Australian Open Day 10-14 - Djokurray! And others! :P

First topic message reminder :

Well some of you hardcore mob will no doubt be up watching the first round matches and even up first thing if your boarding the Fed Express. I will be utilising the power of Sky+!

So we have Federer, Nadal, Murray, Berdych, Gulbis and Dimitov all in action on the men's side.

On the ladies we have Halep, Sharapova, Bouchard, Ivanovic, Kerber and young gun Bencic.

Should be an action packed day.

Silver wrote:Earlier in the week, Novak was saying that the courts were quicker than the last two years, for comparison.

temporary21 wrote:Ok serious question guys. Fed won in 4 today, I didnt see it but apparently he hurt his hand, something like a bee sting or a blister making it hard to play with. Anyone got something new on that?

Nothing beyond what you've just mentioned, I don't think he really elaborated beyond that. It was obviously hacking him off, but he seemed to play well after that though.

I'd agree with Haddie - probably just a bit of minor discomfort, plus Bolelli playing a very good first set.

Federer agrees with Haddie too.. he said the finger was weird like a bee sting but had no bearing on the 1st set. Finger felt better as the match went on and Fed didn't even take the pain killers the trainer left with him.. so not much to that story. The bigger story was Federer was slow to the corners and had poor movement.. very similar to his problem side to side in 2013. Hopefully an anomaly in the heat. He did have some amazing brilliance in the middle of 3rd and 4th sets.. Bolelli was crushing the ball from both sides in 1st and 2nd set though.. Brad Gilbert and even Andy Murray called it right though- said he was capable of that for spurts but always falls back to earth as most of the underdogs do.

Is it Seppi for him next?

Yes. Possibly Krygios after that, which would leave him with a virtually identical run-in to last year - 4R Tsonga/Krygios, QF Murray, SF Nadal.

HM Murdoch wrote:

Silver wrote: I think he'll win it now.

That will be my cue to find another interest.

If a player can be out for months and be short of full fitness but still win a slam, it's time to concede that tennis is dead on its derriere.

+1

I see the asterisks are out already. He only won the second round

kingraf wrote:I see the asterisks are out already. He only won the second round

Who gave asterisks?

Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins this Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

Minor correction - I believe that's what HM is suggesting.

Silver wrote:

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins this Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

Minor correction - I believe that's what HM is suggesting.

Yep, to be fair to HM not prospectively asterisking all slams if Nadal wins, just this one

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

Whether congratulatory or not it has no connection to asterix , no where down the line did HMM mention AO will be asterix if Rafa won, he just felt sad state of affairs that the competition level is very poor to allow part time ATP player at 28-29 to win a Grand Slam so easy.

DirectView2 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

Whether congratulatory or not it has no connection to asterix , no where down the line did HMM mention AO will be asterix if Rafa won, he just felt sad state of affairs that the competition level is very poor to allow part time ATP player at 28-29 to win a Grand Slam so easy.

Oh phew

Why people are talking about Nadal winning this tournament is beyond me.

It Must Be Love wrote:

DirectView2 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

Whether congratulatory or not it has no connection to asterix , no where down the line did HMM mention AO will be asterix if Rafa won, he just felt sad state of affairs that the competition level is very poor to allow part time ATP player at 28-29 to win a Grand Slam so easy.

Oh phew

I know the truth always sucks to hear , take it easy.

Found another interesting picture, nothing to hurt anybodies sentiment but the picture has got a lot of meaning in it.

Correction noted, Silver. I understood it as such, for whatever reason just didn't type it that way

Noted that now Nadal is a part timer, whereas when Hawkeye said it two years ago he definitely wasn't. The difference between that comeback and this one is beyond me.

These Nadal orbital medical treatments are causing:

1. Mega sweating/melting from Game 2 today,
2. Breathing hard,
3. Loosing hair quickly,
4. Looks fat/chubby.

Whats going on?

DirectView2 wrote:Found another interesting picture, nothing to hurt anybodies sentiment but the picture has got a lot of meaning in it.

I know you don't like Nadal, but suggesting he faked the injury in the Australian Open last year is a pretty desperate effort.
If you want I can provide the serving stats again, but I know his serve after his injury was recorded at less than 95mph. Not sure how closely you follow tennis, or your knowledge of the sport, but I can assure that is not Nadal's normal speed.

The idea that him winning the third set is some sort of proof that he wasn't injured strikes me as another fairly unintelligent position to hold, given anyone who watched that set could see Nadal was way below his best level, while Wawrinka totally mentally collapsed- before gathering himself to win the 4th set.

Imbl, Nadal played a little of the same tactic today, be real.

Its not necessary. It's not a direction worth pursuing. We saw the blister on here. And we know he had stem cell treatment on his back. If you want to believe he carved his hand open before the tournament and faked treatment at the end of the year to give him a sort of bookend of excuses, that is your perogative.

It Must Be Love wrote:

DirectView2 wrote:Found another interesting picture, nothing to hurt anybodies sentiment but the picture has got a lot of meaning in it.

I know you don't like Nadal, but suggesting he faked the injury in the Australian Open last year is a pretty desperate effort.
If you want I can provide the serving stats again, but I know his serve after his injury was recorded at less than 95mph. Not sure how closely you follow tennis, or your knowledge of the sport, but I can assure that is not Nadal's normal speed.

The idea that him winning the third set is some sort of proof that he wasn't injured strikes me as another fairly unintelligent position to hold, given anyone who watched that set could see Nadal was way below his best level, while Wawrinka totally mentally collapsed- before gathering himself to win the 4th set.

No, please don't.. you're boring enough as is it.



emancipator

Jahu wrote:Imbl, Nadal played a little of the same tactic today, be real.

Yep, he must have induced himself to vomit...

Nadal is a Cyborg, and does welcome any alpha and beta testing of treamtments on him

It Must Be Love wrote:

Jahu wrote:Imbl, Nadal played a little of the same tactic today, be real.

Yep, he must have induced himself to vomit...

Hahahaha, I can do that, reverse burping then reflux

Nadal once again outlasting his opponent.

Oops, I'm not supposed to say that am I?

Sorry, I meant Nadal played thrilling exciting tennis, hitting winners galore (despite managing just a measly 30 something winners in five sets), displaying virtuoso talent to beat his highly ranked, powerful (5ft 9, skinny as a rail) opponent.

Great performance



emancipator - guardian of the serve

Thats not normal Jahu... being able to burp yourself sick is something thatll give you serious problems when your older/soon

IMBL, show us the serving stats as an aside, and compare them to todays, I dont personally think tennis talk is boring

He actually hit 43 winners, not 30-something; get your facts right emanci...

temporary21 wrote:Thats not normal Jahu... being able to burp yourself sick is something thatll give you serious problems when your older/soon

Thanks for advice temp21, I think by now I have proved it that I have many serious problems, but Nadal seems with even more problems

People can trick themselves to believe all they want, but the facts always tell the truth. Smyczek was physically still great, he only had two bad games after the third set where Nadal pressured him He couldnt get the break back and soo he got edged out.

Still, the bloke was considered a nobody before this... hes a somebody now, can he build and give the USA a much needed boost

Still a prospect of a Fed Kyrgios match sounds inviting. Also Baghdatis and Dimitrov meet in round 3

temporary21 wrote:Still, the bloke was considered a nobody before this... hes a somebody now, can he build and give the USA a much needed boost

No, he's probably gonna remain on the fringe. There's a reason why he's ranked outside the top 100.

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

If the level of the tour is that Nadal can miss months with injury, enter a slam while still clearly short of his best, but still go on to win it with whatever form he is able to muster as the tournament progresses, then, yes, tennis is dead.

HM Murdoch wrote:

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

If the level of the tour is that Nadal can miss months with injury, enter a slam while still clearly short of his best, but still go on to win it with whatever form he is able to muster as the tournament progresses, then, yes, tennis is dead.

But that depends on the circumstances.
If Nadal manages to get back to his best and then wins, that would be understandable. But the whole point is that would be very unlikely.
If Nadal can't get back to his best or even close to that, which is 99% likely, then he's not going to win the tournament.

It Must Be Love wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

kingraf wrote:Tennis is Dead if Nadal wins a Slam is a congratulatory statement then?

If the level of the tour is that Nadal can miss months with injury, enter a slam while still clearly short of his best, but still go on to win it with whatever form he is able to muster as the tournament progresses, then, yes, tennis is dead.

But that depends on the circumstances.
If Nadal manages to get back to his best and then wins, that would be understandable. But the whole point is that would be very unlikely.
If Nadal can't get back to his best or even close to that, which is 99% likely, then he's not going to win the tournament.

If the Rafa of USO13 re-appears, fine.

If he goes all the way in 'safety mode' i.e. being awkward to play and tough in the big moments, then I'll applaud him and despair at the rest of the tour.

But isn't Nadal at his best always awkward to play and tough in the big moments ?

It Must Be Love wrote:But isn't Nadal at his best always awkward to play and tough in the big moments ?

Even Bolleli at his best was akward to play , Fed found it yesterday.

Jahu wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Thats not normal Jahu... being able to burp yourself sick is something thatll give you serious problems when your older/soon

Thanks for advice temp21, I think by now I have proved it that I have many serious problems, but Nadal seems with even more problems

Its only a part of your problem, making yourself sick.. the biggest part is when you make others

Wawrinka looking quite good.

Mannarino was up 4:0 in the third, had a MP at 5:4 on his own serve, then started TB 3-0 with two mini-breaks, yet lost the set and now has to win another one - but is already down 0:3.

I thought Nishi would cruise after he recovered from the dropped first set so I did not watch any of his match, but now he is just barely hanging in the fourth, so I think I will focus my attention there.

It looks like Mannarino retired; that perhaps explains the collapse in the third.

Nishi managed to come back in the 4th set and won TB to love.

Something up with Stanimal here, 5-5 in second set but hes almost rolling his serve here, physio incoming too

I step out for a couple of minutes before Nole's match and by the time I am back he is up 4:0 already.

Also, was Stan not a break up at 5:4? So presumably he was broken back? Injured you say?

Elbow or something, his serve is down 50 k's

6:0

I think Verdasco could be a very tricky opponent for Djokovic. When verdasco is in full flow, he is so dangerious and a handful for anybody. Who can forget his performance against nadal in oz (and murray that year too) as well as his performance in the 1st 2 sets vs Murray at Wimbledon.

You get the sense he loves the opportunity to play on the big stage and i think Novak will have his work cut out. If he does get through that, could well face Isner in round 4 followed by Raonic. On paper it seemed like Novak had the more favourable draw but I actually think its very tricky

Slasher, yes, Novak's 3R and 4R likely opponents are pretty tough as far as those rounds go.

Raonic is a tricky QF, simply because Novak is never at his best against big servers. But, in honesty, it could have been worse. I think Nishikori and Murray pose a greater threat.

And I'd also choose to face Nishi or Stan rather than Rafa or Andy for a SF.

So, Novak's draw could be easier, but could also be much worse!

Yeah, lets all get scared about Djoko and how hard he has got it so far and in next 2 rounds.

No tricks anywhere to be seen, he is going into the Final.

Jahu wrote:Yeah, lets all get scared about Djoko and how hard he has got it so far and in next 2 rounds.

No tricks anywhere to be seen, he is going into the Final.

If it were Bo3, I'd be seriously worried about a route through Isner and Raonic.

Bo5, I'm not quite so concerned. I imagine there will be periods where Novak moans and looks to the heavens at the sheer injustice of facing such serves, but if he concedes 3 sets to it then he's not playing well enough to win anyway.

Match of the tournament so far has to be Monfils V Janowicz. Great stuff with the pair of them going head-to-head for five sets. It had it all - great serving, great rallies, a wide arrange of shots, great comebacks and for me the right winner. Janowicz played great stuff and on this form where he was very controlled at times then he could go far here.

That's a good result for Janowicz, whose star has waned over the last year or so.

In my mind, the pair occupied similar places in the rankings but while Monfils is up at #19, Janowicz is down to #44.

And he has a very winnable match against Lopez next, with the probable Raonic match to follow. How tired is he, though?

Congrats to Novak for tying Sampras at #5 on the AO wins list, a very creditable 45 three more and he hops to third with Lendl and Agassi.