World Tour Finals

First topic message reminder :

Is this going to be the worst quality one of all time?

No one is going to be in form, bar Murray, who is starting to look tired.

Djokovic - hasn't played well since RG
Murray - trying to be YE no1 must be tiring him out. To win Vienna and Paris will be his last four tournaments won I think.
Stan - is he ever in form, except for at the business end of the odd slam he wins. Nearly lost to The Donald yesterday.
Raonic - lost to Berankis (who lost to Marcus Willis at Wimbledon) this week.
Nishikori - probably in the next best form after Murray.
Monfils - Injured. Last seen losing to Gastao Elias.
Thiem - hasn't played well since before Wimbledon. Burn out/injury. Lost to Troicki in his home tournament.
Berdych - lost to Basilashvili this week.

Goffin - lost early, although to Delpo, this week.
Cilic - probably a bit far back.

I've got tickets too!

Though unlikely it's mad to think that wawrinka could end up with more slams than Murray. Not only that but Stan is only one Wimbledon away from the career slam. If he was to win the career slam would that put his career legacy ahead of Murray. Murray far more consistent over the years but a career slam for Murray would be huge. Unlikely but far from impossible

Apologies I mean career slam for Stan

Actually when Stan is 'on' he's probably better than Murray at his best.

Murray is the better player overall though, by some distance. More chance of Murray completing career slam than Stan IMO. If both Aus Open & RG were tomorrow Murray would be favourite for both.

We saw Stan near his best against Murray somewhere close to his in the RG SF. Didn't end that well for Stan as I recall.

Born Slippy wrote:We saw Stan near his best against Murray somewhere close to his in the RG SF. Didn't end that well for Stan as I recall.

I don't think that was Stan near his best. His best was probably RG 2015 final or USO final this year. They are the two best matches I have seen him play.

I actually think the RG 2015 final may have been the highest level of attacking tennis I've ever seen.

Guest82 wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:We saw Stan near his best against Murray somewhere close to his in the RG SF. Didn't end that well for Stan as I recall.

I don't think that was Stan near his best.  His best was probably RG 2015 final or USO final this year.  They are the two best matches I have seen him play.

I actually think the RG 2015 final may have been the highest level of attacking tennis I've ever seen.  

That's not giving Murray credit for staying with him in the early stages when it was vintage 'SSS' (Sunday Slam Stan) mode. For me, together with the Rome Masters these were Murray's best wins

The Murray of any other year would have been beaten

I've said before that (assuming all are fit) Stan's game suits Murray's who suits Djoko's who suits Stan's.

I don't think Wawrinkas level vs Murray at the French open this year was anywhere close that of Wawrinka in his French Open and US open final wins. The 2015 final at the French in particular was freak level of performance, he was like a man possessed !

Not sure why you would think Murray has a better chance of winning career slam though. Murray still has to win both Oz and the French. While I can definitely see him winning an oz open and he certainly deserves one, I wouldn't say the French is highly likely. This year was the first time he reached the final and I think he only has about 2-3 career titles on clay??

Admittedly Wawrinka has had his struggles on grass but it would just take one of those crazy runs of his to end that. I would put his chances of winning Wimbledon at about 30%. Hard to see how Murray has greater than a 30% chance of winning the French for example. Maybe I am wrong but that is my take on it.

I just wonder though what it would mean for Wawrinka legacy vs Murray if Stan was to win the career slam and say murray wins one more at oz open. Would achieving the career slam not put him ahead for some people as so few people have ever achieved it.

Of course I could be wrong and Wawrinka may never win Wimbledon and murray could achieve the slam, all what ifs and maybes but it would surely be a killer for Murray if he say wawrinka complete the slam if he didn't.

Also on the point that stans game suits murray, not totally sure about that. I think there head to head is relatively close and in terms of slam meetings. Djokovic has a very dominant head to head vs wawrinka (however Wawrinka did win those two slam finals).

No chance Wawrinka wins Wimbledon, he's 32 next year and has never had a good run there. Surely Murray has a great chance than 30% or at least a better than Wawrinka has to win Wimbledon as he's been a top 3 clay courter the last couple of years. Whereas i'd struggle to say Stan's even top 10/12 on grass plus he's 2 years older than Andy.

I'm with monty, 30% chance for Wawrinka at Wimbledon seems really high to me, he's never done anything there to suggest he'll do it (I think his best is a QF and that only once). For me, the grass doesn't suit his game with the skiddy bounce not allowing him to take his big swings at the ball. Would definitely give Murray much more chance at RG than Stan at Wimbledon, arguably only Nadal (with a big question mark) and Djokovic would start as favourites against Murray at RG, and you'd make Murray a big favourite against anyone else other than maybe Stan and Nishikori. On grass, Murray, Djokovic would obviously start as big favourites against Stan, and I would also back Raonic, Tsonga, Berdych, Cilic, Feds (with the obvious question mark) and a few others to beat him on most occasions.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I'm with monty, 30% chance for Wawrinka at Wimbledon seems really high to me, he's never done anything there to suggest he'll do it (I think his best is a QF and that only once). For me, the grass doesn't suit his game with the skiddy bounce not allowing him to take his big swings at the ball. Would definitely give Murray much more chance at RG than Stan at Wimbledon, arguably only Nadal (with a big question mark) and Djokovic would start as favourites against Murray at RG, and you'd make Murray a big favourite against anyone else other than maybe Stan and Nishikori. On grass, Murray, Djokovic would obviously start as big favourites against Stan, and I would also back Raonic, Tsonga, Berdych, Cilic, Feds (with the obvious question mark) and a few others to beat him on most occasions.

Agree with this. Murray has made five AO finals and it has mainly been Djokovic standing in his way. With their current form you would make Murray favourite for the next AO.

RG, only Djokovic and (maybe) Nadal have been better than him on clay over the last few years. Again, on current form you might make Murray favourite for RG.

Bit of perspective needed here. Murray had one very good clay season this year, that doesn't necessarily mean it will happen next year and the year after. He is 29 now and like Djokovic only probably has a couple of strong years left near his peak.

I personally still think Murray will be quite vulnerable at the French on any given day. He has not won enough tournaments on the surface to be considered a favourite at the French. He has greatly improved but still has some way to go on clay.

I do agree that he has a very good chance at the oz open, he has always been very consistent there but he has the mental baggage there, 5 finals and has lost all of them. No doubt it gets harder each time, look at the issues Novak had trying to win the French ! the longer the wait, the harder it gets.

The reason I say wawrinka is more likely is precisely because he is so unpredictable. Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Tsonga and potentially others are all better on grass than stan but with all the above moving on in their years, who is to say they will be there to stop stan if he did get on a run? Odds are against stan but if he brings his A game, he has every chance

banbrotam wrote:

Guest82 wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:We saw Stan near his best against Murray somewhere close to his in the RG SF. Didn't end that well for Stan as I recall.

I don't think that was Stan near his best.  His best was probably RG 2015 final or USO final this year.  They are the two best matches I have seen him play.

I actually think the RG 2015 final may have been the highest level of attacking tennis I've ever seen.  

That's not giving Murray credit for staying with him in the early stages when it was vintage 'SSS' (Sunday Slam Stan) mode. For me, together with the Rome Masters these were Murray's best wins

The Murray of any other year would have been beaten

I've said before that (assuming all are fit) Stan's game suits Murray's who suits Djoko's who suits Stan's.

Agree with this. People are judging Stan's display in that match on the result. The reality is that he came into it on a 9 match winning streak, had destroyed his QF opponent and started on fire. However, Murray was in sublime form and took him out of his rhythm - in a way Novak is unable to do - and took charge. It was probably Andy's best display in a slam SF. I'm fairly convinced he would have beaten Stan at the US as well, in decent form. In contrast, I think Stan would probably have beaten Novak had he made it past Murray in Paris.

slashermcguirk wrote:Bit of perspective needed here. Murray had one very good clay season this year, that doesn't necessarily mean it will happen next year and the year after. He is 29 now and like Djokovic only probably has a couple of strong years left near his peak.

I personally still think Murray will be quite vulnerable at the French on any given day. He has not won enough tournaments on the surface to be considered a favourite at the French. He has greatly improved but still has some way to go on clay.

I do agree that he has a very good chance at the oz open, he has always been very consistent there but he has the mental baggage there, 5 finals and has lost all of them. No doubt it gets harder each time, look at the issues Novak had trying to win the French ! the longer the wait, the harder it gets.

The reason I say wawrinka is more likely is precisely because he is so unpredictable. Djokovic, Murray, Federer, Tsonga and potentially others are all better on grass than stan but with all the above moving on in their years, who is to say they will be there to stop stan if he did get on a run? Odds are against stan but if he brings his A game, he has every chance

Two good years - he only lost one match on clay in 2015 (Novak in the RG SF in 5).

Murray was in sublime form and took him out of his rhythm - in a way Novak is unable to do??

you do realise that Djokovic and Wawrinka have played each other 24 times and Novak leads 19-5. Safe to say that Djokovic has a way of beating Wawrinka! It has taken two epic performances from wawrinka in those two slam finals to beat Novak!

On the other hand Murray leads his head to head with Wawrinka 9-7, which suggests Murray doesn't have it very easy against stan. They have met 5 times in slams and Murray leads 3-2, hardly one way traffic and suggesting that he has the secret weopan that Novak doesn't. Djokovic leads wawrinka 4-3 in slam meetings

Born Slippy, Murray only played 3 clay tournaments in 2015 and one was a mickey mouse event in Munich. Hardly comparable

I am conscious I have moved this off topic from the Word Tour Finals. This is not intended as a dig at Murray's credentials anyway. I am aware of how good he is and he may well win the career slam but wouldn't be writing off Wawrinkas chances.

Back to world tour finals, it is certainly Murrays to lose. Djokovic's form has been patchy at best in recent months. I just hope the quality of tennis improves over the coming days. Like last year, been a damp squib so far but early days

Apologies to anyone suffering from this condition but Stan is like someone with a split personality. On his infrequent good days his power can blast anyone off the court but on his bad days he loses frequently early doors in tame fashion. As to who is the better player between Andy and Stan to me it depends how you want to look at it. If you love power games detrimental to everything else then you'll opt for Stan regardless of his terrible inconsistency (for a triple slam winner). If you like players who have an all-round game with all the shots in the book who can return to the highest level, serve at a high level and win points from crazy positions then Murray is your man. I know that if you were betting on one of these players to play for your life you'd opt for Murray as Stan just can't be relied on as much to bring a high level to court.

Slasher

I think you are somewhat downplaying Murray's chances and recent (last 2 seasons) credentials on clay - RG final and SF, 2 MS 1000 titles and an MS 500 title plus a couple of other finals. Yes, an even remotely on form Djokovic and Nadal if he can come back to somewhere near his best are clearly favoured on the red stuff, but Andy has beaten both in finals of fairly major events in the last two seasons, so can't be dismissed. Also, it remains to be seen whether Djokovic 2017 is going to be the Djokovic of 2014 to May 2016, or the late 2016 version, and whether Rafa will be fit and firing on clay.

As for Stan at Wimbledon, he's played 12 times, and has lost in the first 2 rounds 7 times, with a best of 2 QFs. Yes, he is a streaky player and can be too much for anyone on his good days, but there's little sign that he'll produce such a display on the grass, which seems to be his least good surface (as others noted, probably because the big swings he takes are not suited to the lower / skiddier / less consistent bounce). Still, 3 GS titles is more than many more consistent players have won over the years...

People often berate Andy for his clay court record but it is far better than Stan's. Look at their RG record. Stan won it in 2015 but that aside has reached one semi and one quarter and lost in the 4th round or earlier ten times. Murray reached the final this year, has three semis, two quarters and three times has failed to go beyond the fourth round.

CaledonianCraig wrote:People often berate Andy for his clay court record but it is far better than Stan's. Look at their RG record. Stan won it in 2015 but that aside has reached one semi and one quarter and lost in the 4th round or earlier ten times. Murray reached the final this year, has three semis, two quarters and three times has failed to go beyond the fourth round.

Rather take home the trophy than lose in the final

Good to see Thiem coming through today. A new face is welcome. He still plays like a great big kid at time but has power and speed and a lot of time to improve.

Is it just me or has the Djokovic first serve really slowed down in recent months? Seems to be hitting around 116-118 each time. He used to always be around 122-126 back in his peak. I wonder why the drop?

Also the commentators on sky saying it's a good match and Djokovic level has much improved...I totally disagree. There is an alarming drop in novaks play across the board. He seems really lethargic and totally lacking aggression and not going after his shots. Really disappointing performance the way I see it.

This is 100% murrays tournament to lose

Djokovic was very patchy. He'll not beat Murray playing like this, of course he could click back into form, but not looking likely.

In fact, I'd be surprised if he beats Nishikori/Stan/Cilic to get to the final.

slashermcguirk wrote:Is it just me or has the Djokovic first serve really slowed down in recent months? Seems to be hitting around 116-118 each time. He used to always be around 122-126 back in his peak. I wonder why the drop?

Also the commentators on sky saying it's a good match and Djokovic level has much improved...I totally disagree. There is an alarming drop in novaks play across the board. He seems really lethargic and totally lacking aggression and not going after his shots. Really disappointing performance the way I see it.

This is 100% murrays tournament to lose

Lets not get carried away here

Murray was very poor in his first match - we need to see him play well and get through before we make those sort of calls

maybe it is the courts, making everyone a little bit pants

Totally agree RS. Only saw the end of Murray's first match by which time he was playing well. However from what I have read it took him some time to get up to that level. There is no guarantee that he will beat Nishikori today. After all he lost to him at the USO. So maybe Kei has found a game plan that works against him. Djokovic may not be playing that well but he has still beaten two top 10 players. If lack of confidence has been an issue for him recently these wins will have done him no harm. You only have to look at how close Wawrinka came to losing to Dan Evans at the USO before going on to win the title to see how quickly things can change.

I'm hoping that Murray wins the WTF but I definitely don't see it as his to lose.

This event has more significance than ever before for both Djokovic and Murray, being the sole remaining determinant of which of them ends the year as World No.1. I'm fascinated to see whether the long layoff Djoko took in recent weeks will now pay off, aided perhaps by fatigue finally catching up with Andy ....

What a great season Nishikori has had - he has added so much variety to his game. Can he progress to yet greater heights in 2017 ?

Some match that, Murray somehow getting the job done in 3h20. Nishikori played a fine match, but on the big points Murray was just that little bit better.

Murray beats Nishikori in a three set marathon in a strange match. It was a testament to Murray's determination and will to win more than anything else. Andy was tight throughout and wasn't hitting the ball as cleanly as he has recently but he got the job done to keep that unbeaten run going.

So perhaps not the prettiest of matches, but nonetheless one that included a lot of high quality tennis, with serious levels of stamina and determination (+ no little talent !!) on show from both players.

And specifically with regards to Andy Murray, this for me was a microcosm of the latter part of his season, and the battling spirit which enabled him to overhaul Djokovic's seemingly unassailable lead at the top of the rankings. Murray has been winning a boatload of matches where he might not have always been at his best, where his opponent has played to a very high level ; but where his resilience, mental strength and sheer guts have seen him grind out the win

This match, and last night's Djokovic/Raonic contest, have certainly brought a spark to the WTF.

It was a strange match. Although Nishikori played the better tennis overall there was never a period where one or other was really dominant. Even when Murray won 4 in a row to go 5-1 ahead in the third it was hard work. As Andy said after the match that's 3 times he has played Kei this year and each one has gone the distance (5 sets Davis Cup and USO , 3 sets today). Sheer perseverance got Murray through today as his game was a bit off and it never really seemed to get into any rhythm. A lot of that though could be credited to Nishikori who played with a lot of aggression.

They also played in the Olympics and Murray won fairly easily. Kei seems to be closing the gap but I do wonder if it is slightly false impression, on the basis that Andy has been poor in three of the matches (I think he was knackered in each of them for various reasons). 

In the long term, Andy looks to be running on fumes currently and a 3 hour match today may catch up with him. Hopefully he can summon some form from the depths to get through three more matches.

Good win for Stan. Can see Murray going out now. He is bound to be tired on Friday and a 2-0 win for Stan is likely to put Andy out.

Why would Murray go out if he loses to Stan? It all depends on how he loses (if he loses) and how Kei fares vs Cilic. I doubt Murray would lose in straight sets to Stan. Also, it's not like Stan had it easy vs Cilic when they had to go two TB sets. Even if Murray loses, he may get a set and that would make a strong case for Murray to get to the SF.

By my calculations Murray just needs a set against Stan to go through, but a straight-sets loss plus a Nishi win would put Andy out.
Didn't see any of last night's Stan match but he must have played a lot better than in his opening match. Is anyone surprised that Monfils has pulled out ? Injury-prone and an under-achiever. With his ability he should have had a much greater career.

sirfredperry wrote:By my calculations Murray just needs a set against Stan to go through, but a straight-sets loss plus a Nishi win would put Andy out.
  Didn't see any of last night's Stan match but he must have played a lot better than in his opening match. Is anyone surprised that Monfils has pulled out ? Injury-prone and an under-achiever. With his ability he should have had a much greater career.

This is correct I think. Murray is currently +3 on sets, Nishikori +1, Stan 0. A two sets win for Stan moves him to +2 and Murray down to +1, while any win for Nishikori would obviously increase his sets difference and move him above Murray (and indeed Stan) in that case. If Stan wins in 3, then Murray +2 stays ahead of Stan +1. In this case, a straight sets win for Nishikori would see him top the group (I think), while a three sets win would see him through behind Murray in second place. Obviously if Nishikori loses, then Murray is through, tops the group if he wins (in which case Nishikori I think stays second due to direct result with Stan), second behind Stan if he loses.

So to summarise, to get through, what each player needs:
Murray: win at least one set.
Nishikori: win, or lose and Murray beats Stan.
Stan: win in straight sets, or win in three sets and Cilic beats Nishikori.

Good match between Murray and Nishikori. Funnily enough I think Nishikori was the better player and the evening before I think Raonic was the better player against Djokovic.

Just shows how well Murray and Djokovic defend and how hard it is to sustain a high attacking level against them. In the rallies yesterday evening, I noticed that majority of the time Nishikori seemed to hit his ground strokes with more authority off both sides than Murray........for such a small guy Kei seems to strike it really pure, it shows how technique and timing can make up for having less bulk and physical strength.

I still think Murray is the big favourite to win the title. He is finding a way to win these tight matches. If Nishikori is to finish runner up, he could cause Novak a lot of problems in the semis based on what I have seen from both players.

Could well be a Murray - Nishikori final based on form and having seen each player's level this week.

Agree with what you say about Nishikori. Although he lost yesterday he was pretty impressive. With the way things have panned out I think that Djokovic has to be favourite. He has won his first two matches which in his case has meant he has already won his group. Murray with two wins and the same sets for/against (4-1) still has what could be a very difficult match to even qualify. Novak plays this afternoon and then has a day off before he plays any one of Wawrinka, Nishikori or Murray, who all play tomorrow, on Saturday. So he must be fresher going into the semi than whoever he plays.

Watched the Murray match yesterday and didn't think he played well at all. Also by all accounts it was only in the last half of the second set against Cilic that he was playing at a high level. So while Djokovic may not be playing well Murray isn't either.

Wawrinka bothers me as you never know which Stan is going to turn up. Seemingly very poor Monday, very good Wednesday. Murray will have to be playing better than yesterday to ensure that he takes at least the required set off of him.

There are a lot of variables about the Murray/Wawrinka match for sure. Murray's timing and ball-striking has been off so far at the 02 but sheer grit and strong will has got him through. Tomorrow could go a number of ways. Murray's patchy ball-striking continues and Stan feeds on second serves and confidence soars and wins in straights. Or Murray gets off to a solid start and waits for the kamikaze Stan to kick in. Or Stan fails to turn up form-wise and loses comfortably. Take your pick.

Goffin replacing Monfils for the final match against Djokovic which has just started. Monfils has been struggling for a bit with injuries, but it always strikes me as a little harsh on the replacement this sort of thing (i.e. even if he blows Djokovic off the court today he'll still be heading home straight afterwards...)

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Goffin replacing Monfils for the final match against Djokovic which has just started. Monfils has been struggling for a bit with injuries, but it always strikes me as a little harsh on the replacement this sort of thing (i.e. even if he blows Djokovic off the court today he'll still be heading home straight afterwards...)

True. It must be very tough for Goffin (or any player) to get motivated for such a match. I suppose he has to use the carrot of 200 ranking points on offer. If he can get those he is back on the verge of the top ten.

Mad for Chelsea, its a pretty good deal for goffin actually. If he wins he gets 200 points for one match which is nearly as much as winning a small tournament on tour, which could boost his ranking. He gets to experience tour finals and last but not least I think gets about €140K just for playing even if he loses.

I would definitely play !!! :-)

As for Murray vs Wawrinka..........Murray all the way unless Stan has one of his crazy good days in which case he would probably win in straights. However this is not a slam final so probably the other stan !

Looking at it from the other side of the coin Novak is also in a tricky position if this becomes a battle. Does he run the risk of wasting energy in a three hour marathon in pursuit of another 200 points with his eyes on regaining the No 1 spot or does he conserve energy and not fight so hard even if it means a loss as he knows he is in the semi.

Yeah this tournament has worked perfectly for Novak. Easy group, extra day rest before the SF, already guaranteed to be top whereas Murray is still at risk of not qualifying, despite having an identical record.

Goffin has a total free roll of the dice today. The very definition of a no lose situation. A win today is worth more points than making R4 in a slam or a QF at a Masters.

On the other hand you could say that Djokovic is not being tested. He is actually playing poorly for these first three matches but is getting away with it

Against Murray, Nishikori or Stan, he wouldn't get away with it. chances are his form will be found out anyway against better players. I don't think it makes much difference. If he wants to win he will have to beat the best from the other group anyway.

The only way this is a big advantage is obviously if stan takes murray out in straights tomorrow and then novak has the world number one ranking back. It's not like he needs another WTF, he has already won it 5 times.

slashermcguirk wrote:On the other hand you could say that Djokovic is not being tested. He is actually playing poorly for these first three matches but is getting away with it

Against Murray, Nishikori or Stan, he wouldn't get away with it. chances are his form will be found out anyway against better players. I don't think it makes much difference. If he wants to win he will have to beat the best from the other group anyway.

The only way this is a big advantage is obviously if stan takes murray out in straights tomorrow and then novak has the world number one ranking back. It's not like he needs another WTF, he has already won it 5 times.

I see what you are saying but on your final point surely if you say the WTF he doesn't need as he has five already you could say he doesn't need another week at number one as he already has 200+ weeks.

Personally, I think Novak is just taking each match as it comes and is striving to refind his touch, his hunger and his desire first and foremost.

Talking of easy or difficult matches/groups, it's fair to say that Murray - through no fault of his own - had weeks of comparatively low-ranking opponents to play against in the run-up to the WTF.
In fact, some of those guys played exceptional matches against him, so it was no easy ride. But he had not had to play a top five player since June when he came up against Nishi in London.
It's still been a remarkable few months for the Scot, who has achieved the rare feat of having two 20-plus winning streaks in the same season.

Djokovic also hasn't beaten a top 5 player in that time - one match against Stan, which he lost.

Did Novak really just win a match 61 62 when he hit 7 winners (3 of which were aces)? How bad was Goffin?

Goffin was pretty awful, but not really surprising TBH, coming in completely cold, and in all likelihood mentally gone on holiday already. Djokovic was solid enough, and has been in his three matches, but hasn't really been pushed at all.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Goffin was pretty awful, but not really surprising TBH, coming in completely cold, and in all likelihood mentally gone on holiday already. Djokovic was solid enough, and has been in his three matches, but hasn't really been pushed at all.

Always a tricky one to decide whether players who have had an easy time of it in a tournament are going to be fresher for the latter stages or less battle-hardened than guys who have had tough opening matches.
Some will recall an WTF a few years back when Murray did himself in beating Fed in a long match (that he didn't need to win) and then lost to Davydenko in the semi as he was spent.
Intriguing to speculate whether Andy would actually have more chance of beating Djoko in this year's semi than in the final when Djoko would have had another match under his belt.