Australian Open Round 4 (Days 7 and 8)

by Born Slippy Sat 18 Jan 2014, 12:41 pm

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

by Danny_1982 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:20 pm

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.

Virtually all the time, whether the first 4 rounds are perceived as challenging or easy, the big players arrive in the quarters because they are better. It is from quarters onwards that the top players get challenged and beaten. Mostly anyway.

From the quarters onwards, Murray and Federer have the biggest challenge by far.

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:25 pm

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.

I wonder how many qualifiers would have found themselves in the second round if they'd had to play Tomic in Rd 1 and he'd pulled out injured?

by summerblues Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:29 pm

hawkeye wrote:For example

by summerblues Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:35 pm

Everyone seems to think that Rafa will destroy Dimi. I think Dimi has it in him to make it competitive. Not win perhaps, but if he plays well like he did the last couple of rounds he could give Rafa a good fight. He has a good serve, can take the ball early, is willing and able to defend quite well, does not give too many cheap points.

Yes, Rafa is obviously the favorite, and having a SHBH will not help Dimi either, but I do not think it has to be a walkover many seem to predict.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:37 pm

And just to point out to hawkeye this is Andy Murray's 12th slam he has entered in succession that he has at least reached the quarter-finals so that alone proves Andy doesn't need luck alone to get him to quarters.

by R!skysports Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:37 pm

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.

There it is - the slight dig at Murray

I like this game :-)

by Silver Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:38 pm

You could yet be right, SB, and it can't be discounted with a player of his quality. I can't see it myself, but would be happy to eat my words!

Reaching the QF is an achievement in itself Smile

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:39 pm

Riskysports wrote:
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.

There it is - the slight dig at Murray

I like this game :-)

Too predictable for my liking. Hawkeye has wum dig at Murray - yawn.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:51 pm

summerblues wrote:Everyone seems to think that Rafa will destroy Dimi. I think Dimi has it in him to make it competitive. Not win perhaps, but if he plays well like he did the last couple of rounds he could give Rafa a good fight. He has a good serve, can take the ball early, is willing and able to defend quite well, does not give too many cheap points.

Yes, Rafa is obviously the favorite, and having a SHBH will not help Dimi either, but I do not think it has to be a walkover many seem to predict.

I would not rule it out. He looks far more mature now and well-grounded and we know he has the talent. Couple that with Rafa showing vulnerabilities against Nishikori and it offers hope. It depends on Dimitrov and what is between his ears and in his heart. If he truly believes he can win and goes for it then a shock cannot be ruled out. I'd be surprised though as Rafa is relentless and as sure as eggs are eggs whoever (if anyone) beats him here they are going to have to be at their absolute best - anything less won't do.

by Haddie-nuff Mon 20 Jan 2014, 5:59 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote: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.

Actually that is why I never try to predict the outcome of a slam.. it is so dependent not on just the draw but injury, weather (as we have seen) and players not playing up to or beyond their normal standard.
Inevitably some of the big guns get lost on the way ... the unpredictability of it though is what makes compulsive viewing

by Danny_1982 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:02 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
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.

There it is - the slight dig at Murray

I like this game :-)

Too predictable for my liking. Hawkeye has wum dig at Murray - yawn.

WUMs do what WUMs do. When they're funny I don't mind them. This is just dull though, I agree.

by kingraf Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:03 pm

I'd say Dimitrov has a chance, not a big one, but he could upset the apple cart. During the USO, Nadal gave an interview saying something to the effect of "everyone says I'm playing well because I'm playing aggressive. I think I'm playing aggressive because I'm playing well. If I'm not playing as well I have to be a little more defensive". I think that's important because if Nadal starts well and feels the force is with him, then I'm sorry but Dimitrov is going to get got. Bad, most likely. What Dimitrov has to do is force Rafa on the back foot and hope that Rafa attempts to grind him down. This will give him the chance to dictate and that's his best shot. If Rafa shows up aggressive, I'm not sure there are too many players in history that can live with him. Too big, Too fast, too strong. I'd give Dimitrov zero chance of winning a fire fight vs Rafa...

by summerblues Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:10 pm

KR, I agree with your probability assesment (i.e., Dimi has a chance, but a small one) but just about entirely disagree with your reasoning behind it. Rafa is at 13 slams (and counting) not because of his aggressive game but because he is as good as he is at defending and because his usual rally shot is so hard to live with. There are guys that can live with Rafa in a shootout, what is almost impossible is to get through him when he knuckles down.

by summerblues Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:12 pm

Who do you guys think will be the night match on Wed? Fed or Rafa? Rafa is #1 and his last match was daytime, but Fed has a higher profile opponent...

by bogbrush Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:13 pm

Could anyone explain this 'undercooked' thing I keep reading?

Last I checked these are experienced guys who maintain great conditioning and practise incessantly. I really doubt they forget how to play top level competitive tennis and need tough, wearing matches within a particular event to remind themselves of the experience.

by hawkeye Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:16 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote: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.

By that I presume you mean a top player can get beaten or struggle against a lower ranked player. Well of course they can. But chances are they would struggle more against a player considered more difficult.

And CC is wrong a draw will of course affect "how it pans out". Tennis isn't like golf in that players can't compare themselves against the entire field they can only beat who is in front of them. Also it is a myth that things "always even out". Why should they because draws are random...

Where is socal he has a theory about this Whistle

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:20 pm

bogbrush wrote:Could anyone explain this 'undercooked' thing I keep reading?

Google Fogniniiiiii Smile

by hawkeye Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:31 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Riskysports wrote:
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.

There it is - the slight dig at Murray

I like this game :-)

Too predictable for my liking. Hawkeye has wum dig at Murray - yawn.

WUMs do what WUMs do. When they're funny I don't mind them. This is just dull though, I agree.

It's not a dig at Murray. He didn't do the draw. I suppose it's OK to say Novak has had an easy draw but not Murray? Even though when you start looking at draws Murray's does stand out (as far as the quarters). I suppose we could confine this discussion to Rafa and Novaks paths to the quarters if it upsets Murray fans to include him?

I'm willing to leave Murray out of this discussion if it would make people happy angel

by Haddie-nuff Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:31 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Could anyone explain this 'undercooked' thing I keep reading?

Google Fogniniiiiii

I think Novak already did laughing

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:32 pm

Hawkeye look at the facts eh?

Rafael has only suffered early exits in slams against players ranked around 100. This tournament Novak was tested more by Lacko than Fognini (despite the ranking), Murray was tested more by Robert than Lopez (despite the ranking), Nadal was tested more by Kokkanakis than Monfils (despite the ranking). Shall I go on?

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:39 pm

Rafa's draw, Djoko's draw, Murray's draw - so far all pretty much equally easy. So was Fed's apart from today, and even that didn't trouble him overly.

by CAS Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:44 pm

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/net-rush-gold-rush/50343/#.Ut1tUmg4l68 awesome article on Federer's match with Tsonga, and it s exactly how I felt after the match. People want him to do well so badly it can cloud their logic, I'm one of them!

by hawkeye Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:53 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:Rafa's draw, Djoko's draw, - so far all pretty much equally easy.

Rubbish! I suppose by this you mean they have both survived. That doesn't mean their route was equal. Also Julius if it upsets people if I use Murray's draw as an example and I've agreed not to then it's only fair that others don't include him too. Otherwise it's not an equal debate Very Happy

CC. Rosol at the time was a reasonable draw for the second round of a slam. I don't think anyone has ever claimed that Rafa's draw was difficult. Neither was Darcis a difficult draw. I don't think anyone can say Rafa didn't progress at Wimbledon because of the difficulty of his draw.

by Born Slippy Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:54 pm

summerblues wrote:Who do you guys think will be the night match on Wed? Fed or Rafa? Rafa is #1 and his last match was daytime, but Fed has a higher profile opponent...

Murray v. Federer will be the night match. Rafa would need to be playing Novak to top that.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 6:56 pm

Born Slippy wrote:
summerblues wrote:Who do you guys think will be the night match on Wed? Fed or Rafa? Rafa is #1 and his last match was daytime, but Fed has a higher profile opponent...

Murray v. Federer will be the night match. Rafa would need to be playing Novak to top that.

Damn. I will be working so will miss it.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:00 pm

hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:Rafa's draw, Djoko's draw, - so far all pretty much equally easy.

Rubbish! I suppose by this you mean they have both survived. That doesn't mean their route was equal. Also Julius if it upsets people if I use Murray's draw as an example and I've agreed not to then it's only fair that others don't include him too. Otherwise it's not an equal debate

CC. Rosol at the time was a reasonable draw for the second round of a slam. I don't think anyone has ever claimed that Rafa's draw was difficult. Neither was Darcis a difficult draw. I don't think anyone can say Rafa didn't progress at Wimbledon because of the difficulty of his draw.

That just proves my point. However, easy a draw may look on paper a defeat against a lowly ranked player can happen and is more likely than if it were against a weak willed seeded player who lacks the belief or confidence or conviction to beat the big guns whereas lesser players will often play without fear and with great freedom.

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:00 pm

hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:Rafa's draw, Djoko's draw, - so far all pretty much equally easy.

Rubbish! I suppose by this you mean they have both survived. That doesn't mean their route was equal. Also Julius if it upsets people if I use Murray's draw as an example and I've agreed not to then it's only fair that others don't include him too. Otherwise it's not an equal debate

CC. Rosol at the time was a reasonable draw for the second round of a slam. I don't think anyone has ever claimed that Rafa's draw was difficult. Neither was Darcis a difficult draw. I don't think anyone can say Rafa didn't progress at Wimbledon because of the difficulty of his draw.

Ok - if you insist, Rafa's draw was easier than Djoko's.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:04 pm

At the end of the day .....It proves nothing. Novak doesn't need luck of a draw to win the Australian Open (his record here proves that) and Andy doesn't need luck of the draw to reach slam quarters as this is his 12th consecutive slam quarter (that he has entered).

by Danny_1982 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:15 pm

so because you can't talk about Murray without some dig, others should stop talking about him too? You'd love him excluded from the debate wouldn't you.

As someone pointed out earlier, he's got to the quarter of 12 of the last 13 slams he's competed in. So unless he's had luck every time, he's proved he can handle the tough and the easy draws.

Rafa's draw v Novak's draw? Much if a muchness I'd say. Novak has the better draw overall I'd say because his semi final (should he get there) is against 1 of 2 players he matches up great against. Both play a consistent pace, same shots again and again. Perfect for Novak. He loves that.

by LuvSports! Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:18 pm

Over 45 winners from Feds and just 21 UE's, much better!

by YvonneT Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:18 pm

CAS wrote:http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/01/net-rush-gold-rush/50343/#.Ut1tUmg4l68 awesome article on Federer's match with Tsonga, and it s exactly how I felt after the match. People want him to do well so badly it can cloud their logic, I'm one of them!

Very good article, thanks for sharing.
I like both Fed & Murray so I guess I don't mind too much who wins. But I'd like whoever does win to do it with authority so they carry some confidence into their semi final match.

by YvonneT Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:32 pm

Murray has had an easy passage through the first 4 rounds, it can't be denied. But the seeding do lend themselves to that - once you're top 8, the highest ranked player you can play in R3 is 25; once you're top 4, the highest ranked player for R4 is 13. So Andy should have had Isner (seeded 13), Nadal - Nishikori (16) and Djokovic - Fognini (15), Ferrer - Youzhny (14). Even if Isner and Youzhny had made it to R4, they are not exactly renowned for their slam credentials (Isner I suppose has some good upsets in Masters but is pretty poor in BO5). So if we are saying that draws are easy, all we are really saying is that there is little strength at all outside the top 10.

by **laverfan** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:44 pm

Regarding easy draws, Bautista-Agut (Bust-a-Gut, Bad Attitude, etc.) ranked #62 took out Del Potro (#5) and Paire (#27).

Krygios almost took out Paire. Klizan (LL) took out Isner (#13).

Gabashvili (#79) took out Verdasco (#31), the one-and-same Verdasco, who played a classic at AO 2009.

No easy draws, IMHO. If seeded players lose to journeymen, the so-called journeymen should be playing well, correct?

by kingraf Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:45 pm

Lettuce be real here. The real issue is the chasm between the big guys and the rest is so great you couldn't hope to create a threatening draw. Look at Rafa - Even if got a #17, #9, #5 #3 #2 draw...
the head to head goes
Djokovic 22-17
Ferrer 21-5
DelPo 8-3
Gasquet 12-0
Nishikori 5-0

So even in the instance of the toughest possible draw (from 3rd round on), Nadal is up in head to head against every single one of them, and has an aggregate of 68-25 (with Djokovic doing the donkey work in terms of defeats inflicted). Outside of Nole, the toughest draw you could create for Rafa ranking wise has two wins over him in this decade (which I think, is a relevant statement five years into the decade)

by Guest Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:47 pm

Soo guys some big questions for you?

Can Ana Ivanovic now win this Australian open?

and how will Federer follow up this undeniably great performance against guys who put him under more pressure? Has he gone second favourite even?!

by **laverfan** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:49 pm

Of all the QFists, only Nadal, Federer, Berdych and Djokovic have to yet lose a set.

by Guest Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:49 pm

Tbh I have no idea how the Muzz Roger match will go, Murray might get piledrived my a mercurial Fed or it might be patchy, its Really hard to call.

The big match tomorrow is Djoko Wawrinka, but Ive got a horrible feeling its gonna be a damp squib, sequels to great movies rarely meet the hype

by **laverfan** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:52 pm

falzy21 wrote:Can Ana Ivanovic now win this Australian open?

Nah, Genie will put her down, IMO.

by Guest Mon 20 Jan 2014, 7:55 pm

Fair enough Laver, I havent seen anwhere near enough of Bouchard to make a call, exactly nothing in fact.
What do you think of Muzz Fed?

by naxroy Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:10 pm

federer murray will be a great match

nadal - murray
djokovic - berdych

by **laverfan** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:10 pm

falzy21 wrote:Fair enough Laver, I havent seen anwhere near enough of Bouchard to make a call, exactly nothing in fact.
What do you think of Muzz Fed?

Federer played well enough against a lackluster Tsonga, but will have to control his UEs, and perhaps push Murray by moving up the court to have a reasonable chance. Baseline slugfest is not what Federer wants. If Federer wins the first set, he could do it in straight sets.

by summerblues Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:12 pm

falzy21 wrote:how will Federer follow up this undeniably great performance against guys who put him under more pressure? Has he gone second favourite even?!

2nd favorite? Yikes

Certainly not. I think if he plays like he did yesterday, he will take out Andy. But he will certainly lose to Rafa.

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:19 pm

Personally, a lot depends on which of each players turns up. If Murray continues in this patchy vein then Roger wins every time. In an ideal world you'd like the very best of Federer and the very best of Murray to turn up but I doubt that will happen. Going purely on this tournament form and other things then my money would be on Roger.

Should Rafa win his quarter then a dream semi would be set up. Either we'd get to see Murray V Nadal for the first time since Lendl began overhauling Andy's game so that would be of great interest. Or we could get Roger V Rafa and Roger may very well fancy his chances of rolling back the years and dealing a blow to help protect his slam wins total. Many fruity possibilities.

by Danny_1982 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:25 pm

kingraf wrote:Lettuce be real here. The real issue is the chasm between the big guys and the rest is so great you couldn't hope to create a threatening draw. Look at Rafa - Even if got a #17, #9, #5 #3 #2 draw...
the head to head goes
Djokovic 22-17
Ferrer 21-5
DelPo 8-3
Gasquet 12-0
Nishikori 5-0

So even in the instance of the toughest possible draw (from 3rd round on), Nadal is up in head to head against every single one of them, and has an aggregate of 68-25 (with Djokovic doing the donkey work in terms of defeats inflicted). Outside of Nole, the toughest draw you could create for Rafa ranking wise has two wins over him in this decade (which I think, is a relevant statement five years into the decade)

I broadly agree KR, and this is evidenced in the fact that 3 or 4 of the big boys are there every slam. However with your example I'd say it's more relevant to show HC H2H's. But yeah, certainly in the first 4 rounds whether the draw is tough or easy, they get to the quarters.

by socal1976 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:49 pm

hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote: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.

By that I presume you mean a top player can get beaten or struggle against a lower ranked player. Well of course they can. But chances are they would struggle more against a player considered more difficult.

And CC is wrong a draw will of course affect "how it pans out". Tennis isn't like golf in that players can't compare themselves against the entire field they can only beat who is in front of them. Also it is a myth that things "always even out". Why should they because draws are random...

Where is socal he has a theory about this

Funny, Hawkeye, in principal I agree with you when people claim that it all evens out that is a cliche not really backed up by anything other than wishful thinking. I find the same arguments made in football that I find unpersuasive. Although Murray to win the title will most likely have to beat Fed, Nadal, and Djoko back to back slams are won in the last week not in the first week so who cares what collection stiffs he beat to get here from here on out he is going to be challenged in spades unlike a certain swiss who racked up slams against Roddick and Baggy.

by socal1976 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:53 pm

I am sorry but Dimitrov has no chance against Rafa on this surface, maybe on grass or a low bouncing indoors tournament and not this bouncy, slow outdoor surface. Nadal going to pepper his backhand with his heavy spin forehand till his shoulder collapses. Plus he still doesn't return well enough for me and Nadal is serving brilliantly. Nishikori peppered Nadal's second serve but Nish is a very good returner and Dimitrov is not.

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 8:57 pm

socal1976 wrote:
hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote: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.

By that I presume you mean a top player can get beaten or struggle against a lower ranked player. Well of course they can. But chances are they would struggle more against a player considered more difficult.

And CC is wrong a draw will of course affect "how it pans out". Tennis isn't like golf in that players can't compare themselves against the entire field they can only beat who is in front of them. Also it is a myth that things "always even out". Why should they because draws are random...

Where is socal he has a theory about this

Funny, Hawkeye, in principal I agree with you when people claim that it all evens out that is a cliche not really backed up by anything other than wishful thinking. I find the same arguments made in football that I find unpersuasive. Although Murray to win the title will most likely have to beat Fed, Nadal, and Djoko back to back slams are won in the last week not in the first week so who cares what collection stiffs he beat to get here from here on out he is going to be challenged in spades unlike a certain swiss who racked up slams against Roddick and Baggy.

I think HE meant your rigged draw theory Smile

hawkeye also very much cares what collection of stiffs Murray beat to get this far. Not to mention Djoko's stiffs - it's only Rafa that's had it tough apparently.

by socal1976 Mon 20 Jan 2014, 9:04 pm

Well when Federer and Nadal was actually an entertaining match I would not put it passed the tournament officials in protecting the possibility of that final. Right now that match is like watching me box Mike Tyson, it is hardly a competitive match, hell even I feel sorry for Federer when he plays Nadal and that should clue you in on how sad a spectacle it has become.

by **JuliusHMarx** Mon 20 Jan 2014, 9:05 pm

Have you seen Tyson recently - I reckon you could have him!

by CaledonianCraig Mon 20 Jan 2014, 9:05 pm

The whole point here is what is a tough draw?

Rafa has an almost unrivalled record in slams but his only early exits have come at the hands of journeymen - the sort of players that hawkeye his belittling Murray and Djokovic for beating here. Journeymen dealt a dream draw become dangerous opponents if they have the right mental make-up. They come with an attitude of they have nothing to lose and a never say die attitude - a dangerous cocktail - often far more so than being drawn against a seed who is weak-willed and without the courage to beat the big guns ie Anderson, Fognini, Monfils and Lopez here in Melbourne.

by Sponsored content