China Open / Shanghai Masters

First topic message reminder :

Is anyone watching any Tennis?

Anyway this is turning into a half decent tournament although the usual suspects are generally providing the entertainment

We're at the QF stage, where both Edmund and Zverev have just been beaten - but showed enough to remind us that they could be genuine slam contenders in a few years

Be interesting to see how Rafa competes as he'll have to beat Dimi, probably Raonic and probably Murray to win the event - so if he does, then as some of us suspect there may be a good 2017 for him

Today (Friday) the Rafa / Dimi clash looks to be worth watching, it won't start before 1430hrs our time

Update!!!

We've now moved on to the penultimate Masters of the year, with both Novak and Andy actually at the same event!!

Lol my jinxing skills in full flow today. When I posted my last post Monfils was a set and a double break up and Stan was looking comfortable early on. So the big 2 now have the following routes to the final:

Novak

Zverev (Mischa not Alex!)
Tsonga or RBA

Andy

Goffin
Simon or Sock

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Managed to watch the match for a change. Strong performance from Murray, extremely solid from the back of the court (felt like Pouille had to hit a clean winner to win the point), and stepped up powerfully whenever he had the opportunity. Pouille will get a feel for the size of the gap between his level and that of the very top players.

Pouille has now won 7 games in four sets against Andy this year and 3 points in four sets against Andy's first serve.

Draw has really opened up for Murray and Djokovic. Looking forward to seeing them play, feels like ages since they've clashed -considering they met so often in finals at the beginning of the year. Should give us a bit of an indicator for the rest of 2016.

As a sidenote Murray is now on the cusp of breaking into the top twenty for most ATP match wins in history since formation of ATP. A run to the title should take him past Lleyton Hewitt (20th on 616 wins)

So there were two Zverev's getting to the third round. 19 year old Alexander was defeated in the third round (R16) while older brother 29 year old Mischa, who had to go through qualifiers to get into this tournament, is through to the quarter-finals.

Astonishing how a seemingly tough draw (Murray's) opens up. He'll not have to face Monfils nor Raonic now.

Or indeed Wawrinka. Surprised by the Monfils result, when last I checked Monfils had just gone 4-1 up in the second set with a double break. What happened? Monfils had called for the trainer earlier on, so that may have been an issue?

Quite remarkable how much Murray's draw opened up today: from facing Monfils and then Wawrinka/Raonic to facing Goffin and then Sock/Simon. Djokovic of course already had a bit of a cakewalk...

M for C. Yeah, I meant to say Wawrinka, knowing he was out as well. Wonder if someone is going to come with a late run and qualify for the O2?

It is quite stunning how flaky Stan is. Sure he has won three slams but in total only 15 titles - that is a disappointing return and displays just how often he 'goes away' in matches.

Djokovic to win this final set 6-0 or 6-1?

Guest82 wrote:Djokovic to win this final set 6-0 or 6-1?

Not quite but mentally Novak was all over the place. Grinning after errors, gesticulating, waving at people in the crowd and missing sitters but he got the job done. Evidently though his mind is elsewhere.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Guest82 wrote:Djokovic to win this final set 6-0 or 6-1?

Not quite but mentally Novak was all over the place. Grinning after errors, gesticulating, waving at people in the crowd and missing sitters but he got the job done. Evidently though his mind is elsewhere.

I'll be very surprised if Murray doesn't win this tournament.

Guest82 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Guest82 wrote:Djokovic to win this final set 6-0 or 6-1?

Not quite but mentally Novak was all over the place. Grinning after errors, gesticulating, waving at people in the crowd and missing sitters but he got the job done. Evidently though his mind is elsewhere.

I'll be very surprised if Murray doesn't win this tournament.

Well he is in the form needed. Burn out is the only thing I see depriving him.

In beating Steve Johnson, Lucas Pouille and Goffin, Andy has dropped just 11 games that is scary as neither of those players are mugs and two of them are still in the race for the WTF.

Murray destroys Goffin 6-2 6-2.

If Murray meets with Djokovic, one would think the only way Murray would lose would be due to psychology. Monfils led the way in this at the US Open semi-final.

So Murray will play Simon in the SF, after the latter overcomes Sock in a third set TB. Sock with a few too many errors on the big points.

Murray was pretty impressive again today, Goffin didn't really do much wrong, similar to Pouille yesterday, but was just outclassed. Still yet to win a set against Murray.

Simon in the SF... in terms of match up it probably doesn't get any easier for Andy who will play a poorer version of himself.

Simon is a reasonably tough match up for Andy. He returns well, mixes up pace and gets a lot of balls back in play. If Andy is a bit off he can cause him problems. 

Fine win for Novak yesterday in the end. He's still favourite for the title here. Anyone remember last year when Andy looked awesome but only got 4 games against Novak?

Born Slippy wrote:Simon is a reasonably tough match up for Andy. He returns well, mixes up pace and gets a lot of balls back in play. If Andy is a bit off he can cause him problems. 

Fine win for Novak yesterday in the end. He's still favourite for the title here. Anyone remember last year when Andy looked awesome but only got 4 games against Novak?

I'd agree with you about Simon match-up but the only thing fine about Novak was that he won. He looked off the pace and second best for long spells against a qualifier and only won the match at the death.

Djokovic with more mental issues today. He trails Bautista Agut 6-4 3-2 and has destroyed one racket and one shirt now.

Born Slippy wrote:Fine win for Novak yesterday in the end. He's still favourite for the title here. Anyone remember last year when Andy looked awesome but only got 4 games against Novak?

But Novak's not playing as well as this time last year and Murray is playing better than a year ago.

No excuses from me. This is a match (if it happens) that Andy should be winning. Previously, Novak's game was so superior to everyone else's that a Murray defeat could be explained. Now it would have to purely psychological, as if Andy cannot be a player constantly having the type of prolonged match dips Novak is having, then it could be argued he never will

Of course Novak will be back. But Andy must make hay while the sun shines

banbrotam wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:Fine win for Novak yesterday in the end. He's still favourite for the title here. Anyone remember last year when Andy looked awesome but only got 4 games against Novak?

But Novak's not playing as well as this time last year and Murray is playing better than a year ago.

No excuses from me. This is a match (if it happens) that Andy should be winning. Previously, Novak's game was so superior to everyone else's that a Murray defeat could be explained. Now it would have to purely psychological, as if Andy cannot be a player constantly having the type of prolonged match dips Novak is having, then it could be argued he never will

Of course Novak will be back. But Andy must make hay while the sun shines

Fully agree.

Bautista-Agut beats Djokovic 6-4 6-4 to reach his first Masters1000 Final. It keeps the Spaniards faint hopes alive of reaching the WTF whilst the defeat keeps question marks hanging over Novak.

Fabulous match I thought. Novak wasn't terrible and saved three match points with stunning tennis. However, there were just a few too many errors at crucial points. 

Will be funny if we get Simon v RBA in a Masters final. Make no mistake though, RBA is in stunning form and will pose a real challenge whoever he faces in the final.

Born Slippy wrote:Fabulous match I thought. Novak wasn't terrible and saved three match points with stunning tennis. However, there were just a few too many errors at crucial points. 

Will be funny if we get Simon v RBA in a Masters final. Make no mistake though, RBA is in stunning form and will pose a real challenge whoever he faces in the final.

I'll agree Novak was far more stable mentally today (even though he smashed a racket and wripped a shirt) and his game was more consistent. Still though not at the level we expect of him but credit to Bautista-Agut. He held himself together and played some great tennis to seal the win.

I'm not massively surprised by today's results. Djokovic hasn't been in great form, and RBA is exactly the sort of player sho could take advantage of that. RBA and Murray have only met twice before, somewhat surprisingly considering RBA's consistency in reaching R3/R4 of events (this was his sixth meeting with Djokovic), and never on hard (one on clay, one on grass); Murray has won both previous encounters without dropping a set.

Crazy point to end a crazy set.

Cat and mouse stuff in that set, but, crucially, Murray showing a little more potential as the cat.

Murray wins his ninth match on the bounce in straight sets to reach the Shanghai Masters Final. Impressive stuff. Like the heavy hitting and levels of aggression. Keep it up Andy.

Is Lendl with Murray this tournament? Was Becker with Djokovic?

Nore Staat wrote:Is Lendl with Murray this tournament?  Was Becker with Djokovic?

No and no.

Murray has never won the end of year ATP World Tour Final. It would be great for Murray to add that to his collection. Nadal has never won it. Post French Open 2016, Murray looks to be coming out as the strongest player. Let's hope he has a good "winter". The Australian Open has to be a realistic target after five runner up positions.

Main goals for Andy Murray now have to be to get the No.1 spot at some time in his career, win the Australian and French Open to complete the career Grand Slam and win the WTF.

Entering a weak era in the current era. Federer injured and heavily faded. Nadal worst off than Federer. And now Djokovic's body is also breaking down as does it seems his mind. Murray isn't a worthy world number 1. Getting there because the best players are injured doesn't prove anything.

Jermaine2015 wrote:... Murray isn't a worthy world number 1. ...

Murray isn't number 1, he is number 2. If and when he becomes number 1 he will be number 1. These things are not arguable - they are simple facts based on who gains the most points. It is how it has always been. For example 2+2 = 4. This is unarguable. Whether 2+2 is a weak era 4 or a strong era 4 is irrelevant. It simply is. 2+2 is 4. Like Murray will be number 1 if he becomes number 1. I am thinking of writing a book about it. I'll dedicate it to you.

Actually I agree with first part of Jermaine's post - we are entering a 'weak' era with no dominant form player (how different it was 6 months ago!).  However, whilst there have been numerous non-slam winning number 1s in the womens' game this isn't the case in the mens' game, and if Murray reaches number 1 it will be a richly deserved accolade.

Andy Roddick, hardly the most dominant player of his generation, nevertheless reached number 1 briefly in that transitional year, 2003, and deserved it, on account of his great summer on the American hardcourts that year.

Can any number crunchers here work out when Murray can realistically reach number 1 if he keeps reaching latter stages of tournaments?  Also, is anyone keeping tabs on the race for end of year ATP championships in London?  Are any of the current top 8 at risk of not competing due to injury (maybe Monfils)?

If Murray does get to number 1 it will also be a question of how many "weeks" he can remain at number 1.  One week at number 1 is still good but four weeks at number 1 is better and so forth.

Top ten: weeks at number one
1. Roger Federer: 302
2. Pete Sampras: 286
3. Ivan Lendl: 270
4. Jimmy Connors: 268
5. Novak Djokovic: 220 *
6. John McEnroe: 170
7. Rafael Nadal: 141
8. Björn Borg: 109
9. Andre Agassi: 101
10. Lleyton Hewitt: 80
xx. Andy Murray: 0

As I understand it Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Raonic and Nishikori are all now guaranteed a spot at the WTF although Nishi does have an on-going shoulder injury but should not prevent him lining up in London. Monfils, Nadal and Thiem in 6th, 7th and 8th all have work to do to seal their spot at the 02. Any of Berdych, Goffin,Cilic, Kyrgios and Bautista Agut I'd say are still in with a chance of getting into the top eight.

As for how soon Murray could (mathematically) surpass Djokovic well I would probably say after the WTF. If Murray wins tomorrow then the points race will look like this:-

Djokovic 12,900
Murray 10,750

Murray next heads to Vienna for an ATP500 tournament which he never played last year so a win there would theoretically earn him 500 points but presume there will be points elsewhere that he will drop. Djokovic has opted out of Vienna so after Vienna (presuming no points drop off for Murray or Djokovic as well which is unlikely) would look like this:-

Djokovic 12,900
Murray 11,250

Not sure of any more tournaments the players are playing in aside from the Paris Masters 1000. Djokovic is defending 1000 points as champion there and Murray is defending 600 (as runner-up from last year). Even if Murray won in Paris (adding 400 points to his total) and Djokovic exited early then they would head to the 02 with scores something like this:-

Djokovic 12,910
Murray 11,750

Now at the WTF Djokovic is defending champion so has full points to defend whilst Murray has precious little to defend so there would be a chance that if Murray won the WTF he'd take No.1 in the world but needs everything to fall in his favour for that to happen. More likely, Djoko could be overtaken early next year.

Please note the above is very rough estimates.

If Andy wins tomorrow, wins Vienna and wins Paris then he will be number 1 on 7 November unless Novak is runner up in Paris (assuming Novak doesn't take any late wild cards into earlier events). The reason for this is because WTF points drop on 7 November but the tournament only starts the following week, so Novak cannot defend them in time. 

Obviously, that could only then be a one week stay depending on results at the O2 the following week.

Unlikely that will happen though. I don't think Andy has ever won 4 titles in a row and Paris doesn't usually suit him - he's never won there.

Nore Staat wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:... Murray isn't a worthy world number 1. ...

Murray isn't number 1, he is number 2.  If and when he becomes number 1 he will be number 1.  These things are not arguable - they are simple facts based on who gains the most points.  It is how it has always been.  For example 2+2 = 4.  This is unarguable.  Whether 2+2 is a weak era 4 or a strong era 4 is irrelevant.  It simply is.  2+2 is 4.  Like Murray will be number 1 if he becomes number 1.  I am thinking of writing a book about it.  I'll dedicate it to you.

Murray getting to #1 is only due to Djokovic's downturn in form since his wrist injury. Let's look back to when Djokovic superseded Nadal, Djokovic beat the suffering out of the legendary Spanish for a 4 month period. Djokovic beat Nadal on HC, grass and clay. He took the #1 from Nadal.

Now roll forward to Murray, aside from a lucky win at Rome, Djokovic has been destroying Murray for fun. Now Djokovic's body is failing him, Murray's trying to luck out. Andy Murray is essentially Nico Rosberg...

Jermaine2015 wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:... Murray isn't a worthy world number 1. ...

Murray isn't number 1, he is number 2.  If and when he becomes number 1 he will be number 1.  These things are not arguable - they are simple facts based on who gains the most points.  It is how it has always been.  For example 2+2 = 4.  This is unarguable.  Whether 2+2 is a weak era 4 or a strong era 4 is irrelevant.  It simply is.  2+2 is 4.  Like Murray will be number 1 if he becomes number 1.  I am thinking of writing a book about it.  I'll dedicate it to you.

Murray getting to #1 is only due to Djokovic's downturn in form since his wrist injury. Let's look back to when Djokovic superseded Nadal, Djokovic beat the suffering out of the legendary Spanish for a 4 month period. Djokovic beat Nadal on HC, grass and clay. He took the #1 from Nadal.

Now roll forward to Murray, aside from a lucky win at Rome, Djokovic has been destroying Murray for fun. Now Djokovic's body is failing him, Murray's trying to luck out. Andy Murray is essentially Nico Rosberg...

I am not going to argue with you.  

Djokovic is "already" better than Murray.  

I don't think Murray at the end of his career will have a higher tally of slams and titles than Djokovic, nor will he have a longer period at number one.  

But someone has to replace Djokovic at some point as number one and that person is most likely to be Murray.  And if Murray does get to number one the question will be how long can he sustain it before someone else takes over - whether that be a resurgent Djokovic or someone else.  That said Djokovic still tops the pile with two grand slam tournaments for this year and it is still speculation as to whether Murray will get to number one.  If however Murray does get to number one he is certainly better than some others who previously got to number one.  As Murray himself admits his career has coincided with all time great players: Roger Federer (17 slams 6 World Tour Final titles), Rafael Nadal (14 slams, king of clay), Novak Djokovic (12 slams 5 WTF titles).   Murray is not an all time great player but he is a great player.

Nore Staat wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:... Murray isn't a worthy world number 1. ...

Murray isn't number 1, he is number 2.  If and when he becomes number 1 he will be number 1.  These things are not arguable - they are simple facts based on who gains the most points.  It is how it has always been.  For example 2+2 = 4.  This is unarguable.  Whether 2+2 is a weak era 4 or a strong era 4 is irrelevant.  It simply is.  2+2 is 4.  Like Murray will be number 1 if he becomes number 1.  I am thinking of writing a book about it.  I'll dedicate it to you.

Murray getting to #1 is only due to Djokovic's downturn in form since his wrist injury. Let's look back to when Djokovic superseded Nadal, Djokovic beat the suffering out of the legendary Spanish for a 4 month period. Djokovic beat Nadal on HC, grass and clay. He took the #1 from Nadal.

Now roll forward to Murray, aside from a lucky win at Rome, Djokovic has been destroying Murray for fun. Now Djokovic's body is failing him, Murray's trying to luck out. Andy Murray is essentially Nico Rosberg...

I am not going to argue with you.  

Djokovic is "already" better than Murray.  

I don't think Murray at the end of his career will have a higher tally of slams and titles than Djokovic, nor will he have a longer period at number one.  

But someone has to replace Djokovic at some point as number one and that person is most likely to be Murray.  And if Murray does get to number one the question will be how long can he sustain it before someone else takes over - whether that be a resurgent Djokovic or someone else.  That said Djokovic still tops the pile with two grand slam tournaments for this year and it is still speculation as to whether Murray will get to number one.  If however Murray does get to number one he is certainly better than some others who previously got to number one.  As Murray himself admits his career has coincided with all time great players: Roger Federer (17 slams 6 World Tour Final titles), Rafael Nadal (14 slams, king of clay), Novak Djokovic (12 slams 5 WTF titles).   Murray is not an all time great player but he is a great player.

I agree

Jermaine2015 wrote: Murray isn't a worthy world number 1.

Hmm what tosh.

Previous world No.1's in the last 20 years:-

Juan Carlos Ferrero 1 slam win, 16 career titles. 479 ATP match wins (64.64% win rate) reached world No 1.

Andy Roddick 1 slam win, 32 career titles, 612 ATP match wins (74.18% win rate) reached world No 1.

Lleyton Hewitt 2 slam wins, 30 career titles, 616 ATP match wins (70.16% win rate) reached world No 1.

All of the above have inferior career resumes to Murray whose stats beats every one of those above.

Andy Murray 3 slam wins (and counting), 40 career titles (and counting), 616 ATP match wins (77.87% win rate). I rest my case.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote: Murray isn't a worthy world number 1.

Hmm what tosh.

Previous world No.1's in the last 20 years:-

Juan Carlos Ferrero 1 slam win, 16 career titles. 479 ATP match wins (64.64% win rate) reached world No 1.

Andy Roddick 1 slam win, 32 career titles, 612 ATP match wins (74.18% win rate) reached world No 1.

Lleyton Hewitt 2 slam wins, 30 career titles, 616 ATP match wins (70.16% win rate) reached world No 1.

All of the above have inferior career resumes to Murray whose stats beats every one of those above.

Andy Murray 3 slam wins (and counting), 40 career titles (and counting), 616 ATP match wins (77.87% win rate). I rest my case.

'Previous world #1 players' aren't relevant in Murray's case.

In this current era Nadal took the #1 from Federer(general consensus GOAT), IIRC Nadal won like 7 straight events to finally superpass Federer.

Djokovic in turn basically did the same against Nadal to take the #1 ranking.

In Murray's case it's Djokovic's injury that's gifting Murray the #1 ranking.

Big difference.

The art of getting to No 1 is personal consistency compared to the opposition. If Murray gets that now it is because he will have been the most consistent player in the world as (if it happens before the end of the year) it will surely mean he will have had to have won five titles back-to-back. There is no one else in men's world tennis capable of that at the moment so if Murray gets top No 1 it will be merited. And do you think there will be anyone (with a modicum of tennis knowledge within the sport) that will spout what you are spouting? No.

CaledonianCraig wrote:The art of getting to No 1 is personal consistency compared to the opposition. If Murray gets that now it is because he will have been the most consistent player in the world as (if it happens before the end of the year) it will surely mean he will have had to have won five titles back-to-back. There is no one else in men's world tennis capable of that at the moment so if Murray gets top No 1 it will be merited. And do you think there will be anyone (with a modicum of tennis knowledge within the sport) that will spout what you are spouting? No.

You sound as delusional as Nicola Sturgeon...

Djokovic trashed Murray for fun in 2016, Murray fraud claims to being #1 is because of Djokovic's injury.

Jermaine2015 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:The art of getting to No 1 is personal consistency compared to the opposition. If Murray gets that now it is because he will have been the most consistent player in the world as (if it happens before the end of the year) it will surely mean he will have had to have won five titles back-to-back. There is no one else in men's world tennis capable of that at the moment so if Murray gets top No 1 it will be merited. And do you think there will be anyone (with a modicum of tennis knowledge within the sport) that will spout what you are spouting? No.

You sound as delusional as Nicola Sturgeon...

Djokovic trashed Murray for fun in 2016, Murray fraud claims to being #1 is because of Djokovic's injury.

You really do post some amount of CRAP

According to Djokovic he is now fit and injury free but is finding it frustrating he cannot find his top form - hence his outburst in his semi final loss.  Afterwards he was in philosophical mood suggesting that maybe having played lights out tennis for the past two to three years he is due a dip in form.  Of course it could be associated with wear and tear as suggested by Lydian's 850 rule of thumb for longevity of competitiveness.

Nore Staat wrote:According to Djokovic he is now fit and injury free but is finding it frustrating he cannot find his top form - hence his outburst in his semi final loss.  Afterwards he was in philosophical mood suggesting that maybe having played lights out tennis for the past two to three years he is due a dip in form.  Of course it could be associated with wear and tear as suggested by Lydian's 850 rule of thumb for longevity of competitiveness.

All entirely fair comment - I think you can add a couple of other factors in:
1 - Winning RG and so completing the career and non-calendar slam was kind of the big goal, and so motivation afterwards probably was difficult for a while.

2 - Playing through a few niggles at Wimby, Olympics and perhaps USO meant some losses to lesser players and both a dent in Djokovic's self confidence and in the aura of invincibility with which his competitors perceive him.

I think his playing history suggests Djokovic is a player who has some extended streaks of hot form and occasional dips. This streak of form lasted a couple of years but he's (inevitably at some point) in something of a down period at present. Of course the interesting thing will be whether this is the beginning of the end (as Lydian's '850 rule' might suggest) or just a lull.

RBA starting very well. Dictating the baseline rallies early on.