Australian Open Round 4 (Days 7 and 8)

First topic message reminder :

So the tournament proper starts and the round of 16 in the men's singles looks to have more or less all that could be hoped. All the main challengers bar Potro are still there, Dimitrov may finally be justifying the hype and a couple of surprise packages in fine form in Bautista-Agut and Mayer.

Bottom Half

Djokovic v. Fognini (H2H 6-0) [RLA - not before 2.30pm]

The first meeting between them at slam level, after the match that never was at RG. Fognini is playing well and was impressive beating Querrey in straights in R3. However, for all his mercurial skills, he has 9 games in his last 6 sets versus the Djoker. Straight sets to Novak.

Wawrinka v. Robredo (H2H 1-6) [RLA - second night match]

Stan's only win over Tommy was in 2007 and he was beaten twice in 2013. Will Stan's walkover in r3 hurt him? Robredo was very impressive in beating Gasquet. However, I think Stan probably has the form to overcome the head to head but it won't be easy. Stan in 5.

Ferrer v. Mayer (H2H 4-3) [Hisense - after legends doubles and ladies singles]

Mayer has been in terrific form so far this year and comfortably beat Ferrer in Shanghai in their last match. His big serving and variety of shots can cause the more consistent Ferrer problems. I haven't seen much of Ferrer this tournament but I just get the feeling he isn't quite at his best. Going for the upset here - Mayer in 4.

Berdych v. Anderson (H2H 9-0) [Margaret Court - not before 5pm]

Big Kev must be fed up of the sight of Berdych. All 9 meetings have been in the last 2 years and this will be the 5th at slam level. Berdych looks ominously good and Anderson doesn't have the skills to change his game up to overcome the H2H. Big Berd in 3 sets.

Top Half

Nadal v. Nishikori (H2H 5-0) [RLA afternoon match - after two ladies singles]

Nishikori looked very smooth in crushing Donald Young after trailing in the first set but that was against Donald Young. Serve remains a weakness and he doesn't have the reach or power to bother Rafa. Rafa in 3.

Federer v. Tsonga (H2H 9-4) [RLA evening session first match]

The match of the round by a distance. Neither player has yet dropped a set and both have looked impressive. Will Fed's new racquet hold up to the pressure of facing a top guy. I'm not sure. Fed won in 5 in Australia last year but Tsonga recovered to win in straights on the clay of Roland Garros. This is very tough to call but I think there are more questions about Fed. I'm going for Tsonga in 4 tough sets.

Murray v. Robert (H2H 0-0) [Hisense - not before 4 30pm]

Unlikely to be much to see here. Robert as a lucky loser has done exceptionally well to reach this point and he does have a reputation for beating British players (but at a rather lower level). He is solid but has no real weapons. Murray in 3.

Dimitrov v. Bautista Agut (H2H 0-1) [Grandstand - not before 1pm]

The only match without at least one of the players seeded to make R4 but it could be a classic. Both have looked very impressive with B-A backing up his stunning win over Del-po with a crushing win over Paire. Dimitrov outclassed Raonic in 4 sets with only Raonic's serve keeping it close. Interesting their one match at the end of last year was won easily by Bautista-Agut. I just wonder whether Dimitrov's nerve might fail him on the brink of a slam QF. Going with the underdog in 5.

Ladies

Williams v. Ivanovic : Serena in 2
Li Na v. Makarova : Li Na in 3
Kerber v. Pennetta : Pennetta in 3
Bouchard v, Dellacqua : Bouchard in 2

Azarenka v. Stephens : Azarenka in 3
Sharapova v. Cibulkova : Sharapova in 3
Radwanska v. Muguruza : Radwanska in 2
Jankovic v. Halep : Halep in 2

I would put it 60/40 in murrays favour. If federer brings his A game, he has a good chance but I feel Murray will provide more resistance than tsonga and make federer keep playing an extra ball, he will force federer into mistakes.

1st set could be crucial, I feel federer needs it more than Murray. Should be a good match though, hard to see either beating nadal.

Wawrinka looking dangerous for Novak and berdych really sneaking under the radar

Nadal's excursion against Nishikori being any indicator, Nadal seems to have struggled a bit today. Dimitrov was close in a 3-set match, but may now have the additional belief, after some clean match play, to challenge Nadal.

Djokovic of the Top 4 seems supremely confident, and is the man to beat, IMO.

I agree, Novak is the favourite. However nadal played poorly today but still won in straight sets. He always seems to deliver on the big points.

Muguruza is fun to watch, going for her shots. Needs some cleaner shots and control over UEs.

Bookies have Novak as clear favourite.

Novak 8/11
Rafa 5/3
Andy 10/1
Roger 12/1

Bookies see it as a two horse race, and I kinda agree.

First up I never saw Andy or Roger's matches today so am only going by reports and match stats etc. It seemed like another patchy performance from Andy and was perhaps guilty of thinking the job was done after two sets - that is a bad habit to have. By all accounts Roger was mercurial and some saying it is the best he has played since Wimbledon 2012. I have been impressed by him throughout the tournament so I would make Roger warm favourite to beat Andy and red hot if Andy is patchy again. I would even go as far as to say I could see Roger giving Rafa more than a fright if Rafa plays like he did today in spells.

I dont think Novak has had anybody to push him yet has he ? though I admit I have not seen any of his matches but he has had the easiest draw by far.

Haddie-nuff wrote:I dont think Novak has had anybody to push him yet has he ? though I admit I have not seen any of his matches but he has had the easiest draw by far.

HE thinks Murray has the easiest draw.

RAFA´S PRESS INTERVIEW AFTER THE NISHIKORI MATCH.



Q.  Each set took more than one hour.  How difficult was it to keep your concentration against Kei?
RAFAEL NADAL:  I think the concentration for me was okay the whole match.  I think I played very focused, fighting for every ball.
Kei played fantastic match, in my opinion.  Just a few mistakes in some moments that was tough ones.  But for the rest, he played very aggressive, he went for the shots.  He came on court with determination to take the ball very early and go for the winners.
He really had the right feelings to do it.  So just was a tough match, a very important win.  Very happy.

Q.  The game looked a lot closer than the scoreboard suggested.  Is that how it felt out there?
RAFAEL NADAL:  3 hours 16, the score says that the match was very tough.  Is true that it was in three sets.  I felt like I won in three sets today because every set was very tough.
But playing for every set more than one hour is because the match was very close.  He was playing great.  Was a lot of tough points.  I had to run a lot.

Q.  Is that the sort of workout you wanted for the first day of the second week?
RAFAEL NADAL:  I don't prepare.  I looking forward to play my best and try to win every day.  I go on court trying to play my best every day, trying to play aggressive.  Sometimes works better, sometimes works a little bit worst.
Today, were much different conditions than few days ago with playing night session.  So was windy.  The feeling was not the same.  Was little bit worst, my feeling.
He was able to play more inside.  I think I played a little bit too short.  The other day I was able to hit longer and to take advantage with my shots.  Today I didn't make it.
I think he was in a better position on the points than me more times.  So that's something that cannot happen.  But is true that is tough to change that when the opponent is decided to hit winners from everywhere.

Q.  Last time you played Kei in French Open was way easier than this time.  Was it the difference in surface?
RAFAEL NADAL:  Always it's tough against him in every surface.  He's a very complete player.  He's very quick.  He's able to do the most difficult thing in tennis, that's taking the ball early and changing the directions.  He's able to do it easy, so...
Kei is a potential top 10 player.  So that's the real thing.  Is a great victory for me.  Is true that is difficult to compare clay with hard.  In clay, playing on clay is a little bit more difficult than play the way he did today.
For example, you play that inside.  You are not hitting every ball perfect, you will be in trouble, because your position, you know, you're going to be inside and the opponent will have a chance to hit higher, longer.  So will be tough.
Playing on clay is more difficult play that aggressive game because the ball have higher bounces and is more difficult to play that inside.

Q.  If you could change the rule for the time between points, how would you change it?
RAFAEL NADAL:  I don't want to change no one rule.  Just I accept that sometimes I was slow.  I respect that.
But what I think, in my opinion, is not right, you know.  In that game I think I played a very, very tough point with the 15 All or something like this.  So I runned for every ball, crazy point, and then I was back.
It was on deuce.  The negative thing in my opinion is not the warning.  The negative thing is the moment, 4 All, deuce.  You can choose another moment to do it, not that one.
Another thing is she didn't advise me before the second warning that I was still going slow.  So normal thing, if the referee, you know, is interesting on help little bit the player, the normal thing is say, Rafa, you are going too slow.  So I try to go quicker, before the second warning.
But she didn't make it.  She is able to not doing.  The rule says you can do it.  But, in my opinion, that goes against the show.  But that's fine.  If she wants to do it that way, she did.  She did, and that's why we are talking that here.

Q.  Maybe after really long points or if it is very hot, do you think it would be appropriate to make a little more time?
RAFAEL NADAL:  The word is not rules or not rules.  The word is understand the game.  That's all.  We need referees who understand the game.  The rules cannot go against the good show.  That's all.
If you are playing with 40 degrees, you cannot expect to have 20 seconds recover, 25 seconds recover.  If you are playing crazy rallies, you cannot have 25 seconds recover because then you will not have more rallies because the players cannot have it.  So that goes against the fans, against the show.
But I repeat:  nothing against the rules.  I accept the rules.  Sometimes I am wrong.  Sometimes I am too slow and I accept that.  I respect the decision of the referee even if I am not happy for that, because was not the right moment to do it, in my opinion, before an advise.  But she did.  That's all.
I going to try to go quicker for the future.  But is important to have people on the chair that really understand the game and people who manage this sport who understand the game, and that's it.
Because, if not, every time with Hawk Eye, the referee just start watching the watch, 25 seconds, then warning, so then we don't need any more referees.  We only need lines.  That's fine.
Because if not, the referees don't need to do all the rules.  That is my feeling.  We are making the referees worse than before with all the things that we are making for them easier.

Q.  How is your hand doing?
RAFAEL NADAL:  So so.  (Showing hand with blister).

Q.  Is that one of the worst blisters you've ever had?
RAFAEL NADAL:  The problem is not the blister.  The problem is the place.  Is very difficult to cover that blister here.  Is not painful, but I cannot play without that cover today.
Is a little bit hard because with that cover, is true, that    you can imagine that is something that I didn't use never.  I used one time in my career, or twice.  Is different than the ones I am using every day, that I already feel the ball, feel the racquet with all that.  That's something new.  The feeling on the racquet is a little bit more difficult.

Q.  Is that why you didn't manage to push as deep as you usually do?
RAFAEL NADAL:  No.  I didn't push as deep as I am not usually do.  I do when I am playing well.  When I am not playing that well, I run and I fight for every point as I did today.
But, no, because some days you play better, some days you play not that good.  I didn't play bad today, but I didn't play as good as I did two days ago.
But the victory of today has much more value than the victory of two days ago.  Because when you are playing that good, the normal thing is win.  When you are playing normal and the opponent is a good one, you are able to keep winning, that's have much more value.

Q.  You didn't bring a second pair of shoes to the court?
RAFAEL NADAL:  I never bring second pair of shoes on the court.  I have in the locker room.  I never break my shoes on the court.  I didn't break my shoes, I break my lace, something that never happen in the past for me.
No, no reason to bring another shoes.  I have another one in the locker, but Nike shoes are very good.  Never break (smiling).

Q.  You make dozens of routines before each serve.  Why don't you do this during practice sessions?
RAFAEL NADAL:  Because I am not that focused.

CaledonianCraig wrote:First up I never saw Andy or Roger's matches today so am only going by reports and match stats etc. It seemed like another patchy performance from Andy and was perhaps guilty of thinking the job was done after two sets - that is a bad habit to have. By all accounts Roger was mercurial and some saying it is the best he has played since Wimbledon 2012. I have been impressed by him throughout the tournament so I would make Roger warm favourite to beat Andy and red hot if Andy is patchy again. I would even go as far as to say I could see Roger giving Rafa more than a fright if Rafa plays like he did today in spells.

In fairness, Andy been "patchy" in the earlier rounds of a slam is nothing new. More relevant is the fact that he just isn't ready for a fresh and vibrant Roger

i.e. a superfit and on form Andy, will always 'drift' in some matches

However, too much is been read into Roger's victory - Tsonga for me was terrible. The Top 3 still beat Roger if they are all fully fit

Andy isn't (match fit) enough, just yet.

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:I dont think Novak has had anybody to push him yet has he ? though I admit I have not seen any of his matches but he has had the easiest draw by far.

HE thinks Murray has the easiest draw.

Up to this point he has. But from this point onwards it's as hard as it could be. Novak doesn't have to play an elite player until the final. Murray now has 3 in a row if he wants to win it.

I know you know all this LF, and I'm stating the obvious...

One thing I will say about Murray v Federer, I agree with my fellow Muzza fans that Roger should be favourite based on Feds form and Murray's circumstances... But that's not to say Murray can't win. He certainly can.

I'm not sure he's well cooked enough to beat a Rafa or a Novak, but I certainly believe he can beat Federer.

@H-n.. Thanks for that interview. Early ball-takers cause Nadal quite a few problems. Davy is a good example of one. After the break in the first game, I thought Nishikori was just going to melt down. But he pushed pretty hard. Dimitrov can push harder, but has the SHBH disadvantage.

@BanBro… Tsonga was all right the first two sets. Third set was bad and then he started slapping the ball at the very end. Federer played much better than I have seen him in a long time. Perhaps Cincy 2013 v Nadal was better than this.

Danny_1982 wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:I dont think Novak has had anybody to push him yet has he ? though I admit I have not seen any of his matches but he has had the easiest draw by far.

HE thinks Murray has the easiest draw.

Up to this point he has. But from this point onwards it's as hard as it could be. Novak doesn't have to play an elite player until the final. Murray now has 3 in a row if he wants to win it.

I know you know all this LF, and I'm stating the obvious...

Yes.   and  

It's been lapses in concentration with Andy so far, which I think can happen against when the opposition is relatively weak.

I suspect playing Federer will focus the mind!

I'm finding this one tough to call. The difficulty is that I really don't know how each player will handle 5 sets if it happens. If Andy can serve well, I think I'd probably make him the slight favourite. Not much in it though.

It's a very intriguing QF line up. The Berdy Ferrer match doesn't excite me too much if I'm honest, but the other 3 do.

Berdy v Ferrer - Ferrer in 4.
Novak v Wawrinka - Novak in 4.
Rafa v Dimi - Rafa in 3.
Murray v Federer - Fed in 4.

That's my sensible prediction. With exception of Rafa's match, any of them could go 5 sets. In my humble and often wrong opinion anyway.

Why cant Dimi go 5 sets? He has the age and looks quite muscular. Sure Rafa will grind him, but I would love to see Dimi go to 5 and get some confidence with top 8 players, thought a QF here looks good, and hope it becomes a norm for him this year on GS.

Re: Dimi v Rafa... Just my personal view Jahu. First time in a QF, SHBH against Rafa, saying in his press conference that he was pretty tired... Don't think all that adds up to a man who's going to push Rafa to the brink.

Agree, just wishful thinking from my side.

Danny_1982 wrote:Re: Dimi v Rafa... Don't think all that adds up to a man who's going to push Rafa to the brink.

Unless ... he is trying to give the impression of a man who isn't going to push Rafa to the brink. But irrespective of what impression he is trying to give, it would be a stretch to see him win.

I like it Turron, harnessing the spirit of Baldrick and concocting a cunning plan!

I hope I'm wrong too, would be great for the game to see an up and comer knock out one of the big boys. Just can't see it though.

My predictions:

Berdych vs Ferrer Berdych in 5
Djokovic vs Wawrinka Djokovic in 4
Murray vs Federer Murray in 4
Nadal vs Dimitrov Nadal in 3

I am a little nervous about the Djokovic match, if Wawrinka plays like he did in the match last year, he could cause an upset. Normally I would fancy Ferrer against Berdych but I have been very impressed with Berdych so far. I think Nadal will give poor Dimitrov a really tough day at the office. I expect Murray to win unless Federer brings his absolute A game.

With the exception of the Nadal match i think these are really tough to call.

laverfan. I responded to a comment from HM about Murray's draw with this

hawkeye wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:Just noticed that the seeding of Andy's first four opponents is unseeded / unseeded / 26 / unseeded. A very nice opening for someone coming back from injury.

I think the last unseeded wasn't just unseeded he was a lucky loser (ie he lost in the competition to qualify for the AO but got lucky and was given direct entry into the draw). This particular lucky looser was even more lucky because he was placed in such a nice section of the draw his third round opponent was another "lucky looser". But his opponents in this years AO have been much tougher than his first round opponent in Doha. This player was given a wildcard into a main tour event with a ranking of about 2,400. It is not clear how a player ranked so low was given a wildcard but he was also given one for the previous years tournament in Doha so maybe he knew the organizers.

So Murrays opponents this year have been Player ranked 2,400, (lost to Mayer ranked 37), unseeded, unseeded, 26, lucky looser.

I think Haddie wasn't even talking about Murray so I'm not sure why you jumped in saying I disagreed that Djokovic had the easiest draw? She was comparing Djokovic's draw with Nadal and I agree as do most people that Djokovic has had the easiest draw and has not been tested yet.

The last two Novak v Stan matches have been won comfortably by Novak. Straight sets in both (6-1 6-4 in Paris and 6-3 6-3 in London) and Stan only broke serve once.

I'm not expecting a cakewalk but I'm not expecting a 5 set classic this time. If Stan takes the first set, then we could have something. But if Novak takes the first, I can't see him then losing 3 out of 4 sets on RLA.

At the end of the day - as far as draws are concerned - there are no hiding places I feel. There is no doubt the bottom half of the draw was by far the easier to be in. Novak has had easy games to date but tomorrow he faces Stan Wawrinka who is in very good form and will be a big threat. Awaiting in the semis could be Berdych who himself has looked very good so far in the tournie and then possibly Rafa awaits in the final. So if Novak is not worthy of the title there are enough banana skins there to find him out.

Andy Murray (as some have said) has had it ridiculously easy apart from Lopez match and I would whole-heartedly agree. However, ask Rafa (Rosol and Darcis) and any match can be a banana skin however easy it may appear on paper. Besides from here on in can it get any tougher? I say not. Potentially a run-in of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would turn this into his most impressive slam win to date especially considering he is just back from back surgery.

We could argue Rafa has had it easy as well. A one set win before Tomic retired, a 17-year-old Australian in his first ever slam, a third round against Monfils spraying unforced errors here there and everywhere and only got tough today for him. Here after again Rafa will be fully tested so again if he wins it will be fully merited.

So you see easy draws here don't exist if we are talking about what it takes to win the whole tournament.

Neither Djoko, nor Nadal, nor Murray have yet really played anyone who should challenge them. Nishikori tested Rafa, but maybe that's because Rafa didn't play so well and would have struggled against Foggy, whereas Djoko would have routed Nishi.

Ranking of opponents in first 4 rounds:

Rafa - 57 / 570 / 32 / 17
Novak - 96 / 98 / 49 / 16
Andy - 112 / 267 / 27 / 119
Roger - 133 / 99 / 79 / 10

Safe to say that Andy has had the easiest draw so far.

I'd say Federer's was the toughest, largely because of playing a top ten player in round 4.

I wouldn't say there is much between Rafa's draw and Novak's.

For these guys, 98 or 267 or 570 makes no difference 99% of the time. Nobody in the first two rounds to trouble them, journeymen in Rd 3 for all of them, and Andy with the easiest Rd 4, but has Fed in the next round.

Fair point HM but you would expect a Slam QF to get Wawrinka in the mood again. He seemed to relish the slam encounters last year, he would need to play lights out tennis. You really feel that Stan will need to take the 1st set to have a chance.

After that, I think what makes Berdych dangeroius is he is has cruised through his draw, if he beats ferrer it will give him huge confidence. Not only that but he is 28 and probably only has 2 - 3 years of peak tennis ahead of him. I do think he will deliver sooner or later. If Berdych was playing anybody but Nadal or novak in the next round, you would probably make him favourite

But I say again who is to say what an 'easy' draw is? Rosol and Darcis are walking proof that NOBODY can be taken lightly. Some players thrive with a more challenging draw seeing it as a challenge whilst others struggle with pressures of expectation as favourite or in matches they are expected to win and would some would probably feel more at ease with a tougher challenge to focus the mind on the challenge in hand.

JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

Slasher, I've been becoming increasingly nervous about Berdych in the draw.

I know Novak dominates that match up, but TB has been playing some really calm, clinical tennis. Often he wilts before Novak but there's something about him at the moment that makes me think that won't happen this time. I'd fancy him if sets go to a tie break, for example.

CaledonianCraig wrote:At the end of the day - as far as draws are concerned - there are no hiding places I feel. There is no doubt the bottom half of the draw was by far the easier to be in. Novak has had easy games to date but tomorrow he faces Stan Wawrinka who is in very good form and will be a big threat. Awaiting in the semis could be Berdych who himself has looked very good so far in the tournie and then possibly Rafa awaits in the final. So if Novak is not worthy of the title there are enough banana skins there to find him out.

Andy Murray (as some have said) has had it ridiculously easy apart from Lopez match and I would whole-heartedly agree. However, ask Rafa (Rosol and Darcis) and any match can be a banana skin however easy it may appear on paper. Besides from here on in can it get any tougher? I say not. Potentially a run-in of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would turn this into his most impressive slam win to date especially considering he is just back from back surgery.

We could argue Rafa has had it easy as well. A one set win before Tomic retired, a 17-year-old Australian in his first ever slam, a third round against Monfils spraying unforced errors here there and everywhere and only got tough today for him. Here after again Rafa will be fully tested so again if he wins it will be fully merited.

So you see easy draws here don't exist if we are talking about what it takes to win the whole tournament.

I agree with the latter Craig but it makes a difference when you have the winning post in sight whether you have had a stroll in the park to get there or a mountain to climb.. if you get my drift.

HM Murdoch wrote:JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

And his QF, where the top guys can face their first real test (on paper, based on rankings) he gets the only guy not in the top 20 and who has never been in the top 20. It's enough to make you spend 30 seconds preparing to serve.

HM Murdoch wrote:JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

Agreed JHM.

It is not all just about ranking number either. That does not portray the level of challenge they give to their opponent. Look at Kokkanakis (ranked in the 500's and 17-years-old) but he put up a sterner challenge than Monfils (seeded 28 was it?). Murray's sternest challenge to date was offered by Robert (ranked 118) and not Lopez (seeded 27). Novak himself was tested more by Lukas Lacko than the seeded Fognini.

HM Murdoch wrote:JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

Fair comment Hm but at the time of the draw nobody knew which Montfils would walk out on court did they  

JuliusHMarx wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

And his QF, where the top guys can face their first real test (on paper, based on rankings) he gets the only guy not in the top 20 and who has never been in the top 20. It's enough to make you spend 30 seconds preparing to serve.

I think he has already acknowledged that in his press release Jm.. if you have read it and Im sure you have.. another truly barbed comment   

JuliusHMarx wrote:
And his QF, where the top guys can face their first real test (on paper, based on rankings) he gets the only guy not in the top 20 and who has never been in the top 20. It's enough to make you spend 30 seconds preparing to serve.

And the one opponent who has never been in a slam QF before.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Fair comment Hm but at the time of the draw nobody knew which Montfils would walk out on court did they  

No, that's true. I must confess, I thought it looked like a tricky draw for a 3rd round. Unfortunately La Monf was in crazy mode.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:JHM, I agree.

Interesting though that many think Rafa's draw is tough and yet his 4th opponent has a lower rank than either Novak's or Roger's opponent.

And Monfils in the third round is one of the biggest sleights of hand I've ever seen. How anyone concluded that Monfils played well and offered a threat in that game is a complete mystery to me.

And his QF, where the top guys can face their first real test (on paper, based on rankings) he gets the only guy not in the top 20 and who has never been in the top 20. It's enough to make you spend 30 seconds preparing to serve.

I think he has already acknowledged that in his press release Jm.. if you have read it and Im sure you have.. another truly barbed comment   

I would have thought that my making a joke out of it would indicate that it's not truly barbed. I'm not above a truly barbed comment, but that wasn't one of them.

Wow !!!!! I really must go to specsavers  

Haddie-nuff wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:At the end of the day - as far as draws are concerned - there are no hiding places I feel. There is no doubt the bottom half of the draw was by far the easier to be in. Novak has had easy games to date but tomorrow he faces Stan Wawrinka who is in very good form and will be a big threat. Awaiting in the semis could be Berdych who himself has looked very good so far in the tournie and then possibly Rafa awaits in the final. So if Novak is not worthy of the title there are enough banana skins there to find him out.

Andy Murray (as some have said) has had it ridiculously easy apart from Lopez match and I would whole-heartedly agree. However, ask Rafa (Rosol and Darcis) and any match can be a banana skin however easy it may appear on paper. Besides from here on in can it get any tougher? I say not. Potentially a run-in of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic would turn this into his most impressive slam win to date especially considering he is just back from back surgery.

We could argue Rafa has had it easy as well. A one set win before Tomic retired, a 17-year-old Australian in his first ever slam, a third round against Monfils spraying unforced errors here there and everywhere and only got tough today for him. Here after again Rafa will be fully tested so again if he wins it will be fully merited.

So you see easy draws here don't exist if we are talking about what it takes to win the whole tournament.

I agree with the latter Craig but it makes a difference when you have the winning post in sight whether you have had a stroll in the park to get there or a mountain to climb.. if you get my drift.

The point is that quite often it is the lesser names that cause more problems regardless of rank or standing in the game. As I highlighted Lopez was less of a challenge to Murray than Robert (despite the rankings), Kokkanakis provided more of a challenge than Monfils (despite the rankings), Lacko was more of a thorn in Novak's side than Fognini (despite the rankings suggested that wouldn't be the case). And look at Rosol, Darcis, Falla, Devaarman etc as players who have caused the big guns more problems in the past than seeded players. Rankings and seedings don't tell the full story of the challenge they can offer over more illustrious players.

Feliciano Lopez didn´t turn up Craig... just somebody who looked like him. If I hadn´t wamted to believe differently I would have said he tanked that match imo

That is neither here nor there though Hn.

My point being that players seeded high can often disappoint as we have seen at this tournie in the tame surrenders of Anderson, Fognini, Monfils and Lopez yet unseeded and ranked lowly Bautista-Agut (beat Del Potro), Robert (offered Murray his biggest challenge), Lacko offered more than Fognini and proves that what may look like a weaker challenge can offer a stiffer test than a seeded player.

Well fortunately for Novak it didn´t happen in his quarter did it.?

I hope all those that mention Darcis and Rosol in the same breath as  Rafa take heed of your post Craig. Memories tend to be a bit selective at times  

I think Novak in 4, Ferrer in 5, Nadal in 3 (this will be an evisceration) and the last one is virtually impossible to call. We don't know Murray's true form against top players, and we don't know if Federer will sustain his level of play.

Both looked very motivated today, however. Murray was raging over the TB loss and Federer had that calm, zen steel about him. Neither of them are going to be getting the win easily.

@Banbro, if Federer doesn't beat Murray this time then he certainly has a chance in the future. Pretty sure Fed will continue to build on his rediscovered conditioning routine and become better as the season goes on. Murray will also improve with match practice, of course. Funnily enough we were all saying the same thing last year - 'if Murray can't beat Federer now, then he never will in a slam' - and now suddenly the tables are completely turned? With all due respect, I doubt it.

All draws are not even. There is luck involved. Trying to say there isn't is just ridiculous!

For example. I wonder how many players could have found themselves in the quarter finals if they had the benefit of Murray's draw.

hawkeye wrote:All draws are not even. There is luck involved. Trying to say there isn't is just ridiculous!

For example. I wonder how many players could have found themselves in the quarter finals if they had the benefit of Murray's draw.

Loads of players. Just like with Federer's 2008 Wimbledon draw. It happens to them all, and the draws even themselves out eventually. Can't fault Murray for taking advantage of a relatively easy draw - I'd rather he had it over the others, because he needed it the most. Back surgery is tough enough to come back from without combating dangerous unseeded opponents in 40 degree heat.

Yes Haddie I would say Novak has been lucky in that he has hoovered up a lot of the 'easier' seeds in his half and many seeds not up to reaching the latter stages. But at the end of the day (to prove my point) his biggest challenge thus far has come from the lowest (I think) ranked player he has faced so far. However, if he wins he will have earnt it as from here on in he will have to beat Stan, maybe Berdych and then Rafa or Federer. A tough run of games and his easy route so far could leave him under-cooked.

It does show that however much of a big deal is made of the draw when it comes out, like CC says, it can bear little relation to how it actually pans out in the tournament.
Foggy might have had a bad day, or caught Djoko on a really good one, or a bit of both. Had they played a day later or earlier, it might have been much closer.
Unless we actually watch every match and evaluate the level of play of both players, it's often inaccurate to say someone had an easy draw, simply because of either the opponent's ranking, or the scoreline.