Monte Carlo Masters

First topic message reminder :

The draw is out for the third Masters tournament of the year:
http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2016/410/mds.pdf

Quarter finals if the top 8 seeds make it through:
Djokovic - Ferrer
Federer - Tsonga
Wawrinka - Nadal
Berdych - Murray

Federer opens against Bellucci or Garcia Lopez then likely Bautista Agut to get to the quarters. Not too bad a test after 2 months off.

Nadal has a really tough draw - probably R2 Rosol, R3 Thiem, QF Wawrinka (or Simon/Dimitrov), SF Murray (or Berdych/Raonic). If he can make it through that lot to the final, perhaps he will have the form to beat Djokovic there.

temporary21 wrote:If you'll excuse me. I need to get a cup of tea and make fun of the Irish cause they're the ones that can take a joke...

They are good for a joke. Stereotypes I mean, not the Irish

Whilst you are away I'll get BB started on the Jeermans.

The English are probably the most stereotyped people - and there are various different stereotypes of them in use.  Just ask Mel Gibson and Emily Thornberry.

Mel Gibson. The most patriotic scot ever to have lived

Not watching Nadal but judging from the score updates this is all about whether he can keep saving break points.

Thiem is 1/13 on break points.

It's good grit from Nadal, but being really honest it's a sign of change. I remember when Nadal used to go through a clay season and hardly be threatened for a set.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I love Paire. There's something quintessentially French about him. Has the most lovely BH which he can do anything with, capable of going huge with the FH too, and is more than a little crazy. Also the only player on tour who complains more than Murray does. Complete maverick.

I love the way that most of the French lads are very French; Fognini is outstandingly Italian, Murray is the stereotypical Scot. Even Federer fits the Swiss image; clean, neat, urbane, multilingual.

They can stick their political correctness up their *****, stereotypes work and prejudice is an evolved trait for survival, it's just not to be used for wrong.

Stereotypical Scots - so he is inventive, industrious and gutsy. Well said BB.

Exactly what I meant.

And for the narrow-minded, pc-programmed out there, does anyone really imagine Fabio Fognini being German?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Aren't Swiss stereotypically cowardly opting out of wars like they have? BB has opened a whole can of worms here.

Not cowardly, they just somehow convince everyone they're exempt. I guess because all the World leaders had hidden their money there so didn't want to mess that up.

temporary21 wrote:your stereotyping of murray and Scottish people proving why judging people with broad swipes and prejudice does not actually work at all. It's what lazy people do

Your assumption over what stereotype I was applying does not work at all. It's what lazy people do.

Thiem now 1/16.

If he doesn't win this set, he might fold quickly.

15/16 bps saved. Epic.

2/17. GAME ON!!!

good bounce back from Thiem, feared the loss of a set he really should have won would hit him hard.

To be fair, Nadal played the BPs very well, generally being more aggressive and forcing Thiem back, but Thiem made bad errors on at least 3 or 4 of them. Then of course the DF on set point.

Sounds like a good match. Shame I'm stuck on a train really. It's soo enthrallinh it's pushed us all back to topic after getting derailed. How many bp's has rafa had?

That is a very good win for Rafa and surely a big morale booster. Thiem is on a roll at present and good on clay so a lot of positives for Rafa to take out of this.

An hour left. Maybe Roger will be kind and not beat rba too fast

Well as I suspected yesterday's hero Jiri Vesely was soundly beaten today 6-1 6-2 by Gael Monfils.

Good for is monf fans though. I wanna see this man make a run at some big tournies. (Psst RG psst)

Very smooth by Federer.

In just a few months he qualifies for the seniors tour. I imagine there's not a huge appetite amongst the guys for him to join them just yet.

Kobe was still going well at the age of 37. If you still have the interest the mid thirties don't mean what they used to.

Might be back to see ol Jo play

bogbrush wrote:It's good grit from Nadal, but being really honest it's a sign of change. I remember when Nadal used to go through a clay season and hardly be threatened for a set.

Presumably you used to spend all your time cowering behind the sofa during all of the FeDal RG finals (Not counting 2008 obviously...) Rafa was like a cat with a mouse...

temporary21 wrote:Kobe was still going well at the age of 37. If you still have the interest the mid thirties don't mean what they used to.

Might be back to see ol Jo play

Yeah, you just have to be interested. Nothing to it.

hawkeye wrote:

bogbrush wrote:It's good grit from Nadal, but being really honest it's a sign of change. I remember when Nadal used to go through a clay season and hardly be threatened for a set.

Presumably you used to spend all your time cowering behind the sofa during all of the FeDal RG finals (Not counting 2008 obviously...) Rafa was like a cat with a mouse...

Shhh, don't cry.

bogbrush wrote:Very smooth by Federer.

In just a few months he qualifies for the seniors tour. I imagine there's not a huge appetite amongst the guys for him to join them just yet.

The top 100 is chocker block with players that could be on the senior tour. They will need to up the age on the genuine "seniors" tour...

Haddie-nuff wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:But we are not talking about a Djokovic loss we are talking of a Vesley win.. we are forever debating who amongst the young guns coming through are showing any promise of being able to rattle the cages of those at the top.. when we find a 21yr old, rank 55, who can actually knock the number one off his pedestal you are trying to find reasons why Novak lost.. does it not come into your thinking that this lad might, just might, for one moment have found the answer ..I believe he did.  Dominic Thiem is playing Rafa tomorrow no one will be surprised if he beats Rafa.. are we to assume then that Rafa is still playing badly or that Thiem is fulfilling his promise.  Why are you running away LF  have the courage of your conviction

The problem with youn'guns is lack of consistency.

Vesley is 4/8 for the year and 44/62 career. Thiem is 24/6 for the year, and much more consistent. I also like Thiem (and Goffin, too). He had Djokovic in trouble in Miami too.

The current Top 4 are slowly walking away into the Sunset (perhaps except Djokovic), so it is a surprise. It is bound to happen, but Nishikori or Raonic seem better candidates to cause such upsets.

I would love to see some young blood provide these stalwarts (warts?) a run for their money.

You really are missing the point arnt you... it matters not if he goes on to win a major at this stage .. what he has done is he has had the b@lls to take his game to Novak.. Novak did not dictate that match as he has done so often in the past.. he was made to play Vesleys game.
And credit to the lad he stuck with his own play throughout.. sadly all others have been drawn in and allowed Novak to dominate (including Rafa)Dolgopolov first showed how to keep Novak guessing and moving him around.. ditto Vesley ... Soderling first showed how to beat Rafa.. and the others followed. As I say there will not be a coach on tour that does not watch yesterdays match.  

Vesley did a 1-2 against La Monf. This is what I meant by inconsistency. They should also watch the match from today and see why the young ones are failing miserably.

Just been watching some of the Rafa-Thiem highlights. Bruising, physical game with some great rallies. Rafa looked good and seemed to be moving well.

hawkeye wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Very smooth by Federer.

In just a few months he qualifies for the seniors tour. I imagine there's not a huge appetite amongst the guys for him to join them just yet.

The top 100 is chocker block with players that could be on the senior tour. They will need to up the age on the genuine "seniors" tour...

And so many of them in the top 3.

Granollers beats Goffin.

That's rubbish by Goffin, he's taking his time amounting to anything very interesting.

bogbrush wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Kobe was still going well at the age of 37. If you still have the interest the mid thirties don't mean what they used to.

Might be back to see ol Jo play

Yeah, you just have to be interested. Nothing to it.

The top two 100m runners last year are 29 and 34;
The top two footballers in the world are 28 and 31;
Nick Matthew is world number 3 at squash aged nearly 36.

Federer remaining close to his peak at 34 is impressive but it's consistent with what we are seeing across a lot of sports.

temporary21 wrote:Kobe was still going well at the age of 37. If you still have the interest the mid thirties don't mean what they used to.

Might be back to see ol Jo play

Well is a relative term I suppose. If ball had a ranking system Kobe would be 50-75 over the last two years and that might be being kind

Well without being dramatic...

Its not like being near the top of your game in the mid thirties is easy, but with modern sports science and focus on conditioning, its not as hard, or as rare as it used to be.

When Jimmy kept going it was incredible because he really hadnt conditioned his body well enough over his 20's. His body was being propped up by sheer will, and hes suffered for it a lot now hes older sadly.

If you can keep up an interest to adapt and keep practicing, its not miraculous nowadays to keep going to near 40. Haas is about to have his 9th surgery (!) in rep for another comeback at 38, that would never have been doable twenty years ago.

In any case this focus on age is weird, hes still a great player, playing great stuff, and is actually still a young guy in the grand scheme. This is no OAP were talking about

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:But we are not talking about a Djokovic loss we are talking of a Vesley win.. we are forever debating who amongst the young guns coming through are showing any promise of being able to rattle the cages of those at the top.. when we find a 21yr old, rank 55, who can actually knock the number one off his pedestal you are trying to find reasons why Novak lost.. does it not come into your thinking that this lad might, just might, for one moment have found the answer ..I believe he did.  Dominic Thiem is playing Rafa tomorrow no one will be surprised if he beats Rafa.. are we to assume then that Rafa is still playing badly or that Thiem is fulfilling his promise.  Why are you running away LF  have the courage of your conviction

The problem with youn'guns is lack of consistency.

Vesley is 4/8 for the year and 44/62 career. Thiem is 24/6 for the year, and much more consistent. I also like Thiem (and Goffin, too). He had Djokovic in trouble in Miami too.

The current Top 4 are slowly walking away into the Sunset (perhaps except Djokovic), so it is a surprise. It is bound to happen, but Nishikori or Raonic seem better candidates to cause such upsets.

I would love to see some young blood provide these stalwarts (warts?) a run for their money.

You really are missing the point arnt you... it matters not if he goes on to win a major at this stage .. what he has done is he has had the b@lls to take his game to Novak.. Novak did not dictate that match as he has done so often in the past.. he was made to play Vesleys game.
And credit to the lad he stuck with his own play throughout.. sadly all others have been drawn in and allowed Novak to dominate (including Rafa)Dolgopolov first showed how to keep Novak guessing and moving him around.. ditto Vesley ... Soderling first showed how to beat Rafa.. and the others followed. As I say there will not be a coach on tour that does not watch yesterdays match.  

Vesley did a 1-2 against La Monf. This is what I meant by inconsistency. They should also watch the match from today and see why the young ones are failing miserably.

LF you are still not getting my drift but Im not sure I want to go over it again.
Ill just watch this space and see if any of the coaches on tour have picked it up. may not be tomorrow but lets wait and see
..I don't give a damn how he played Montfils..different match up

kingraf wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Kobe was still going well at the age of 37. If you still have the interest the mid thirties don't mean what they used to.

Might be back to see ol Jo play

Well is a relative term I suppose. If ball had a ranking system Kobe would be 50-75 over the last two years and that might be being kind

NBA players, if knees hold out, have long been able to play well in their mid 30's. Same with NFL players. Modern tech might have gotten a current NFL QB to 38-40 for the ultra elite like Brady or Manning vs. 35-37 for the elite 80's players like Montana, Elway- but it hasn't created a huge difference. Comparing sports where superstars in the 1960's until present have been able to play at or near peak in their 30's vs tennis where except for an anomaly here and there- the superstars were finished or near retirement in their upper 20's is pure nonsense. Just an attempt to diminish what Federer is pulling off. No one in modern tennis- not Conners or Agassi has played at this level (especially consistently) as Federer has. To try and say it's the new norm is ridiculous as will be proven when we see Djokovic, Nadal and Murray at 34

Modern nutrition, training, techniques has done great things for all sports, but these players are also faced with pressures, time consuming outside interests and responsibilities that past stars weren't. Their competition is more professional and dedicated. No longer can a Conners show up at a tournament and play 3 matches against college level players or pickups out of the local area before playing a real pro. It's serious from start to finish for the modern tour. That wears down anyone.

Maybe if his age wasn't constantly brought up to be used as an excuse to make wins not count against him it wouldnt matter so much...

When he wins, its considered amazing what hes doing at his age. Which it IS.

but when he loses, its just "oh hes old it doesn't count anymore, people should be beating him at his age" which it ISNT. It cant be both.

To often it been used to disregard others fine wins against a great player. Whoever beats him this week, if indeed anyone does his age will have done very well.

His age doesnt matter, its an obsession, its how he plays that matters.

temporary21 wrote:Maybe if his age wasn't constantly brought up to be used as an excuse to make wins not count against him it wouldnt matter so much...

When he wins, its considered amazing what hes doing at his age. Which it IS.

but when he loses, its just "oh hes old it doesn't count anymore, people should be beating him at his age" which it ISNT. It cant be both.

To often it been used to disregard others fine wins against a great player. Whoever beats him this week, if indeed anyone does his age will have done very well.

His age doesnt matter, its an obsession, its how he plays that matters.

of course his age matters and it can still factor into losses even if he is playing amazing for his age. The two sides can coexist. There are extremes to each side that make it a problem- just like some make it a massive excuse to explain away a loss, others use it as a bizarre way to diminish how good he was in his prime when he loses.

The fact is that he is an extreme anomaly- even now with modern tech- to 1. not be burnt out, 2. be playing at this level when every human being, every athlete has lost some ability. At the same time- he isn't as consistent and over a long tournament- the age in his legs can catch up to him. If we talk about it in a fair and even way- it's all very reasonable. Of course his fans celebrate his wins with a wow, and moan his losses with an excuse.. just like Nadal fans, just like Djokovic fans.

Except that never happens sadly...

I still maintain that a world class, successful mid thirties athlete isnt as superhuman an anomaly as people think. Its also gonna get common real soon, weve already seen guys peaking close to thirty rather than 25 a lot more in tennis these days

Thing is, I watch him play. His play is still better than most on tour, beating him, specifically breaking his serve, is still one of the toughest things in tennis and an achievement worthy of not being given the cursed *.

He cant be amazing one day, and an old man nearing the seniors tour who only lost because he got tired, based on who hes facing. It would be nice if admiring it was all people did, but there always an angle to it...

impressive from Murray this morning. His return of serve has been a bit dodgy this week but today it was back to its excellent best, and he was much better as a result. Dispatches Raonic 6-2 6-0 and moves into the semis.

Murray has just beaten Raonic two and love. With a score like that, I wonder whether the Canadian was injured. Anybody see the match?

watched the second set. Didn't seem injured, didn't get the trainer on or anything and his movement looked fine. Think it was a case of Murray being excellent for once, his return particularly sharp (Raonic hit I think two unreturned serves all set). Raonic wasn't great, certainly, but from what I saw that was mostly because Murray didn't let him settle, aggressing him from the off in most rallies.

Thanks M for Ch. Good win, in that case. Murray will have to play either Stan or Rafa in the semi. Bit of a turn round today after Andy's struggle in the first two matches.

Raonic was probably a little tanked, he won a 3rd set tb the day before and had leg trouble. By most accounts Andy was brilliant too though.

This is a good tourny for the rest of the season competition wise. Federer looks sharp, Gael Monfils looks focused, Rafa and Andy have found a bit of form, and with Novak going early, theres a faint light of hope that he wont sweep the season easily.

Nadal looking pretty good so far. Wawrinka though has been woeful, coughing up more than 15 UEs as Nadal looks set to take the set 6-1.

Where HAS stan gone lately? Hopefully hell find some focus before RG. Holding serve in this next set would be a nice start

Better from Wawrinka, Nadal leaving his returns a little short and that gives him the opportunity to blast away a few winners and hold serve. Needed that.

but next game hes nowhere again...
credit to rafa tbf, some real power today and not missing much

Come on Stan, crush him.

What the fX!!!!@@@ is going on with Andy. Where did this performance come from, arguably his best since he last beat Raonic

I used to love the unpredictability of Agassi (and Conners to a degree) as you often didn't know which version would turn up on court. Even though it's torture for a fan, it's great to see Andy following suit!!

I think it's a clear case of him not properly respecting the lesser players, probably at a subconscious level / or not liking playing against those he's not faced often. His career is littered with these bizarre early round performances, leading to great ones later

You never know, maybe we'll get Fed and Andy playing at last, on the dirt

Lets hope so, no one cares for Nadal and Djoko on MC.

Lets hope so, no one cares for Nadal and Djoko on MC.

temporary21 wrote:Raonic was probably a little tanked, he won a 3rd set tb the day before and had leg trouble. .

Raonic just has to learn to manage these niggles, but I fear he's another Cilic / Del Potro (although not as bad) where his big frame is always going to cause problems. We had this at the Aussie Open, when he got the trainer and then all the sympathy and an excuse for the loss. Quite frankly Roger and Andy would probably have toughed it out (not saying that's correct) i.e. we rarely know that they have niggles

There's also a very good reason why there are very few players above 6' 4" who regularly win these Masters or Slams. It's defying the laws of gravity, to think that the tallest players have enough durability to achieve the very best wins