam winners in Del Po and Murray you guys focus on the Tommy Haas' of the world. It is like kicking angelina jole out of your bed because you don't approve of her tattoos. I mean seriously I would find this lack of depth argument amusing if it wasn't repeated with frightening urgency. I think 80s stank, never mind Connors and mcenroe how the hell did brad gilbert make the top ten? These players that you use as examples of strength or weakness are also rans they have ability and can turn in the odd inspired performance. But they in no way determine who wins or loses slams guys like Fed, Djoko, Nadal, and Murray do that and maybe, maybe at most the next handful of players. The other guys don't decide the major honors on 99 percent of the occassion they don't in this era and they never have in the past either.

by socal1976 Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:58 pm

Watching maybe the greatest match of all time!. First set is almost done Anderson has lost one point on serve! 20 of the first 21 points on serve. No rallies, no great shots, no great gets, but a lot of unreturned serves and big forehand winners; in short a perfect match of attack tennis. This match is scoring off the charts in the new metrics of match quality. I can't wait to get my calculator out I bet this match is averaging around 4 shots per point! Now that is what I call breathtaking tennis. Nothing like a lengthy string of 40-0 holds to get your blood boiling.

by socal1976 Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:00 pm

Go big John Isner win the super classico!

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:34 pm

Not watching it, but I'm sure no-one on the entire planet could possibly be getting an ounce of enjoyment out of it. There is absolutely no-one alive today who likes that sort of tennis.
Thank goodness no-one is watching it. Except socal.

by User 774433 Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:56 pm

socal1976 wrote:Watching maybe the greatest match of all time!. First set is almost done Anderson has lost one point on serve! 20 of the first 21 points on serve. No rallies, no great shots, no great gets, but a lot of unreturned serves and big forehand winners; in short a perfect match of attack tennis. This match is scoring off the charts in the new metrics of match quality. I can't wait to get my calculator out I bet this match is averaging around 4 shots per point! Now that is what I call breathtaking tennis. Nothing like a lengthy string of 40-0 holds to get your blood boiling.

Brilliant

by Josiah Maiestas Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:59 pm

Not Isner's fault for being built like a giraffe is it Julius.

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:29 pm

2 tie-breaks, one going to 10-8. Seven break points, all saved. Neck and neck in the 3rd. No excitement here folks, move along.

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:28 pm

socal1976 wrote:Watching maybe the greatest match of all time!. First set is almost done Anderson has lost one point on serve! 20 of the first 21 points on serve. No rallies, no great shots, no great gets, but a lot of unreturned serves and big forehand winners; in short a perfect match of attack tennis. This match is scoring off the charts in the new metrics of match quality. I can't wait to get my calculator out I bet this match is averaging around 4 shots per point! Now that is what I call breathtaking tennis. Nothing like a lengthy string of 40-0 holds to get your blood boiling.

Sad to see someone broadcasting their lack of grasp of the game and misrepresenting the arguments made by a number of posters, most especially lydian.

Someone really needs to explain to socal the difference between a broad-based game and switching everything to serve only. Oh, they have...... Sad

by bogbrush Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:31 pm

socal1976 wrote:I think 80s stank

At this point I think any pretence socal has to an understanding of the game is officially exposed.

The decade of McEnroe, Becker, Edberg, Lendl and Wilander stank. Yeah, if you say so..... picard

by lags72 Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:31 pm

Stepanek takes out Hewitt in straights with a breadstick in the 2nd.

Hewitt is 13/12 on W/L stats for this year. Almost a decade since a title of any real significance.

Time to bow out gracefully ....?

by Turron Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:04 am

If you think that 13-12 is cause for retirement, what do you think about someone with 4-23? Say hello to Donald Young ... Rolling Eyes

by Josiah Maiestas Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:10 am

Turron wrote:If you think that 13-12 is cause for retirement, what do you think about someone with 4-23? Say hello to Donald Young ...

yea but he's like those joke acts in X Factor who are in the 'game' for entertainment purposes only. Him and Fognini are modern day circus acts.

by bogbrush Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:24 am

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
Turron wrote:If you think that 13-12 is cause for retirement, what do you think about someone with 4-23? Say hello to Donald Young ...
yea but he's like those joke acts in X Factor who are in the 'game' for entertainment purposes only. Him and Fognini are modern day circus acts.

Lay off Fognini, he took out the 2nd seed at the French a couple of years ago.............

by socal1976 Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:12 am

bogbrush wrote:
socal1976 wrote:I think 80s stank
At this point I think any pretence socal has to an understanding of the game is officially exposed.

The decade of McEnroe, Becker, Edberg, Lendl and Wilander stank. Yeah, if you say so.....

You do realize I was being sarcastic but that is why like the liar and propagandist you are you quoted exactly 4 words and not the whole quote which clearly shows I am being sarcastic. Either you are a known liar or you lack the basic english comprehensions skills of a ten year old, which is it BB?

by socal1976 Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:19 am

Anderson and Isner held 36 consecutive times in a row. By the way what a high quality match both players hit well over 2 to 1 winners to unforced errors. Forget wimby 2008, forget AO 2012, or Tipsy v. Ferrer this was pure magic. I know lets bring about changes that make it easier for these two to hold serve an harder for them to break, because I know what we really need on tour is more unreturnable serves.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:31 am

The match is being described as a 'thriller' which the fans found 'exciting'. What more could you ask for?

by socal1976 Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:36 am

Julius you watched did you think it was a thriller? I have never seen more routine forehands find their way through the court. If you love 40-0 service games then rush to you tube right now.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:44 am

I was unable to watch - not the right time zone - but whilst I appreciate that you did not enjoy it (although I'm puzzled why you watched it). many tennis fans do enjoy a tight 3-setter with long tie-breaks, that could go either way. In fact, I think that was one of the criteria you yourself used to illustrate a good first 2 rounds at the USO - close matches.
I suspect it was more enjoyable than, say, Tomic's match, where he didn't even bother trying too hard in the second set.

by socal1976 Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:54 am

It was awful they could have played till 3 in the morning and it would have been awful. But I do agree it got better and went from being a horrible match to a highly mediocre one by the fact that it was very close. Still 36 consecutive holds, 7 break points in 36 service games. You could have just watched the three tiebreakers and saved the bother. That is precisely what I did for the second set, fast forwarded the entirety of it watched the tiebreak.

by socal1976 Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:55 am

For most of the 3rd set I just played with my new iphone till the it got to about 5-6.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:59 am

That's pretty much what I did for the AO final 3rd, 4th and 5th sets (surfed the net, rather than iphone) - just watched the end bits.

by bogbrush Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:55 am

JuliusHMarx wrote:The match is being described as a 'thriller' which the fans found 'exciting'. What more could you ask for?

I wonder what the TV ratings were? That decides what's good nowadays.

by bogbrush Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:58 am

socal1976 wrote:
bogbrush wrote:
socal1976 wrote:I think 80s stank
At this point I think any pretence socal has to an understanding of the game is officially exposed.

The decade of McEnroe, Becker, Edberg, Lendl and Wilander stank. Yeah, if you say so.....

You do realize I was being sarcastic but that is why like the liar and propagandist you are you quoted exactly 4 words and not the whole quote which clearly shows I am being sarcastic. Either you are a known liar or you lack the basic english comprehensions skills of a ten year old, which is it BB?

Nah, you put no emoticon to signal anything of the sort.

I can see why wish you'd meant it sarcastically, but it was quoted in context and as written.

Good wriggle though.

by lydian Wed Oct 10, 2012 6:01 am

Not surprised Verdasco took out Monaco, he's a much better player.
I don't want to see Monaco at WTF, just wouldn't seem right.

by Sponsored content