Business End of US Open

We are now getting to the business end of the US Open.

It has been disappointing. Flashes of great tennis. Federer really only producing a single dominant match with his straight sets victory over Juan Monaco. The first between Nadal and Nalbandian and also Dolgopolov and Djokovic. It is fair to say that Nadal, Djokovic and Murray have stumbled through the draw. Federer didn't really thrill the crowds against Tsonga, though Tsonga on an even slower court, cannot dictate points against Federer. These courts will not reward passive play. It will however draw the true shot-maker out of the player. For me an attacking performance will win this title. UE's stacked up. Look at the second set between Federer and Tsonga. Tsonga made only 2 winners. Tipsarevic missed a trick against Djokovic. Played some strange shots at crucial times. Instead of being 2 sets up, he lost in 4 sets.

Murray and Nadal will be in action today. Murray cannot afford a display against Isner in the ilk Young or Hasse. If Isner feels confident he will hammer anything short and Murray needs to be aware of that. I have no doubt however instead of Andy taking on riskier shots, he will break down the Isner BH.

If Roddick's FH is firing, he could power Nadal off the court. I think Roddick will be tricky for Nadal. Nadal won't be looking to feed Roddick anything short.

At this stage, I can only see a Federer 6th title. Granted he had lapses against Tsonga, but looking at how Djokovic has struggled in the last 2 rounds I cannot see that the passive play will work against Federer. Nadal and Murray or too out of form for me to mount any challenge, unless their game is upped dramatically. Federer is playing a Djokovic without the streak and without any lingering doubts about his form. That could ultimately be what sways it for Federer.

I am hoping to see a flurry of great tennis towards the end of this tournament. It needs it. I would like to see a Murray maiden Slam, but Rog will have the final say.

If Federer and Nadal both make the final then Nadal wins, no question.

Same as if Nadal and Djokovic make the final then Djokovic wins.

Rock/Paper/Scissors for you, Guest?

What it's going to be interesting in my view is how today's 1/4f pan out.

Andy has a huge advantage playing an exhausting Isner. He returns better than Simon so that shoudl be an easy 3 setter for him.

Roddick Nadal coudl be closer. The interesting factor is how is Nadal going to handle the crowd? We know they are very voiciferous and have influenced many matches in the past in favour of their players. Nadal will have to start very well.

Knowing there is less than 24 hours before Andy and Nadal (shoudl they get through) played their semi, this should give Andy a huge advantage for tomorrow, especially as he plays first today.

The Djoko v Federer match is much more in the air I think. Federer will have to play close to his best. Djoko will need to be very physical. I don;t think he will be allowed to bounce the ball too many times against Federer.

Tenez wrote:Knowing there is less than 24 hours before Andy and Nadal (shoudl they get through) played their semi, this should give Andy a huge advantage for tomorrow, especially as he plays first today.

It's the 'stupid friday' for their half of the draw and I think Murray (should he win his QF) needs all the advantage he can get. He needs to serve much better than he did against Young, he needs to put constant pressure on the Isner serve with minimum UE's, in particular if he breaks he needs to concentrate hard and consolidate by holding his own serve crisply, he needs to get off court quickly, and he needs the Andy Roddick from Spring 2010 to turn up against Nadal and take him the distance.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

barrystar wrote:I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

No need too. Isner will be playing at 50%. A giant like that doesn;t recover from a 4 long setter with Simon over night.

[quote="Tenez"]

barrystar wrote:

Tenez wrote:
I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

No need too. Isner will be playing at 50%. A giant like that doesn;t recover from a 4 long setter with Simon over night.

W 2010

emancipator wrote:

barrystar wrote:I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

W 2010

Yes good point but neither Isner nor Mahut did any running that day. I was in the first row 2m away from them...for the first 36 games the 5th.

How on earth did the quotes manage to get inside out - it was me who said I was keeping my fingers crossed not Tenez?

Fixed it.... on my side. Just an HTML typo!

At this stage, I can only see a Federer 6th title.


Yah, my fortune teller told me that too... Well but she also told me i'll hit the lotto Jackpot 2 years ago.

bogbrush wrote:Rock/Paper/Scissors for you, Guest?

Pretty much so. It would seem that these days Fed can't deal with Nadal and Nadal can't deal with Djoko.

Only Fed v Djoko is a pick 'em match for me.

I make all of the above three favourite against Murray, but I give him more chance against Nadal than I give Federer. Also more chance against Djokovic than I give Nadal. If that makes sense.

Guest82 wrote:If Federer and Nadal both make the final then Nadal wins, no question.

Same as if Nadal and Djokovic make the final then Djokovic wins.

I rather agree - which is one reason why I'd like to see Murray make the final from their side of the draw to introduce a bit more uncertainty (although I'd have both Fed and Djoko as fairly firm favourites against him, just without the same certainty of a match involving Nadal against either of them).

Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

Guest82 wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Rock/Paper/Scissors for you, Guest?

Pretty much so. It would seem that these days Fed can't deal with Nadal and Nadal can't deal with Djoko.

Only Fed v Djoko is a pick 'em match for me.

I make all of the above three favourite against Murray, but I give him more chance against Nadal than I give Federer. Also more chance against Djokovic than I give Nadal. If that makes sense.

Agree 100%.

Tenez, even if it was reasonably close at the FO, we all new that in the end there would only be one winner.

I actually think Nadal is playing pretty well. He started off very shaky in his opening match but has steadily played himself in, based on that early form I didn't think he'd get very far. But he hasn't lost a set and he's looked solid in his last couple of matches. Of course, there were patches against Nalby when he didn't look so good, but Nalby can do that to anyone.

I expect Rafa to beat Muray. If he plays Roger in the final, then the trophy is his.

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

Well he will have to do something he hasn't done since 2007. Well who knows, miracles happen. Maybe he will get a net-cord on match point against Djokovic this time and take stage in the finals.

So you see him getting to match point against Djokovic then.

Well as a worried tennis fan, i'm just concerned about the possibilty of choke. A net-cord will help this time.

Simple_Analyst wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

Well he will have to do something he hasn't done since 2007. Well who knows, miracles happen. Maybe he will get a net-cord on match point against Djokovic this time and take stage in the finals.

Since 2007 sounds a long time, but it is only 4 GS finals (RG 2008, 2011, WIM 2008, AUS 2009). Sure, Nadal will be favourite if a final against Federer comes to pass but their matches are usually tight and I have too much admiration for Federer's game to rule him out entirely.

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

Well he will have to do something he hasn't done since 2007. Well who knows, miracles happen. Maybe he will get a net-cord on match point against Djokovic this time and take stage in the finals.

Since 2007 sounds a long time, but it is only 4 GS finals (RG 2008, 2011, WIM 2008, AUS 2009). Sure, Nadal will be favourite if a final against Federer comes to pass but their matches are usually tight and I have too much admiration for Federer's game to rule him out entirely.

I'll rule him out entirely. Admiration has nothing to do with this. Will rule Nadal out against Djokovic? Yes. Recent dominations have shown that.

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

Well he will have to do something he hasn't done since 2007. Well who knows, miracles happen. Maybe he will get a net-cord on match point against Djokovic this time and take stage in the finals.

Since 2007 sounds a long time, but it is only 4 GS finals (RG 2008, 2011, WIM 2008, AUS 2009). Sure, Nadal will be favourite if a final against Federer comes to pass but their matches are usually tight and I have too much admiration for Federer's game to rule him out entirely.

The first set is typically the decider when those 2 meet. Fed was pretty close of winning a few of those in slams but failed to cross that important hurdle in the last 6 or 7 times they met in slams.

Hmm, if Federer/Nadal are destined to face off in 1 last final, then atleast it would be a venue where they have never met, sadly though Nadal would complete the set on defeating him in all the slams. I'd much rather see Roddick or Murray reach the final; some new blood in a final is what tennis should be about...

Positively 4th Street wrote:

Tenez wrote:Federer Nadal might not be as clear cut. Again, last time they played on clay, it was pretty close.

I'd agree with that. At this venue and on this surface you'd have to think Federer would have a reasonable chance. I don't go along with the view that he can't beat Nadal ever again in general or in a slam final in particular.

I would not make too much out of RG. The trouble is Nadal knows too well how to absorb Fed's near best (like the 1st 2 sets at RG) and not to panic when being blown away by Fed's absolute best (the 3rd set) - and Fed knows how Nadal is going to do it but has not worked out a way of consistently countering Nadal's tactics.

In my view Fed needs to win the 1st set vs. Nadal, that's the key, and Nadal knows that too - only then might Nadal be at risk of panicking if Fed hits another strain of brilliance because the risk that it will be enough to get Fed over the finish line increases. For those reasons Nadal is in better shape for a best-of-five setter too.

Barry, that's one thing when the play. Nadal has always known Federer to come out playing aggressively with the attempt to win the first set. In all his slams wins, only at Wimbledon 2004, 2009 and AO 2006 did he not win the 1st set and not to my suprise, the culprits there were Roddick and Bagdhatis. Nadal knows this even i have to say as a way of breaking Federer mentally. He hangs there with him during the first set no matter how well Federer is playing and once he gets his chance, takes it and it normally goes downhill for Federer from there. Djokovic seems to have realised this as well.
The FO was an example when Federer was out with fire and soon as Nadal got the break back, you could see he lost the set.

I can't help feeling Murray must have a real chance if he can solve the riddle of Nadal. I don't think he will be facing either Federer or Djokovic at their best, and while Murray has been patchy too, I think he could outlast Fed in a final and overall I believe he is playing with more stamina and greater mental freshness than Djokovic.

S_A - we are on similar wavelengths.

All players put great store by winning the 1st set because as your "pressure situation" statistics show, not one single player has a percentage rate of >50% for turning a 1st set loss into a match win.

Statistically against Nadal the need to avoid losing the 1st set is particularly acute because he has a >90% rate of converting a 1st set win into a match win. This is even more so specifically against Federer because Nadal depends upon his ability to ride out a Federer storm without panicking which is obviously depleted if Federer can hit one of his unstoppable veins of form from a leading position (i.e. 1 set up).

Where we differ is I don't like using terms such as 'breaking Federer mentally' - it becomes too subjective and also even moralistic and likely to result in arguments.

Well hardly much wrong with the word mental. Leading 5-2 in a 1st set for example an packing it to lose 7-5 surely calls for the word mental. Or is it physical?

Simple_Analyst wrote:Well hardly much wrong with the word mental. Leading 5-2 in a 1st set for example an packing it to lose 7-5 surely calls for the word mental. Or is it physical?

You may be right - but bitter experience tells that the way to upset fans of a particular player is to say he/she is a choker or a mental midget and so on, and it's also rather subjective and difficult to prove/disprove - 5-2 is after all only one break up so to get back to 5-5 you only need one break-back and two holds which is not necessarily down to having broken your opponent mentally (Nadal being a lefty helps enormously when receiving service in the advantage Court). Then at 5-5 you start afresh but the person who has broken more recently has the momentum. If Federer had been broken mentally you'd not expect him to take the next set to a tie-breaker and win the third set - but it was clear that he had run out of all sorts of ammunition by the 4th set I'd agree.

Don't forget, we are talking about two of the greatest players ever - both with double-digit slam wins, it's hardly likely that either of them is mentally weak on a tennis court and I don't see the point of launching into language likely to start an argument on such uncertain ground.

The language is absurd. Nadal is overjoyed to win the 1st not because it depletes Federer mentally, but because he knows it's now at worst a 4 set match.
This is synomymous with the fact that his prime tactic to to wear him down physically.

And comments about breaking him down mentally in these matches is overturned not only by this years Frence, as barry says, but by 2008 Wimbledon, where Federer recovered from 2 sets down to take it long in the 5th when, just as in 2009, the match was won and lost more or less on the toss of a coin.

Well, my opinion at times on the matches is, Federer gets discouraged very fast ones Nadal absorbs his early assault in the 1st set. May be he shouldn't come into the matches expecting to win the 1st set and concentrate better in the coming sets. A point in case was the 2009 AO final where he thought he had all the advantage with Nadal's barely 19 hour rest. He came out guns blazing and I think had the break to go 4-2 only for Nadal to storm back and take the set 7-5. Federer still played well after but you could see how the 1st set lost affected him. BY the 5th set he threw in the towel.

But in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th he didn't?

Did it take him until the 5th to realise he'd blown the 1st?

Simple_Analyst wrote:Well, my opinion at times on the matches is, Federer gets discouraged very fast ones Nadal absorbs his early assault in the 1st set. May be he shouldn't come into the matches expecting to win the 1st set and concentrate better in the coming sets. A point in case was the 2009 AO final where he thought he had all the advantage with Nadal's barely 19 hour rest. He came out guns blazing and I think had the break to go 4-2 only for Nadal to storm back and take the set 7-5. Federer still played well after but you could see how the 1st set lost affected him. BY the 5th set he threw in the towel.

This is a classic example of what I can't agree with - we just don't know what's going on in their minds and we are better of analysing what we can see. Nadal has devised a very effective way of dealing with Federer's play assisted substantially by the fact that he is a naturally right-handed left-hander so his topspin forehand goes to Fed's single-handed backhand and his double-handed backhand is itself very solid, almost a second forehand. Federer is made to play on his weaker side and in order to beat him Federer has to sustain periods of excellence which are usually beyond Federer - so Nadal wins fair and square. It is impossible to identify where matters such as talent fitness technique strategy and mental strength merge from one to the other and trying to separate them out is a nonsense and far too easily becomes a lazy vehicle for expressing your dislike of a player as a person - this analysis is based on know knowledge of what goes on in Federer's head but portrays him as arrogant weak-minded and sufficiently lazy to take Nadal for granted. I cannot believe that it is anywhere near the mark in describing his approach towards playing Nadal.

Cant see Nole playing as "badly" as yesterday for the 1st two sets (although to be fair Tipsy was in great form), but given this is Roger's best surface IMO, I have it as 50:50 either way.

Against Nadal, I'd put it 60:40 Nadal to win, although if Federer is white-hot and got a 2 set lead it would be hard to pull back for Rafa. The benefit for Roger of course is that Nadal will have played more tennis over the same period of a few days going into the final so that has to help Federer - depends how long the Roddick match goes really.

I'm still expecting a Nole: Nadal final and a Nole win (70:30 chance there).

No why i pointed out he still played well after the match and still played well enough in the 4th set but part of it could also be put down to Nadal's fatigue i should say having rested very little.

It appears no one has hope for Roddick, but the way he's been playing and the crowd on his side, will not be easy for Rafa..

I think A-Rod has to serve out of a tree AND get that FH working to have a chance...the problem is that he doesnt have the game to really hurt Nadal. He's only beaten Nadal once since Feb 08.

Funnily enough its only the 2nd time they have met in a slam...and the first was waaaay back in 2004 (USO).

Roddick has a 1-0 head to head against Nadal in slams

Simple_Analyst wrote:Well, my opinion at times on the matches is, Federer gets discouraged very fast ones Nadal absorbs his early assault in the 1st set. May be he shouldn't come into the matches expecting to win the 1st set and concentrate better in the coming sets. A point in case was the 2009 AO final where he thought he had all the advantage with Nadal's barely 19 hour rest. He came out guns blazing and I think had the break to go 4-2 only for Nadal to storm back and take the set 7-5. Federer still played well after but you could see how the 1st set lost affected him. BY the 5th set he threw in the towel.

.[/quote]

On that occasion (the AO 09), I can live with the idea that Fed lost this match in his head. He frankly had the form that day to win in 3, 4 max. I however remember the point that made him think and play with hesitation instead of pushing on the acceleration button. 4-2 indeed in the first set, 30 love and a point for 40/0 to get to 5/2. Fed executes a great S&V but Nadal runs like he can and passes him along the line. Fed looked at it felt simply powerless, realising that the conds were too slow and that Nadal was a physical freak. This point stuck in his mind for the rest of the game and instead of being 40/0 for Fed and 3 balls for 5/2...it's 15/30 and Fed gets broken, dispirited.

realising that the conds were too slow and that Nadal was a physical freak

Well and then simply packed it in mentally. Settled then.

Tenez wrote: Fed looked at it felt simply powerless, realising that the conds were too slow

You mean realisation of the same conditions that allowed him to win only 12 months later? Geez...

I think Roger feels pretty powerless when playing Nadal much of the time...the 17-8 H2H doesnt lie.

What you're writing there is pure supposition on your part. Have you considered novel writing?

lydian wrote:

Tenez wrote: Fed looked at it felt simply powerless, realising that the conds were too slow

PLease make an effort to understand. Too slow when facing Nadal! He pulled what he tought woudl be a great winner...just to see the ball coming back. If a well executed serve and volley come back, either the courts are too slow or the opponent is lightening fast.

Simple_Analyst wrote:realising that the conds were too slow and that Nadal was a physical freak

Well and then simply packed it in mentally. Settled then.

Actually it did not but certainly stopped him in his tracks to be agressive. If being agressive doesn;t pay...then no other solution to slug it out from the back. So you see, it's still not a mental issue. Had conditions been a bit faster, It woudl have been 62 or 63 for fed first set...and then we know what happens next (Shanghai).

Tenez wrote:

Simple_Analyst wrote:realising that the conds were too slow and that Nadal was a physical freak

Well and then simply packed it in mentally. Settled then.

Actually it did not but certainly stopped him in his tracks to be agressive. If being agressive doesn;t pay...then no other solution to slug it out from the back. So you see, it's still not a mental issue. Had conditions been a bit faster, It woudl have been 62 or 63 for fed first set...and then we know what happens next (Shanghai).

62 or 63 first set? Well still time to hack the ATP/ITF data base and correct the score to what you think it should be

Another big 4 semi, this is going to be great, I think we are in for two very good semis and a day between the final and semi will assure us that it will be a higher quality level and play and that the final won't be decided by scheduling, hopefully the weather will start to cooperate.

I think it will be Murray and Novak in the final, with Novak getting a bit of revenge for Cincy. I wouldn't be surprised if this turned into a fedal final either however as it is very hard to bet against the grandslam track record of those two great champions. Murray in 4 over Nadal, Novak in 4 over Roger. And then novak in 5 sets over Andy in the final. Really any of the four guys could win it. Roger is playing the best right now, but he has shown a tendency to have difficulty maintaining a consistently high level over the course of grandslam lately.

socal1976 wrote:Another big 4 semi, this is going to be great, I think we are in for two very good semis and a day between the final and semi will assure us that it will be a higher quality level and play and that the final won't be decided by scheduling, hopefully the weather will start to cooperate.

I think it will be Murray and Novak in the final, with Novak getting a bit of revenge for Cincy. I wouldn't be surprised if this turned into a fedal final either however as it is very hard to bet against the grandslam track record of those two great champions. Murray in 4 over Nadal, Novak in 4 over Roger. And then novak in 5 sets over Andy in the final. Really any of the four guys could win it. Roger is playing the best right now, but he has shown a tendency to have difficulty maintaining a consistently high level over the course of grandslam lately.

Talking about Cincy socal and Novaks problem shoulder.

No evidence of it now!

Still say he ran out of gas and if he gets taken to five by Federer and still wins you might see a repeat again on Monday irrespective of who he is playing, weather conditions may also play a part.

Sportslover, I disagree on the shoulder it was definetly bothering him in cincy. But he played 3 and change with Tipsy the first two sets were brutal and Novak didn't look worse for wear although the weather was hot and humid in that match as well. Really wouldn't be surprising to see any of the top 4 guys win it, I actually think of the 4 right now Nadal is the longshot.

socal1976 wrote:Sportslover, I disagree on the shoulder it was definetly bothering him in cincy. But he played 3 and change with Tipsy the first two sets were brutal and Novak didn't look worse for wear although the weather was hot and humid in that match as well. Really wouldn't be surprising to see any of the top 4 guys win it, I actually think of the 4 right now Nadal is the longshot.

Hope for an Andy Novak final which would be good.

Tall order mind you as both their opponents are playing really well.

But never say never!

Yes, SL I actually wouldn't mind if Andy got this one although I obviously would be dissappointed for Novak not to win. He really is putting in consistent performances year in and year out so he has to get one eventually if he keeps getting through to the business end of slams. Plus even if Novak doesn't win and Andy does it will still result in Novak's lead in the point's race to increase, so I could still take a positive out of it as a Novak fan. Still though, I really want Novak to get it, if I can't have my cake however the next best thing from my perspective would be an Andy win.

socal1976 wrote:Yes, SL I actually wouldn't mind if Andy got this one although I obviously would be dissappointed for Novak not to win. He really is putting in consistent performances year in and year out so he has to get one eventually if he keeps getting through to the business end of slams. Plus even if Novak doesn't win and Andy does it will still result in Novak's lead in the point's race to increase, so I could still take a positive out of it as a Novak fan. Still though, I really want Novak to get it, if I can't have my cake however the next best thing from my perspective would be an Andy win.

Its just a pity that there aren't more open minded fans like us