Thoughts on mens' quarters

So, we finally get to the quarter-finals, with all top 4 seeds safely through. Arguably Ferrer has been the most impressive, but arguably he's the least likely to win the tournament. Djokovic has had some shaky moments but finished his matches strongly. Nadal stepped it up against Nishikori but still hasn't hit top form. Ferrer has been v impressive, and Federer has been a bit hot and cold - the best that can be said about the Simon match was at least the 5 sets were over relatively quickly.

Djokovic v Haas. Haas' great year continues, and he was v impressive in crushing Youzhny in straights after that epic win over Isner. Haas has a complete all-court game which if executed well could trouble Djokovic, as we've seen earlier this year. My heart says Haas in 4, but my head says Djokovic to prevail in 4, after a tricky start.

Nadal v Wawrinka. Great to see Wawrinka finally maintaining his form through slam tournaments. Nadal has looked vulnerable at times and Stan will really go for it here. I think this could be a great match and it may even go the distance, but I don't think the Swiss is consistent enough over 5 sets to beat Nadal. Nadal in 5 sets.

Ferrer v Robredo. I'm glad that the media have picked up on Robredo's consecutive 5 set comebacks, but Ferrer will be a step too far. Mentally and physically, Robredo will be too shattered to last the pace in this one. This will be the most one-sided quarter-final - Ferrer in 3 fairly straightforward sets.

Federer v Tsonga. Tsonga has really impressed me this tournament - some great defensive tennis to back up his attacking prowess, and he really seems to have sharpened up the tactical side of his game. Federer's form has been hard to judge - great in patches but sloppy at other times. Although this is clay, the serve will be vital, and Tsonga is serving better than Federer at the moment. I'll say Tsonga in 5 sets.

Think youre being very kind giving Wawrinka two sets vs Nadal.

Djokovic, Nadal and Ferrer are cast-iron guaranteed wins.

It's Tsonga / Federer where all the uncertainty lies. I really can't say what will happen.

Djokokic in 3
Nadal in 3
Federer in 4
Ferrer in 3

Would be nice if this "Djokokic" wins HB, would be nice to see a new face in the semi's :wink:

3 great looking matches and one fairly dull looking one.

I think Haas will start strong but run out of gas. Novak in 4.

Stan could seriously trouble Rafa. I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH. And Stan will attack. After AO I think he understands he has to just go for it against the big boys in slams. Potential belter. Rafa in 5.

Ferrer in 3... Zzzzz.

Tsonga v Federer. Belter. Will be full of attacking tennis and flamboyance. I will edge Roger in 5.

Danny_1982 wrote:
Stan could seriously trouble Rafa. I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH. And Stan will attack.

Yea we saw that in Rome , sorry Danny anything outside routine st.sets to Rafa is a great achievement for Stan.

My heart says

1]Haas in 4
2]Stan in 3
3]Tsonga in 4
4]Robredo in 5, winning last 3 sets

but this is what gonna happen mostly

1] Djoko in 3
2]Rafa in 3
3]Tsonga in 3
4]Ferrer in 3

With you there IC. Wawrinka is an encouraging 0-9 vs Nadal. Believe it or not. Wawrinka hasnt even won a SET vs Nadal. Nadal is 19-0 in sets. And only thrice has Stan forced a set to a tie-breaker.

kingraf wrote:Think youre being very kind giving Wawrinka two sets vs Nadal.

Wawrinka is better than Klizan or Brands, correct?

Henman Bill wrote:Djokokic in 3

Haas likely to take a set, IMHO.

Danny_1982 wrote:I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH.

Do you recall Stan's comments after the Madrid final?

Henman Bill wrote:Ferrer in 3

Robredo may be physically ground down by Ferrer, but he will play one or two sets pretty close.

invisiblecoolers wrote:Tsonga in 3

IMVHO, it depends on who wins the first set. Federer will run away, if he does.

LF - correct. But Nishokori is also better than Brands and Klizan, correct? And the total amount of games he won barely totals enough to win a set.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:
Stan could seriously trouble Rafa. I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH. And Stan will attack.

Yea we saw that in Rome , sorry Danny anything outside routine st.sets to Rafa is a great achievement for Stan.

Haha. I stick by my prediction of a tight match. Stan is in the zone.

If Rafa wins in straights then you have permission to mock me, but I have a funny feeling.

LF - What were Stan's comments after Madrid?

Like I said LF -
Wawrinka lifetime record vs Nadal is 0-9
Set total is 0-19
Only three times has Wawrinka won six games in a set vs Nadal... Sadly all three times he lost the ensuing Tie-breakers. And none of them were on clay.

Danny_1982 wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:
Stan could seriously trouble Rafa. I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH. And Stan will attack.

Yea we saw that in Rome , sorry Danny anything outside routine st.sets to Rafa is a great achievement for Stan.

Haha. I stick by my prediction of a tight match. Stan is in the zone.

If Rafa wins in straights then you have permission to mock me, but I have a funny feeling.

I won't mock you anyways , coz I would love to see Stan go far deep in the tournament but it just unlikely to happen, SHBH can just not do the job against Rafa in clay.

Danny - "I think he started really well," said Wawrinka.
"Even if I'm playing my best tennis and [am]
completely fresh, it's really, really tough to beat
him. It was tough for me. The ball was flying. I
didn't find out a way how to play my game [and]
how to be aggressive on the court. He was also
dictating the points."

"[Nadal’s] a lefty and puts so much topspin on his
forehand, so I have to [play my] backhand always
high," said Wawrinka. "So I need to have the
perfect timing to play a strong shot. You could see
today [that] if I don't have the legs to get there, I
have no chance to come back in the point. So
many times [today] he hit one [or] two forehands
to my backhand and I could come back."

Ok, Stan is making me doubt myself...

But perhaps foolishly I'm sticking by my prediction. Stan to push Rafa and he WON'T lose in straights.

(Gulp)

kingraf wrote:LF - correct. But Nishokori is also better than Brands and Klizan, correct? And the total amount of games he won barely totals enough to win a set.

Nishikori played absolutely horrible today, compared to his previous matches. The bps went a-begging. I do understand Nadal is a slow starter, so that would explain Brands and Klizan. Stan did show heart today (and that despite Gasquet).

Im not writing Wawrinka off (in terms of winning a set), Its just very kind to give him a shot at winning two, when to date, he has yet to win one set, in nineteen attempts.

Beating Nadal on Clay is hard work, no matter what. Perhaps I should join Danny in a :gulp: as well.

Danny_1982 wrote:
Stan could seriously trouble Rafa. I see his SHBH as the least susceptible to Rafa's loopy FH. And Stan will attack. After AO I think he understands he has to just go for it against the big boys in slams. Potential belter. Rafa in 5.

Wawrinka has yet to get a set from Nadal in any of their previous matches. Nadal leads their H2H 9-0.

He's getting the virgin set in this one then.

Even though he's improved I don't think he'll get a set.
I have a feeling Nadal has the bit between his teeth after improving his serve and BH in practice on Sunday, areas he'll further refine today. His BH is always a barometer of his play.
Also, Nadal rarely gets worse once its QF/SF/F time, it'll take an almighty effort from Stan to get to 6 games in any one set but perhaps if he swings and it all goes in...

Rafa should definitely beat Stan the man (some improvement being shown at last by Rafa). Im not so sure about Fed and JWT I think Fed can steal that one.. he is playing with a lot of confidence and JWT gets a bit intimidated by the maestro.Though it maybe a long match with the Paris crowd cheering Jo on
Ferrer will be the winner against Tommy.. though Tommy will fight tooth and nail Im sure. I think Haas will give Novak a hard time.. and push him all the way but I cant see Novak losing
So Nadal, Fed, Ferrer and Novak for the semis

Good call on Tsonga, in fact you were generous in giving Federer any sets at all.

Haas is playing beautifully so far this year. He can really trouble Novak. I am stunned at how well tommy is moving at this age. He must be pretty fit and healthy for once in his career because he gets to seemingly every ball and doesn't get tired. Part of it is that he has so much match experience it is like Haas knows where his opponent is going to hit the ball before he does.

I too am a little concerned about the threat from Haas, he's a wily one and he's really playing some good tennis.

I think the fact it is BO5 swings it strongly toward Novak though.

I can certainly envisage Tommy taking at least a set though, probably the first if Novak starts slowly again.

I'm confused how Tommy Haas at 35 is considered a threat to the 2013 #1 on clay.

He won't get a set.

bogbrush wrote:I'm confused how Tommy Haas at 35 is considered a threat to the 2013 #1 on clay.

He won't get a set.

This may be the reason - http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=H355&oId=D643

Beat him in Miami and took a set in Toronto, but it is clay. Haas may be getting to the edge in terms of physically matching Djokovic though.

Because Tommy Haas isnt your average 35-year old. He has been reconstructed using the finest Shoulder and hip technology can create. He is the future of sport science. In 20-years, veterans will all come in for a new hip in the way you do a New tyre.

©Kingraf
Flying Pets and Athletes of The Future.

Doesn't matter,Tommy is 35, miles past his best, and never even did anything huge when in his prime during a period often looked down upon. How could he be considered a threat to the #1 of the glorious present?

Haas is 35 in age. However, if we look at miles on the clock he probably has less miles in his legs than players in their late twenties. By that I mean his career has been blighted by long, long lay-offs due to injuries so I would say that has kept the mileage down and kept him extra fresh for a 35-year-old.

I will add though that I only see Novak Djokovic winning that match in four sets at the most.

Djokovic in 4
Nadal in 4

Final Djokovic v Tsonga.

Tsonga to prevail against all odds.

bogbrush wrote:Doesn't matter,Tommy is 35, miles past his best, and never even did anything huge when in his prime during a period often looked down upon. How could he be considered a threat to the #1 of the glorious present?

Because the #1 of the glorious present is vulnerable to players who can employ great variety and is a notoriously slow starter.

I'm not expecting a Tommy win but taking a set wouldn't surprise me at all.

I think Novak takes it in 3 or 4, but Haas has been really hot, is healthy and moving superbly for a man of any age right now. So he can win it especially if Novak helps him in anyway with a poorer performance. All that being said I think Novak takes this and we see the real final between Nadal and Djoko.

bogbrush wrote:Doesn't matter,Tommy is 35, miles past his best, and never even did anything huge when in his prime during a period often looked down upon. How could he be considered a threat to the #1 of the glorious present?

I am with you. He is gonna have his hass kicked. 35 is way too old to last against a beast like Djokovic in today's power/stamina game.

Regarding Haas, it's worth remembering that in 2009 he was up 2 Sets to Love and a Break in the 3rd Set against Federer before Roger staged his comeback to the title that year. So the fact is Haas can play on clay - and do well against the very best on clay. Federer is far more accomplished on clay than Djokovic. The challenge Djokovic faces on clay is the Backhand: the ball can still get up high on that wing often enough to reduce his optimum strike rate on that side, as opposed to a hard court. He has to hit down on his Backhand on clay more often than he wants. Djokovic wants - and needs - to use the Backhand as offense by driving through it. On hard courts he does that far better - the bounce is so consistent he can time it beautifully. On clay or grass, he loses a little of his optimum effectiveness on that side. And he doesn't have the Forehand like Federer & Nadal to compensate for that reduced effectiveness on his Backhand. That's why Djokovic finds himself in longer matches at RG: 5 setters to Seppi & Tsonga last year; 4 sets to Kohlschreiber this year. So if Kohlschreiber can get a set off him, it's a pretty good bet Haas can get one. And maybe two.

Haas also took out Djokovic in Wimbledon 2009, and with the courts apparently all being the same, we can take that to suggest he can also beat Djokovic here.

kingraf wrote:Haas also took out Djokovic in Wimbledon 2009, and with the courts apparently all being the same, we can take that to suggest he can also beat Djokovic here.

4 years later and now 35? Does age not matter? Djokovic is also better now than then. He is also better on clay.

antonico wrote:Federer is far more accomplished on clay than Djokovic

I disagree. Maybe in 2009 this was true, but it hasn't for a couple of years now

In addition I don't think you can assume that just because Novak loses a set in one match, then he will do in another

_homogenised_ wrote:

kingraf wrote:Haas also took out Djokovic in Wimbledon 2009, and with the courts apparently all being the same, we can take that to suggest he can also beat Djokovic here.

4 years later and now 35? Does age not matter? Djokovic is also better now than then. He is also better on clay.

Welcome to the boards 'homogenised'. It does often astonish me how some of our posters take a stat from ages ago and assume the same applies. despite evidence to the contrary, i.e. Nole is a little bit better than he was in 2009

We'll let kingraf off, as they are one of our better posters!!

I wasnt serious. Crikkey. I would assume my sarcastic remark about how all the surfaces are the same would highlight that. Besides, Federer hasn't beaten Nadal in a Slam since 2007, and yet Im generally asked to believe that he goes into every Nadal match with more than a prayer.

antonico wrote:Regarding Haas, it's worth remembering that in 2009 he was up 2 Sets to Love and a Break in the 3rd Set against Federer before Roger staged his comeback to the title that year. So the fact is Haas can play on clay - and do well against the very best on clay. Federer is far more accomplished on clay than Djokovic. The challenge Djokovic faces on clay is the Backhand: the ball can still get up high on that wing often enough to reduce his optimum strike rate on that side, as opposed to a hard court. He has to hit down on his Backhand on clay more often than he wants. Djokovic wants - and needs - to use the Backhand as offense by driving through it. On hard courts he does that far better - the bounce is so consistent he can time it beautifully. On clay or grass, he loses a little of his optimum effectiveness on that side. And he doesn't have the Forehand like Federer & Nadal to compensate for that reduced effectiveness on his Backhand. That's why Djokovic finds himself in longer matches at RG: 5 setters to Seppi & Tsonga last year; 4 sets to Kohlschreiber this year. So if Kohlschreiber can get a set off him, it's a pretty good bet Haas can get one. And maybe two.

I don't know about all that, Novak handles the high ball on his backhand about as well as anyone I see on tour and off of clay as well. The man has beaten Nadal in three clay court finals, if he had problems with the high ball on the backhand that wouldn't be happening. Federer has played a lot more matches on the clay than Djokovic. By the time it is said and done I would not be surprised if Djokovic is more heralded and accomplished on clay than Federer. His western forehand likes the ball up, and he handles the high ball on the backhand exceptionally well. His game is more naturally suited to clay than Fed's game. Either way I think Novak already has more masters titles on clay than Roger has or they are even, not sure, and he still has some time to go. But I don't see fed's game to be better suited to clay, and I disagree with the highball on the backhand being a problem. Novak is a great high ball hitter, if anything the lower ball gives him problems.

kingraf wrote:I wasnt serious. Crikkey. I would assume my sarcastic remark about how all the surfaces are the same would highlight that. Besides, Federer hasn't beaten Nadal in a Slam since 2007, and yet Im generally asked to believe that he goes into every Nadal match with more than a prayer.

He would at Wimbledon and US open. And Aussie is 50/50 even though fed is 31. The faster the surface the better the chance. The "since 2007" thing is misleading. It isn't the years that have passed that are a fair stat, it is the number of slams, and which of them were at Wimb or US. Nadal hasn't been good enough to even reach Federer at US Open all these years (and only 2 times at Wimb in fed's peak years 04-07) hence the lopsided h2h in slams.

I would agree that at the French Open he has next to no chance of beating Nadal now. Luckily elsewhere, Rosol is waiting.

kingraf wrote:I wasnt serious. Crikkey. I would assume my sarcastic remark about how all the surfaces are the same would highlight that. Besides, Federer hasn't beaten Nadal in a Slam since 2007, and yet Im generally asked to believe that he goes into every Nadal match with more than a prayer.

The sarcasm was too subtle for my blunt Yorkshire brain

So can we then criticize Federer for not breaking through earlier, hence his 1-0 hth vs Sampras? Nadal has advanced on pace with Federer everywhere except on clay, his most dominant surface. Nadal also made two straight USO finals, not his fault Federer couldnt put Djokovic away (as The Nameless one put in 2011, after Roger lost "Nadal just lost two championship points). Also, even if Federer and Nadal had met 2004-2007 on hard court, and Federer won it would still mean Federer hasnt beaten Nadal in a Slam since 2007. Federer cant beat Nadal over five sets, it speaks wonders for Nadal's progress that he was taking Federer to five sets in Wimbledon at 21, while Federer was at his peak.

Youre forgiven Banbrotam... Although Im still not sure about why you referred to me in Plural form. There is only one KingRaf, I am not an organisation.

We all know the surfaces are not even like they were in 90s. They are far slower now which favours Nadal. Even so, he has not been able to meet Federer at US Open because he kept getting knocked out early. Fed leads H2h at wimbledon 2-1, and even that was after his best years 04-07. It isn't Nadal's fault, but it isn't Federer's either. It is what it is. Last year do you know why Nadal didn't get beaten by Federer at Wimbledon?

Yeah, he got beat by a rank 100. It's not Federer's fault that Nadal frequently misses the boat at Wimbledon and US, but that Federer seems to go far at Aus and French.

... And then took seven months off.. you probably dont think the two events are in any way interlinked. His last Slam victory over Nadal came in 2007. Over a 21-year old, since then he is 4-12 against him. Funny how Feds best seemed to dissapear just as the rest of the guys matured. They say the same thing about Tyson, but he went to jail, so it could be true. Federer, according to some, simply lost it.