Montreal Masters

First topic message reminder :

Started yesterday. Who's going to win it then?

Federer not playing. I voted for Djokovic.

Order of play here. Kyrgios v Verdasco looks interesting.

http://www.couperogers.com/en/schedules-and-results/order-of-play/

ahhh Banbro, no steak?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msQPHxTUgzI

Enjoy pal! End of Djoko's snoreminance.

Djokovic, first masters series defeat of the year.

Fourth defeat of the year overall: Karlovic at Doha, Federer at Dubai, Warwinka at the French Open, and now Murray here. This means that there is no chance of having the best W/L record for a season in the open era, that is now completely gone. It will likely turn out worse than Federer's best seasons (TBC) and should certainly be worse than Mcenroe (84-3) and Connors' (93-4) best seasons.

LuvSports! wrote:

Enjoy pal! End of Djoko's snoreminance.

Uh oh, I have a bad feeling this quote may be coming back

Henman Bill wrote:Djokovic, first masters series defeat of the year.

Fourth defeat of the year overall: Karlovic at Doha, Federer at Dubai, Warwinka at the French Open, and now Murray here. This means that there is no chance of having the best W/L record for a season in the open era, that is now completely gone. It will likely turn out worse than Federer's best seasons (TBC) and should certainly be worse than Mcenroe (84-3) and Connors' (93-4) best seasons.

He may as well end his career now. Abysmal failure.

Aye HB, a disaster im sure. Tbh if thats what it takes ti just edge Novak I cant see anyone but maybe Murray and some miracle Federer display doing any damage

To beat Federer's best win loss record for a season Djokovic will likely need to not lose a single match from here. He has a strong chance of getting his own best number, and beating Nadal's best number though.

Djokovic season head to heads

Murray 4-1
Federer 3-1
Nadal 2-0
Warwinka 1-1

Murray season head to heads
Djokovic 1-4
Federer 0-1
Nadal 1-0
Nishikori 2-0
Berdych 2-0
Tsonga 2-0

This is from the wikipedia articles "2015 player name tennis season", so I assume it's right.

Congrats to Murray, he deserved the win. He played great and had a good blend off attack / defence. Credit to djokovic for putting up the fight. This win I feel was far more important for Murray and he really needed it with such a barren spell against Novak. I think I would still have Novak as favourite for the us open.

The big worry for Novak was his 1st serve, it was very poor today. Still it's not like he lost heavily here, match could have gone either way and hard to say Novak played poorly overall. He even nearly broke back at the end. The better player won on the day. Congrats to cc and Murray fans, he is well and truly back and that is good for tennis

Well well well, I was very wrong on this one.  I certainly did not expect that Andy would win.  This makes the lead up to the USO somewhat more interesting.

Andy now with a very good chance to grab the #2 seeding for the USO.  If I am getting it right, the only way Federer can overtake him for the #2 seed is if either:

1.  Federer wins Cincy, or
2.  Andy fails to make the SF in Cincy and Federer makes the final.

Not entirely impossible for Andy to drop back to #3 but the odds must be in his favor.

I may be reading this completely wrong so I stand corrected but I would say it is extremely unlikely Roger will go to US Open as No.2 seed. He has 1000 points to defend at Cincy so he cannot add to his current points total and Murray reached the quarters last year (has 180 points to fall off as well). By my estimation for Federer to regain the No.2 spot he needs to win Cincy and pray Murray loses in the Second Round. Highly unlikely.

[quote="CaledonianCraig"]I may be reading this completely wrong so I stand corrected but I would say it is extremely unlikely Roger will go to US Open as No.2 seed. He has 1000 points to defend at Cincy so he cannot add to his current points total and Murray reached the quarters last year (has 180 points to fall off as well). By my estimation for Federer to regain the No.2 spot he needs to win Cincy and pray Murray loses in the Second Round. Highly unlikely.[/quote


Here you go again CC !!! stick with me    

The Cinci points have already come off (I think the tournament is a week later this year). SB's summary is correct.

Born Slippy wrote:The Cinci points have already come off (I think the tournament is a week later this year). SB's summary is correct.

Ah right. Thanks BS. That simplifies things.

Yeah it kinda confused me at first, but because both Montreal and Cincy were a week later - the points came off sooner. Hence Tsonga dropped to twenty-odd last week, due to losing his Montreal winning points

Quite simple, if Murray matches Fed, i.e. gets to the same stage - then he's No.2 seed for the US Open

My maths has it that if Andy makes the SF Roger has to win the event

With been 595 points behind, I'm pretty certain that Roger must win here in order to have any chance of getting the spot back

And I calculate that a final appearance, even if Roger is there, guarantees Murray his No.2 status

I see Nishikori has pulled out? I say that because the No.4 seeding has disappeared

Sensible decision

Best backhand I've ever seen by Murray.

It had to come sooner or later!

I didn't watch it but I'm hearing good things about Murray's backhand and serve. Can he maintain that serving level over the coming weeks? That's the big question. If he can keep it up, he has a very good chance in New York.

I've also heard quite a lot about Djokovic having elbow pain. If it's serious, it was a stupid decision to play doubles too. I'd prefer him to pull out of Cincy if it's causing problems.

This is something that gets overlooked in seasons like McEnroe's 84 or Federer's 05 and 06. It's tough enough to beat opponents match after match but the body has to hold up too.

It's telling that Novak and Rafa, despite producing very dominant periods, neither has had a complete 12 month period of dominance. The wear and tear always starts to take its toll.

Good prediction HM.

I thought I'd better say it, since I rarely get the chance.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Good prediction HM.

I thought I'd better say it, since I rarely get the chance.

Thanks, JHM. Very decent of you.

As my overall level of accuracy is hovering somewhere below that of a stopped clock, I'm doing my best to savour this rare feeling of being correct.

There were reports prior to this match that Novak had an arm injury. I didn't watch but did this impact on his play? Will he be OK for Cincy. Kei has already pulled out after his semi were he complained about being unable to move after the first few games.

Of the top players in Montreal. Novak had his arm problems, Murray won, Federer took a rest, Wawrinka was "sledged" (and injured?), Kei couldn't move and has withdrawn from Cincy, Berdych crashed out in first match, Ferrer missed it with a wrist problem, Nadal is at least not injured (I think), Cilic crashed out in the first round and Raonic crashed out in the first round (possibly still recovering from injury)

Mmmm...

HM Murdoch wrote:

This is something that gets overlooked in seasons like McEnroe's 84 or Federer's 05 and 06. It's tough enough to beat opponents match after match but the body has to hold up too.

It's telling that Novak and Rafa, despite producing very dominant periods, neither has had a complete 12 month period of dominance. The wear and tear always starts to take its toll.

Really this gets overlooked? Maybe you've not noticed because Novak has been fortunate but Rafa has missed huge chunks of the schedule due to injury.

Massive win for Murray I thought. Well deserved as he was by far the better player, credit to Djokovic's fighting abilities for making it so close.

Murray played the big points better, which is quite often what it comes down to.

Don't think Djokovic was quite at his best and think he will rightfully be favourite for the US Open. To be honest I expect the two of them in the final there too.

Think I read somewhere that if Murray loses in the quarter final and Fed loses in the final at Cinci then Fed takes back number two. Get the sense that both Fed and Murray would want to avoid a Djokovic semi final.

Guest82 wrote:Think I read somewhere that if Murray loses in the quarter final and Fed loses in the final at Cinci then Fed takes back number two.  Get the sense that both Fed and Murray would want to avoid a Djokovic semi final.

Unless there's some more points to drop off Murray, which isn't indicated on the ATP website, then the facts are these (anyone can correct me when I'm proved wrong )

Murray is 595 points ahead of Roger
There are 1000 points for a win and 600 points for reaching the final (which is why Andy went ahead after reaching the final last night)
This means that as Andy gets a minimum of 45 points (for reaching the 3rd round) Roger cannot catch up by reaching the Cincy final
If Roger wins, then Andy must have reached the final - i.e. if they meet, Andy is definitely No.2

Where's Cogen when you need him

hawkeye wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

This is something that gets overlooked in seasons like McEnroe's 84 or Federer's 05 and 06. It's tough enough to beat opponents match after match but the body has to hold up too.

It's telling that Novak and Rafa, despite producing very dominant periods, neither has had a complete 12 month period of dominance. The wear and tear always starts to take its toll.

Really this gets overlooked? Maybe you've not noticed because Novak has been fortunate but Rafa has missed huge chunks of the schedule due to injury.

Even his complete seasons didn't match McEnroe or Federer's numbers.

McEnroe 1984: 82-3
Federer 2005: 81-4
Federer 2006: 92-5
Nadal 2008: 82-11
Nadal 2010: 71-10
Djokovic 2011: 70-6

They've got close to the number of wins (Nadal 08) or the number of losses (Djokovic 2011) but neither has matched the combination of very high number of wins and very small losses.

Either they haven't been able to sustain it physically or they are just not as good.

Take your pick, I'm happy with either.

banbrotam wrote:

Guest82 wrote:Think I read somewhere that if Murray loses in the quarter final and Fed loses in the final at Cinci then Fed takes back number two.  Get the sense that both Fed and Murray would want to avoid a Djokovic semi final.

Unless there's some more points to drop off Murray, which isn't indicated on the ATP website, then the facts are these (anyone can correct me when I'm proved wrong   )

Murray is 595 points ahead of Roger
There are 1000 points for a win and 600 points for reaching the final (which is why Andy went ahead after reaching the final last night)
This means that as Andy gets a minimum of 45 points (for reaching the 3rd round) Roger cannot catch up by reaching the Cincy final
If Roger wins, then Andy must have reached the final - i.e. if they meet, Andy is definitely No.2

Where's Cogen when you need him

I'm probably wrong. Just something I read somewhere.

More a case of physically not being able to sustain it otherwise those figures suggest McEnroe is better than Federer.

CaledonianCraig wrote:More a case of physically not being able to sustain it otherwise those figures suggest McEnroe is better than Federer.

I think one can make a case that McEnroe's 84 really was better than anything Federer produced.

As a combination though, Federer's 05-06 record of 173-9 is ridiculous.

If we chuck in the not-quite-as-remarkable-but-still-brilliant years of 2004 and 2007 too, then it is 315-24. A four year period of averaging over 13 wins to every defeat.

Crazy numbers.

Just to clarify on the points difference between Murray and Federer, it is 595 in the rankings published today - but because Cincy is not counting, Murray has 180 points from a non-mandatory tournament in the total which will have to drop when the Cincy points get added (even if the Cincy points are less than 180). Federer has no points dropping. So the "in running" difference is 415.

So summerblues is correct, Federer regains the no.2 with a title win (as Murray would have max 360 points in that case), or a final with Murray losing before the SF.

I don't see either of those scenarios as unlikely - in fact, I expect one of them to happen. Montreal took a lot out of Murray, Federer has a pretty good draw and Djokovic has an arm issue to take care of (and seems to have some sort if Cincy hoodoo in any case). It feels to me like this time in 2013, when Murray lost to no.2 to Nadal by losing in the quarters to Berdych and then Nadal winning the title.

CaledonianCraig wrote:More a case of physically not being able to sustain it otherwise those figures suggest McEnroe is better than Federer.

They suggest he had a more dominant year, and he did. He was incredible that year; the only blot being the crazy loss in the FO final to Lendl. The Wimbledon final was utter humiliation for Connors (he won one point I recall playing a winner from a seated position!).

Incidentally, Federer's 2005 result DID include an injury. He turned his ankle badly on a ball and played the year-end Master Cup with an ankle brace, and lost in 5 to Fat Dave in the final. Perhaps he would more likely have been 82-3 that year. In any case, he wasn't entirely injury free.

bogbrush wrote:Incidentally, Federer's 2005 result DID include an injury. He turned his ankle badly on a ball and played the year-end Master Cup with an ankle brace, and lost in 5 to Fat Dave in the final. Perhaps he would more likely have been 82-3 that year. In any case, he wasn't entirely injury free.

I'd completely forgotten about that!

Quite a coincidence too, that had he won that final match, his 2005 W-L record would have been exactly the same as McEnroe's 1984. I hadn't picked up on that before.

I also very much doubt that Federer's physical condition has been quite as plain sailing as legend suggests. There's no way a player plays that many matches without having to go through aches and pains.

Also, if back problems were the cited reason for reduced military service in 2003 and then he demonstrably suffers back problems in his later career, it seems likely that he would have had some level of back pain during his peak years.

Maybe back then there wasn't the same hysteria in the media that gives us "ooh Novak's got a sore elbow, Andy's got a sore back, Rafa's got a pooey bum".

^ I think the difference now and then is that the level among the top players is much closer now, and most of the time they have to beat each other to get the win.

Rafa's 2013 with 75-7 (91.46%) together with Novak's 74-9 (89.16%) were also impressive as they met each other six times beating each other thrice each. Had Rafa or Novak won all of those encounters, that would improve their W/L% (Rafa 78-4 ie > 95% W/L; Novak 77-6, ie > 92%).

Yup. The metatarsal wasn't invented when Bert Trautmann was running around with a wobbly head. Wayne Rooney started the metatarsal injury.

HM Murdoch wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Incidentally, Federer's 2005 result DID include an injury. He turned his ankle badly on a ball and played the year-end Master Cup with an ankle brace, and lost in 5 to Fat Dave in the final. Perhaps he would more likely have been 82-3 that year. In any case, he wasn't entirely injury free.

I'd completely forgotten about that!

Quite a coincidence too, that had he won that final match, his 2005 W-L record would have been exactly the same as McEnroe's 1984. I hadn't picked up on that before.

I also very much doubt that Federer's physical condition has been quite as plain sailing as legend suggests. There's no way a player plays that many matches without having to go through aches and pains.

Also, if back problems were the cited reason for reduced military service in 2003 and then he demonstrably suffers back problems in his later career, it seems likely that he would have had some level of back pain during his peak years.

Maybe back then there wasn't the same hysteria in the media that gives us "ooh Novak's got a sore elbow, Andy's got a sore back, Rafa's got a pooey bum".

Yeah, I think the Federer fitness legend is bolstered by him never having anything so bad he had to blow out entirely (which is lucky enough in itself) combined with his opinion that he's better off not letting on about injuries during a tournament (the only really surprising thing was the declaration of a bad back after losing to Berdych At W'10 - a match I attended, incidentally).

I don't think this is "Gentleman Rog" or anything like that, I reckon he just thinks bluffing is in his best interests. It's like W '12 where he was obviously knackered against Benny and Malisse yet maintained throughout that everything was fine.

I have taken this comment from an article written about Andy getting a psychological boost from this win over Novak

"There is a locker room power - a belief from the players at the very top that they are going to win - versus doubt in their opponents."

THIS is what Rafa has lost.. and Im not sure he will ever regain it

^BLB, Good point but I think it's also how they have to beat each other.

The combinations of Rafa, Novak and Andy usually end up being a physical bloodbath.

Roger didn't really have to face this as frequently during his peak years. Even now, he tends to avoid it.

Last night for instance, Novak and Andy took 3 hours to complete 29 games. The USO11 SF between Novak and Roger took only 51 minutes more to complete 52 games.

Thanks for all the info about the rankings.

I think what confuses things is this thing with points dropping off. Especially confusing when tournaments move a week or something.

Djokovic clearly had an injury, but it's not clear how serious it was, or whether it was what decided the match. He is presumably due to play again on Wednesday; I can't imagine him fancying that unless it's a very fast recovering or very minor injury. Perhaps he'll pull out of Cincinatti this afternoon.

The thought occurs that I appear to have turned into a Federer fanboy in the last 24 hours.

Darn it! I'm always late to the party.

Hey HM - it looks like you've changed the final 'h' on your name to a 'k'. About time! Don't know how you could get it so wrong for so long. I guess you weren't on the jazz.

YvonneT wrote:Just to clarify on the points difference between Murray and Federer, it is 595 in the rankings published today - but because Cincy is not counting, Murray has 180 points from a non-mandatory tournament in the total which will have to drop when the Cincy points get added (even if the Cincy points are less than 180). Federer has no points dropping. So the "in running" difference is 415.

So summerblues is correct, Federer regains the no.2 with a title win (as Murray would have max 360 points in that case), or a final with Murray losing before the SF.

I don't see either of those scenarios as unlikely - in fact, I expect one of them to happen. Montreal took a lot out of Murray, Federer has a pretty good draw and Djokovic has an arm issue to take care of (and seems to have some sort if Cincy hoodoo in any case). It feels to me like this time in 2013, when Murray lost to no.2 to Nadal by losing in the quarters to Berdych and then Nadal winning the title.

I knew I'd be wrong

Thanks Yvonne

You also appear to have lost a h and gained a k, or was it always that way?

Novaks got this arm trouble, Muzza is likely in need of rest, Rafas down on power, but then Roger is coming off a long break and a bad loss, so I actually think a new guy might win Cinci, (Nishi!)

JuliusHMarx wrote:Hey HM - it looks like you've changed the final 'h' on your name to a 'k'. About time! Don't know how you could get it so wrong for so long. I guess you weren't on the jazz.

It was...erm...a deliberate satire which I was suggesting that Rupert Murdoch was howling mad.

There's no way I would accidentally spell my name wrong and then not notice for 4 years! Only somebody really stupid would do that....

Change it back Bruce!

Great call Temp - Kei has already withdrawn ;-).

LuvSports! wrote:Change it back Bruce!

Sorry, LuvSpots, this represents a new me: accurate, full of good predictions and entirely rational about Novak Djokovic.

Incidentally, why do you love spots?

Also, I wonder if Julius works for this company. They share the same name.

http://www.julianmarks.co.uk/

Grrrr... I have to root for Berdych then

HM Murdock wrote:

LuvSports! wrote:Change it back Bruce!

Sorry, LuvSpots, this represents a new me: accurate, full of good predictions and entirely rational about Novak Djokovic.

Incidentally, why do you love spots?

Also, I wonder if Julius works for this company. They share the same name.

http://www.julianmarks.co.uk/

Threefold.
1) My melon sized prostate.
2) My love of the Boss.
3) I get aroused whilst watching many sports at once. 

My psychiatrist has given me increased medication but I'm already experimenting with the dosage.

LuvSports! wrote:Yup. The metatarsal wasn't invented when Bert Trautmann was running around with a wobbly head. Wayne Rooney started the metatarsal injury.

Thought it was Beckham in 2002.

HM Murdock wrote:The thought occurs that I appear to have turned into a Federer fanboy in the last 24 hours.

Darn it! I'm always late to the party.

God loves a sinner, come to His understanding......