World Tour Finals (WTF!) 2015 - Day 6 (was Day 5!)

First topic message reminder :

PDF version - PDF version
Day 6 link - Day 6 link (and it does work!)
Live Scores on the ATP Web Site - ATP Live Scores
Barclays Live Scores - Barclays Live Scores

MoTD : Murray v Wawrinka.

Jahu wrote:Fed wins. Stan melted.

LK, sure mate, we can count on eachothers balls

I'll tag in first!

Just what the doctor ordered. Easy win in a little over an hour, not much running.

Still cannot get my head around Fed's super-aggressive strategy. Will he try to be that aggressive tomorrow too?

Feck off Cowan!

I only pray it isn't one sided either way. Please don't be one sided! He absolutely should play that way. Would you want him to baseline a lot in the final?

Fed should be same tomorrow, attack, he can't rally with Djoko.

temporary21 wrote:I only pray it isn't one sided either way. Please don't be one sided!  He absolutely should play that way. Would you want him to baseline a lot in the final?

No, obviously not baseline as he will get destroyed. It will have to be a very careful balancing act if he is going to have to have any chance. He will need to go forward as much as possible. But no more. Today I almost felt like he was going forward more than was wise, but got away with it.

Yeah, attack - but it needs to be balanced. His main weapon against Djokovic is uncertainty, variety.

Basically, he has to mix it up massively.

If Djoko loses tomorrow, it will be his 7th loss of the season. Four of those defeats would have been at the hands of a 33/34 year old Federer!

That's a reflection on both Federer and the rest of the tour.

For certain in this wtf the old fashioned top 3 are the only ones who've really turned up, that's not a good reflection on the wtf

I think Djokovic will defeat Federer in straight sets tomorrow.  

But I have been impressed with Federer.  He has changed his tactics and has improved as a result of it.  His level of play aged 34 and being the clear no 2 player in the world at least in the best of three set match format and certainly within the top three in the grand slam format has finally persuaded me Federer is the best player we have seen in the sport of tennis.  

I think Djokovic will end up being the second best player we have seen in the sport of tennis at least in the modern game, and Nadal the third best - and the best on clay.  Plus Nadal will have the distinction of finding a way to beat Federer when Federer was at his best, or just slightly past his past.

I accept that part of this is due to the increase in professionalism in the sport and the fact that the top players consider it a full time "job" with trainers, nutritionists, sport scientists maximising their physical abilities + improvements in the predictability of the court surface ...

I don't know what to expect tomorrow.

Novak was very effective today but Roger will not let him execute his strategy so easily. He poses a completely different set of tennis questions to Rafa and they are ones that Novak finds tougher to answer.

It's a fitting end to the season though. With a tip of the cap for what Murray has done this season, I still consider Novak and Roger to be the best two players of the year.

temporary21 wrote:For certain in this wtf the old fashioned top 3 are the only ones who've really turned up, that's not a good reflection on the wtf

Well, not really. The results were pretty much as expected with the only real upset being Federer beating Djokovic. That doesn't mean the players didn't turn up or weren't trying. The Ferrer and Berdych who got beaten in every match were the same ones losing to top players in every tournament this year. Nishikori played one bad match (but a comprehensive loss to Djoko was expected anyway) and was otherwise pretty good. Wawrinka was hot & cold as he was all season.

The best WTFs in terms of closely contested matches at the O2 were 2009 and 2011 and that was as much because the top players were a bit off their game which levelled the field as it was to do with likes of the Tsonga and Delpo being able to produce something special.

HM Murdock wrote:If Djoko loses tomorrow, it will be his 7th loss of the season. Four of those defeats would have been at the hands of a 33/34 year old Federer!

That's a reflection on both Federer and the rest of the tour.

Even if he wins, three of his six losses will be to Federer. The second year running that Federer is the only guy with multiple wins against Nole. Somewhat embarrassing for the rest of the tour. Both for the guys like Rafa and Andy, who should really be the ones challenging Nole more, as well as for the rest of the tour for being so far behind.

HM Murdock wrote:With a tip of the cap for what Murray has done this season, I still consider Novak and Roger to be the best two players of the year.

I think that is slightly unfair to Murray.  He is at #2 for a reason.  The ranking is done over 12 months and he was far better than Roger all the way through the end of the clay court season.  Roger was lagging quite behind - and not just behind Andy.  Roger has been the second best guy from then on - meeting Novak in the finals at Wimbledon, USO and now here, but all in all, I have no problem with Andy at #2.

If their current form carries through the AO, Roger may well take the #2 spot from Andy there - which would also be quite fair.

Djokovic is Nadal v2.0. It is not a surprise, at least to me, that the variety that Federer can still summon, is a thorn in Djokovic's side.

Nore Staat wrote:But I have been impressed with Federer.  He has changed his tactics and has improved as a result of it.  His level of play aged 34 and being the clear no 2 player in the world at least in the best of three set match format and certainly within the top three in the grand slam format has finally persuaded me Federer is the best player we have seen in the sport of tennis.

The USO 2015 final should have been played the way he has been playing in the last few weeks, aggressive and up-court, instead of staying at the baseline and trying to slug it out. It may have increased Federer's chances for #18.

agree that Djokovic is Nadal 2.0... but with less of the bulk. he is having a serene progress this year and is pretty much unbeatable. whether he can sustain this level for years or his knees go the Nadal way is anyone's guess.

i don't think anyone can sustain a chasing-the-ball-down game for years and not have injury issues. Murray's injuries have caught up with him quicker than Nadal's did and unfortunately i don't think Murray will ever get back to consistent slam winning form.

Federer and Wawrinka on the other hand have different styles of play that put less wear on the body.

Wawrinka - this guy's a headcase. he is the one who can easily wipe out ANYONE including Djokovic. but what does he do? he loses tamely in most events.

laverfan wrote:Djokovic is Nadal v2.0. It is not a surprise, at least to me, that the variety that Federer can still summon, is a thorn in Djokovic's side.

Nore Staat wrote:But I have been impressed with Federer.  He has changed his tactics and has improved as a result of it.  His level of play aged 34 and being the clear no 2 player in the world at least in the best of three set match format and certainly within the top three in the grand slam format has finally persuaded me Federer is the best player we have seen in the sport of tennis.

The USO 2015 final should have been played the way he has been playing in the last few weeks, aggressive and up-court, instead of staying at the baseline and trying to slug it out. It may have increased Federer's chances for #18.

coolpixel wrote:Wawrinka - this guy's a headcase. he is the one who can easily wipe out ANYONE including Djokovic. but what does he do? he loses tamely in most events.

Norman has modeled Wawrinka after himself, and has learned from his own injuries and given Wawrinka, what he missed. Listening to Courier and Annacone on Tennis Channel, and it was clear that all see Wawrinka's issues. He is as mercurial as Soderling.

On a tangent, Soderling and Norman must have had some strong personal issues, otherwise it was strange to see Norman leave him.

His personal life is a roller-coaster as well. Leaving his family, rejoining, leaving again, and repeating the cycle, and this has been this way since he left Zavialoff.

Disagree that Djokovic is Nadal 2.0, his return is uniquely good and he hits more winners.

summerblues wrote:

HM Murdock wrote:With a tip of the cap for what Murray has done this season, I still consider Novak and Roger to be the best two players of the year.

I think that is slightly unfair to Murray.  He is at #2 for a reason.  The ranking is done over 12 months and he was far better than Roger all the way through the end of the clay court season.  Roger was lagging quite behind - and not just behind Andy.  Roger has been the second best guy from then on - meeting Novak in the finals at Wimbledon, USO and now here, but all in all, I have no problem with Andy at #2.

Oh, I don't have a problem with Andy being #2. The rankings are fair, so Andy is the 2nd most successful player of the year.

But Federer has played more slam finals, has more wins over the #1, is 2-0 (5 sets to 0) over Murray for 2015, and has added interesting things like SABR to the story of the year.

I think his highs were higher and, given that the ranking is pretty close, that's enough for me to prefer Fed's year.

both Murray and Nadal have modeled the most key aspect of their game - chasing a ball down - after Nadal.

take that away from them, including Nadal, and they will lose a lot of their potency.

sorry, both of them are Nadal versions.

obviously they have their own strengths, compared to Nadal.

A bit unfair to lump Rafa with the rest for not being able to challenge Novak for the past two years. Rafa was injured and had a loss of confidence coming back from injury. He was the one challenging Novak in 2013 and beat Novak at FO2014.

Stan too had also beaten Novak twice at the slams. Stan and Rafa, also Kei, beat Novak where it mattered most, ie at the slams in the past two years, whilst Fed and Murray beat him at the Masters.

coolpixel wrote:both Murray and Nadal have modeled the most key aspect of their game - chasing a ball down - after Nadal.

take that away from them, including Nadal, and they will lose a lot of their potency.

sorry, both of them are Nadal versions.

obviously they have their own strengths, compared to Nadal.

I assume you mean Murray and Djokovic. Maybe they have but I don't see the problem. Yes they would lose a lot of their potency if that were taken away but all players have key aspects in their games. Take away the current Federer's serving ability or Wawrinka's excellent backkand and they would lose a lot of their potency as well.

YvonneT wrote:

summerblues wrote:I may have gotten this wrong, but it looks to me that Andy can finish YE #2 in two ways:

First (more likely, and simpler):  If Federer fails to win WTF, Andy is #2.

Second:  If Fed wins WTF, Andy will be able to overtake Fed in DC, but only if he wins both of his matches and both of them are live matches (dead rubber would not count).

Almost.

If Federer wins the WTF, he'll be on 95 points ahead.

Murray can get the following from DC:
0 points - for no wins
75 points - one singles live rubber win but losing final overall
150 points - one singles live rubber win plus winning final overall (75 for the win plus 75 bonus points)
275 points - two singles live rubber wins (75 for each win plus 125 bonus points)

I think that's right anyway - taken from here http://www.daviscup.com/en/rankings/atp-ranking-points.aspx

If Murray wins the first singles, the only way the second can be a dead rubber is if GB have won anyway. But of course the second could be live and he loses - I would suspect in that case, whether he was YE no 2 or 3 would be the least of his problems.

Ok. I thought Fed would be ahead by 170 points if he won the WTF and 150 points would not be enough for Andy.

SB, I guess you were missing that Fed has 75 points to drop from last year's Davis Cup final.

Nore Staat wrote:I think Djokovic will end up being the second best player we have seen in the sport of tennis at least in the modern game, and Nadal the third best - and the best on clay.

I have to say that there is a part of me that wonders whether the three of them are really that good, or whether there is something about tennis today that makes it a little more likely for top players to collect so many trophies.

I can see some arguments in that direction (uniformity of conditions could possibly be a reason, for example?) but not enough to be really sure either way.

But if we end up with another 2-3 10+ slammers in the next ten years, I think I will definitely be very suspicious.

YvonneT wrote:SB, I guess you were missing that Fed has 75 points to drop from last year's Davis Cup final.

That is likely it. I was just looking at the points they will have right after the WTF.

HM Murdock wrote:

summerblues wrote:

HM Murdock wrote:With a tip of the cap for what Murray has done this season, I still consider Novak and Roger to be the best two players of the year.

I think that is slightly unfair to Murray.  He is at #2 for a reason.  The ranking is done over 12 months and he was far better than Roger all the way through the end of the clay court season.  Roger was lagging quite behind - and not just behind Andy.  Roger has been the second best guy from then on - meeting Novak in the finals at Wimbledon, USO and now here, but all in all, I have no problem with Andy at #2.

Oh, I don't have a problem with Andy being #2. The rankings are fair, so Andy is the 2nd most successful player of the year.

But Federer has played more slam finals, has more wins over the #1, is 2-0 (5 sets to 0) over Murray for 2015, and has added interesting things like SABR to the story of the year.

I think his highs were higher and, given that the ranking is pretty close, that's enough for me to prefer Fed's year.

Fed played a reduced schedule as well- skipping two masters. Maybe that helped him perform better in other tournaments given his age, but I think he prob out points Murray with full schedule.

The fact he is this close missing two masters is quite remarkable.

I said at beginning of year in the guess ranking thread that it would be "shame on rest of the tour" if fed is able to finish #2. Even being the Goat I thought if that happened it would be more of a reflection of the rest of the tours failings vs federer actual level. However- the guy is simply still that good. The rest of the tour hasn't stepped up, but fed is still at a level that would be at or near the top of any generation. Amazing at his age and with the physicality of the game- the guy can still run through 4 top 8 players in a week and be in a tenth world tour Final.

It's good that it is close but remember Murray missed Monte Carlo and had to pull out of Rome after winning one match. So the two masters difference isn't quite what it looks.

coolpixel wrote:both Murray and Nadal have modeled the most key aspect of their game - chasing a ball down - after Nadal.

This doesn't seem plausible to me.

I remember when Novak was breaking through in 06/07. His speed and movement were key to his game even then and he could chase almost anything down.

To suggest that that a 19 year old Novak modeled his game on a 20 year old Nadal, who at that point had only won 2-3 clay slams, seems fanciful in the extreme.

It's the kind of thing that sounds profound but doesn't actually make a lot of sense.

The style is probably largely the fault of the strings and of Federer, the way they play gets benefits from the new tech, and is a natural counter.

Nadal actually invented chasing the ball down, before then players used to just watch and admire attacking shots as it flew past them.

YvonneT wrote:Re HB/lags discussion, I did really try to persuade myself to go to the WTFs this year, but I just couldn't justify the cost for what could amount to very little tennis. I've never seen Federer live and would like to, but I'd have had to plan out a trip to two days and either book 2 whole days and get some dud matches in there, or wait til the last minute for tickets once the schedule was out. It does always seem pretty much full so there's plenty of people enthused about it, but even though it's the only way in the UK of guaranteeing to see Fed play, I'm not one of them. And I'm not sure that can be blamed on individual players (hey, one side matches happen!) or the RR format.

I did enjoy watching Nishikori yesterday, so going to book for Davis Cup R1 tie and hope he plays (and Murray too if poss). I'm not one for flag waving, but the 2 best of 5 sets matches in one session is much better value than the WTFs, and can be good contests even if the top players don't turn out.

How flexible is your life re family/work or whatever else. How far ahead do you have to plan?
Not sure if it was true this year but in past years you can still get tickets for the group stage matches quite late, even generally the day before.
You just need to wait to see the order of play for day 1 and then buy tickets for 1 whole day not 2 a few days before.
I even bought Federer vs Nadal tickets about 2 days once and went down just for the evening session.
A slight downside is your seats are likely to be off in the corners somewhere.

Thats the gentlemens way imbl, none of this chasing down good balls. Thats just not on!

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal actually invented chasing the ball down, before then players used to just watch and admire attacking shots as it flew past them.

I still do.

Played today (freezing!) did a lot of sitting and watching myself

Henman Bill wrote:How flexible is your life re family/work or whatever else. How far ahead do you have to plan?
Not sure if it was true this year but in past years you can still get tickets for the group stage matches quite late, even generally the day before.
You just need to wait to see the order of play for day 1 and then buy tickets for 1 whole  day not 2 a few days before.

Too far from London for it to be a day trip so need hotel etc sorted in advance. I suppose I could do that for the midweek and still buy the tickets once the days for each group are known. Maybe I will look for any hotel deals now - pretty sure Federer will still be there next year.

doesn't take long to book a hotel online a day or two in advance. I think wait to see which day is Federer, buy Federer ticket, then book hotel.

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal actually invented chasing the ball down, before then players used to just watch and admire attacking shots as it flew past them.