Murray a proponent of the Raodal effect?

"I feel like I'm a lot closer than I was at this stage last year," Murray said. "At the end of the match I was able to dictate a lot more of the points, which I wasn't doing early on in the match. If I had returned better, which normally is the best part of my game – maybe it was because I didn't play for a few days."



Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/other-sports/djokovic-dominant-as-busy-summer-approaches-16139687.html#ixzz1r3EKUP2L


I guess Murray seems to think that too much rest could have hurt his game. It seems that many people seem to think that too much rest or rustiness can impact your play in a big match. I guess Murray will now be seen as fool in some segments. I guess my arguments regarding the problems created for a players preparation due to an ill timed gap in the tournament schedule. Maybe not such a crazy proposition afterall.

Social,

I think that EVERYONE including those who playfully wind you up here know that a few days gap in a tournament is not that great and can disturb the tournament rhythm for a player.

Last year's RG SF was additionally aggravated by the enormous pressure of The Streak and the record that was on the line for Nole.

At the end of the day, Nole lost that match.
We shall remember the circumstances, the crowd, the Finger.
For any Nole fan that was a difficult day.

Let it go, please.

Nole came back from that loss in some style.
The Shot closes the door on The Finger.

When they both retire, those two matches will go down in the top 5 of all time.

Does it still really hurt that much, socal?

Let it go, son, let it go.

Nitb, nice comments and I totally agree with your points. I actually am not hung up on that loss as much as is portrayed. I didn't mention foggy for months and months. And then a strange thing happened the foggy effect became the battle cry for a certain segment of individuals and it was portrayed in a wild and exaggerated manner. While 3 successive grandslam victories have gone a long, long way to ease that loss, my logic has actually been vindicated. That is my key point here, the foggy effect was portrayed as the ludicorous and wild theory. Although even at the time numerous writers mentioned how the gap effected Novak and how he didn't play early on anywhere near the Novak form of the streak.


BB, your sham argument that the Foggy effect is some wild and unheard of proposition involving quote too much rest has been exposed. You guys kept bringing it up and alluding to it. For the benefit of newer members on the site I thought I would clear up my position.

Seriously socal, take her advice before she flounces off in a huff!

oh and p.s. "remember the finger" - always useful advice, that.

No reckoner, Nitb and I are cool I think she understands my thinking. Either way I think I have made my point. Nothing wrong with my logic in stating that the walkover in FO came at a really bad time for Novak and impacted his performance. She of all people knows that Novak took some time before he started to match fed's level and play like he should have in that match and by then it was too late.

reckoner wrote:oh and p.s. "remember the finger" - always useful advice, that.

Actually, i do remember the finger can't ever remember Roger doing something like that in other grandslam matches. Can't wait for the next time those two play in a slam. Really can't wait it will make it all the more interesting.

noleisthebest wrote:Social,

I think that EVERYONE including those who playfully wind you up here know that a few days gap in a tournament is not that great and can disturb the tournament rhythm for a player.

Last year's RG SF was additionally aggravated by the enormous pressure of The Streak and the record that was on the line for Nole.

At the end of the day, Nole lost that match.
We shall remember the circumstances, the crowd, the Finger.
For any Nole fan that was a difficult day.

Let it go, please.

Nole came back from that loss in some style.
The Shot closes the door on The Finger.

When they both retire, those two matches will go down in the top 5 of all time.

Speaking of shots, I can remember some memorable Federer shots versus the Djoker.

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37qyvTRVus8&feature=related

I hope that you know it is all in good fun NITB. Roger and Novak are both exceptional players and I am glad that Novak has finally come into his own.

socal1976 wrote:No reckoner, Nitb and I are cool I think she understands my thinking. Either way I think I have made my point. Nothing wrong with my logic in stating that the walkover in FO came at a really bad time for Novak and impacted his performance. She of all people knows that Novak took some time before he started to match fed's level and play like he should have in that match and by then it was too late.

Oh, I'm glad to hear that. She seems a little thin-skinned to me - it was like Mean Girls 2 in here last night lol.

Well, it'll be interesting to see what happens if they Fed meets Nole again at the FO - by far my favourite matchup in the top 4 at the mo. You just don't know what'll happen and some of the shots are awesome to watch.

Yes Kemet, but the shot had so much more at stake. Just loved that comeback by Novak. Especially, when they interviewed Roger in the post match and he came off looking like a giant poor sport as he was all incredulous about the shot. By the way "The shot" remembered by Tennis channel in the US as the best shot of 2011. The shot certainly did go a long way towards paying back the finger at RG.

Agree Reckoner by far the most interesting and entertaining matchup in the big 4 right now in my opinion is the Novak and Roger matchup. Roger actually matches up really well and can give Novak a lot of problems with his variety, serve, and slice backhand. And Novak pretty much returns Roger's serve about as well if not better than anyone and is one of the few guys out there that can go toe to toe with Roger cross court forehand to cross court forehand and still win a large percentage of the battles.

socal1976 wrote:Yes Kemet, but the shot had so much more at stake. Just loved that comeback by Novak. Especially, when they interviewed Roger in the post match and he came off looking like a giant poor sport as he was all incredulous about the shot. By the way "The shot" remembered by Tennis channel in the US as the best shot of 2011. The shot certainly did go a long way towards paying back the finger at RG.

Agree Reckoner by far the most interesting and entertaining matchup in the big 4 right now in my opinion is the Novak and Roger matchup. Roger actually matches up really well and can give Novak a lot of problems with his variety, serve, and slice backhand. And Novak pretty much returns Roger's serve about as well if not better than anyone and is one of the few guys out there that can go toe to toe with Roger cross court forehand to cross court forehand and still win a large percentage of the battles.

I agree that under the circumstances, it was a gutsy shot. However, that shot alone did not get Nole out of trouble. Roger still had a match point and netted the forehand. If it is one thing that detracts from Roger's legacy is that he cannot play the tight situation very well, so while he is arguably a great winner, I am not convinced about his ability as a champion. If Pete Sampras was in that same situation (i.e US Open 2011), he would have been far more clinical.

As for the finger, I think it was more a response of the media writing him off as a contender for the French Open and almost giving Novak an automatic berth in the French Open final. He probably did not take too kindly to that and had a point to prove, so it may be a bit premature to cast aspersions on Roger for this. Roger has had to deal with the tennis public and media signalling his decline for quite a few years now and the finger was his way of saying, "hang on, I am not quite done yet."

I am afraid but the Shot as NTIB calls it, is anything but a gutsy shot! It would have been gutsy had he played it in the first set TB, or trying to break Fed when on serve in the 5th. Not at MP when Nole has no other option! He is against the wall and has nothing to left to lose.

This is why Fed and Nole both agree there is a good share of luck in it. In that match, everytime, Nole and Fed had to show nerves, it was Fed who was able to produce the goods. He only surrendered when very tired and irritated.

Well since I have steered this thread off-topic (I apologize socal), I will get it back on topic.

I agree that walkovers can break an opponent's rhythm; however, as a professional Novak should have coped with it better. I actually believe the pressure of the streak got to him more than the walkover. Once that pressure was lifted, Novak played well for the rest of the year, winning his first Wimbledon and US Open titles.

When you continue to keep pushing this argument you become guilty (as I have said before) of the very thing that you accuse many fans of. This is fine as long as you do not become so outraged the next time you perceive that it is being done to Novak Djokovic.

The thing is that a WO at slams is much more likely to be an advantage than a disadvantage....and much more so just before a semi of a slam when 4 matches were already played.

Federer plays a creative game which will always be difficult to warm up to when he is fresh and firing on all cylinders.

Why are we still discussing those obvious facts nearly a year on? absurd!

kemet wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Social,

I think that EVERYONE including those who playfully wind you up here know that a few days gap in a tournament is not that great and can disturb the tournament rhythm for a player.

Last year's RG SF was additionally aggravated by the enormous pressure of The Streak and the record that was on the line for Nole.

At the end of the day, Nole lost that match.
We shall remember the circumstances, the crowd, the Finger.
For any Nole fan that was a difficult day.

Let it go, please.

Nole came back from that loss in some style.
The Shot closes the door on The Finger.

When they both retire, those two matches will go down in the top 5 of all time.

Speaking of shots, I can remember some memorable Federer shots versus the Djoker.

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37qyvTRVus8&feature=related

I hope that you know it is all in good fun NITB. Roger and Novak are both exceptional players and I am glad that Novak has finally come into his own.

Those can't be called "the shot" because Federer does loads of that standard. For Djokovic the singular is appropriate.

Tenez wrote:The thing is that a WO at slams is much more likely to be an advantage than a disadvantage....and much more so just before a semi of a slam when 4 matches were already played.

Federer plays a creative game which will always be difficult to warm up to when he is fresh and firing on all cylinders.

Why are we still discussing those obvious facts nearly a year on? absurd!

Because socal still hasn't got over it. It was hard, seeing such a record taken away by a veteran but there you go. When the Fed has hs game in order the result is pretty much on his racquet.

kemet wrote:Well since I have steered this thread off-topic (I apologize socal), I will get it back on topic.

I agree that walkovers can break an opponent's rhythm; however, as a professional Novak should have coped with it better. I actually believe the pressure of the streak got to him more than the walkover. Once that pressure was lifted, Novak played well for the rest of the year, winning his first Wimbledon and US Open titles.

When you continue to keep pushing this argument you become guilty (as I have said before) of the very thing that you accuse many fans of. This is fine as long as you do not become so outraged the next time you perceive that it is being done to Novak Djokovic.

Good post Kemet initially although I completely disagree with the second part. That is precisely what i have been saying, it wasn't just the layoff it was the streak. And the very important fact that he would have tied the all time mark against Foggy if he had not withdrawn. It was really quite a bit of bad timing and luck. The layoff gained in significance because of the streak. But this very argument that I made was the cause for all this sillyness with the "fogninni" effect become the calling card for the iq challenged.

As to the second part of your post, I am not the one pushing it. I stopped mentioning foggy for months and months. As I pointed out above, I even avoided talking about it. But when this only enboldened the silly peanut gallery I was forced to address the issue and expose their hypocrisy.

socal1976 wrote:

kemet wrote:Well since I have steered this thread off-topic (I apologize socal), I will get it back on topic.

I agree that walkovers can break an opponent's rhythm; however, as a professional Novak should have coped with it better. I actually believe the pressure of the streak got to him more than the walkover. Once that pressure was lifted, Novak played well for the rest of the year, winning his first Wimbledon and US Open titles.

When you continue to keep pushing this argument you become guilty (as I have said before) of the very thing that you accuse many fans of. This is fine as long as you do not become so outraged the next time you perceive that it is being done to Novak Djokovic.

Good post Kemet initially although I completely disagree with the second part. That is precisely what i have been saying, it wasn't just the layoff it was the streak. And the very important fact that he would have tied the all time mark against Foggy if he had not withdrawn. It was really quite a bit of bad timing and luck. The layoff gained in significance because of the streak. But this very argument that I made was the cause for all this sillyness with the "fogninni" effect become the calling card for the iq challenged.

As to the second part of your post, I am not the one pushing it. I stopped mentioning foggy for months and months. As I pointed out above, I even avoided talking about it. But when this only enboldened the silly peanut gallery I was forced to address the issue and expose their hypocrisy.

Fair enough.

The problem is socal, you can't really expose other people's hypocrisy without being incredibly hypocritical yourself.

I appreciate you're not in a position to see that for yourself.

djlovesyou wrote:The problem is socal, you can't really expose other people's hypocrisy without being incredibly hypocritical yourself.

I appreciate you're not in a position to see that for yourself.

Please fill me in Dj because I don't see my hypocrisy in this at all.

Yeah, socal laying off really made me feel like I dared to talk about this.

When the real World seems boring we can always tap into this place socal inhabits. It's kinda fun isn't it?

Either getting walkovers hinders a player's chances or it doesn't. One or the other.

You claim that it hindered Djokovic but felt able to howl at anyone who suggested that it hindered Murray.

I can't see how this is not hypocritical.

Actually, howled is an adjective that I can't agree with for description of what I did in regards to the Murray fans. I stated that even if Murray had more match time and wasn't rusty that playing the #1 player hitting 70 percent first serves would probably have still resulted in a loss. That was my opinion of the match I saw. It isn't a hard and fast rule as you people want to make it. As I have stated there was specific set of factors involved with playing for #1 and the streak that was involved in the FO 2011, which was not involved here for Andy. Its a case by case thing, and yes have a nearly 5 day gap in his match play and failing to tie an alltime record you had worked for months to attain against Foggy and having all of it to do against Fed with the #1 and finals berth to boot had a bigger impact than what we saw with murray in this masters. These two events while having many similarities diverge when it comes to talking about the stakes involved in that slam for Novak and for this match for Murray. No hypocrisy exists where there is factual dissimilarity in some respects between those two situations. The foggy effect for various historic and streak related reasons was a much more damaging and ill timed event than what murray faced in a run of the mill masters.

djlovesyou wrote:Either getting walkovers hinders a player's chances or it doesn't. One or the other.

You claim that it hindered Djokovic but felt able to howl at anyone who suggested that it hindered Murray.

I can't see how this is not hypocritical.

Your big problem is that you're not obsessed to the point of delusion. If only you could get there it would all become clear.

There you going fortune cookie boy on me again with your cryptic confucius like posts. I am glad that you still have the nerve when your moronic battle cry has been exposed. It shows that you are doing as well as any in the battle of delusions.

The dissimilarity between the cases is that you like one player and don't like the other.

No the dissimilarity is exactly what I discussed above and that you failed to address. Furthermore, I can't predict that if the Foggy thing had not happened that Novak would have won. I just said it impacted him and he was a bit rusty early on. I do realize it is impossible to know what would have happened if history had been different. Same exists for the murray situation. Maybe Novak plays better and still loses a heartbreaker in five if the foggy thing did happen. In the Murray case maybe he plays better but still loses or wins. In both cases there is no sure way of knowing, it is a classic what if.

No, it's a classically obvious attempt to smuggle in an assumption that extra rest is a disadvantage.

Hw long before you switch horses to claim its all a big joke?

bogbrush wrote:No, it's a classically obvious attempt to smuggle in an assumption that extra rest is a disadvantage.

Hw long before you switch horses to claim its all a big joke?

Ok BB, I think you have made this clear and I have made it clear that I don't agree with you. It also seems like many people on this website and in the media at large also don't see my argument being this wild and crazy notion that you portray it as. And those of us who have played sports know that at certain times waiting it out can result in losing a bit of your edge, but again depends on the circumstances. And the circumstances regarding the Foggy layoff is actually what magnified the impact. I think most people can understand that but as for you I hold at no hope that you can break your black and white binary thinking.

Except when it happens to anyone but Nole.

The thing you're missing is that everyone else sees this for what it is. Honest, you're convincing nobody.

Anyway, knock yourself out, I'll stop getting in the way.

BB, excuse me when I don't take your word for it. Its seems that many people including Andy Murray who I am sure knows more about tennis than you do are making similar arguments. Your silly "too much" rest banter and line of reasoning has been exposed as the two bit wummery it is. I know you are having difficulty seeing it.

Walkovers don't always translate as wins with a little gentle practice for the next round you know. Sometimes players get a walkover in place of a brutal defeat...