US Open 2022

First topic message reminder :

Former US champion Dominic Thiem awarded as wildcard.
Venus Williams also awarded a wildcard.

Astonishing stat about this Chinese guy Wu. He's the first China male to win a GS match since....1959, and the first to make a Slam 3rd round since 1946.

We've become accustomed to a few Chinese women doing well so it's a wonder the men have fared so badly. Is tennis not felt to be macho enough for Chinese guys, or what?

The womens world rankings are a constant source of bemusement to me.

Anett Kontaveit for instance is world ranked number two, reached one grand slam quarter final back in early 2020, never won a WTA1000 title and generally has a modest record. How on earth is she ranked so highly?

Kyrgios has accused a spectator of smoking cannabis during his match. This guy is getting insufferable.

sirfredperry wrote:Astonishing stat about this Chinese guy Wu. He's the first China male to win a GS match since....1959, and the first to make a Slam 3rd round since 1946.

We've become accustomed to a few Chinese women doing well so it's a wonder the men have fared so badly. Is tennis not felt to be macho enough for Chinese guys, or what?

Not as macho as ping pong which appears to be their national sport or maybe your view of Chinese machismo is an overestimation?  

The common thing about todays tennis stars is just how much investment had to go into their development.   Also many had parents or grandparents that were professional tennis players, professional tennis coaches or was head of the LTA.  It seems to require wealth, extreme dedication and people around them that know what it takes to reach the professional ranks in a sporting discipline. It also seems to require a certain body type (height etc).

Disappointing year for Raducanu so far, below my expectations, although some of you called this accurately at the end of last year. Seems to mostly lose to top 50 players and mostly beat players outside of the top 100, but also some inconsistency.

I refuse to believe last year was a fluke, she played so well and won every match in straight sets and looked the real deal.

So I think she´s below par in some matches, and is young enough to improve.

I think we´ll start to see her winning more consistently against 30-70 ranked players even at the end of this year with some pressure off. And perhaps starting to get to R3 and QF or some tournaments rather than nearly always failing to win more than two matches. And then next year doing a bit better still.

You can see her ranking settling anywhere between 5 and 50 in 2024-2025. She needs to improve in three setters. Not sure if the stats back me up here but she seems to either blow through a match easily in straight sets or lose. I think it will take her a couple of years to work through and start to steadily improve this. Can´t tell if it´s more physical or mental or something else.

Even after things settle down, she does look like she might end up the kind of player who has some great streaks but also lots of poor defeats. Not a bad thing if so. Better to win a tournament and then lose the next in R1 than lose two QFs.

This is a pretty amateur analysis to be honest though, I only saw her play a couple of times this year and not following that closely.

Soul Requiem wrote:The womens world rankings are a constant source of bemusement to me.

Anett Kontaveit for instance is world ranked number two, reached one grand slam quarter final back in early 2020, never won a WTA1000 title and generally has a modest record. How on earth is she ranked so highly?

Yes, that is odd

Looked into it and one answer is that players ranked 2 - 5 all have about the same points, so she has a low numbers of points compared to what is probably normal for a no 2

A lot of her points come from being a finalist at the year end championships, plus 3 500 tournament wins

A lot of points due to drop in 2022, will likely start 2023 with a lower ranking

Rafael Nadal comes from a set and a break down to beat Fabio Fognini. Slow start again from the Spaniard and Fognini took it to him. Nadal fought back in the second and the Fognini’s race was run.
2-6 6-4 6-2 6-1

Rafa suffered a freak injury towards the end when his racquet bounced off the court and whacked him on the nose. He resumed after treatment so at least Fognini can say he gave Rafa a bloody nose, even if he did lose.
Four Britons in the third round of the USO for the first time for yonks. Today Murray plays Berrettini while Draper faces Khachanov.

Nadal plays he’s great friend Gasquet in round 3. IIRC Nadal has some crazy winning streak against the Frenchman

No name Bertie wrote:....
If Harriet Dart wins her second round match she will become the new British No. 1

Harriet Dart lost her second round match 4 and zero to Dalma Gálfi who was ranked #91 heading into this tournament so remains the British No. two.    Britain had two women in the women's singles tournament and they now have both been knocked out.  Harriet Dart was also entered for the women's doubles with Russian partner Samsonova but lost in the first round.

The crazy streak referred to above is something like 17-0 and very likely soon to be 18-0. Not sure if that will be a record. I think Federer-Ferrer was fairly one-sided (well totally one-sided, to be precise). Roddick-Federer was pretty horrendous, too, although Andy did get a couple of wins.

Interesting that the last time three Britons made the 3rd round of a men's Slam was 1997. Henman and Rusedski? Yes. But who were the other two? Without looking it up I'd go for Delgado and Petchey.

Matteo Berrettini beats Andy Murray 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-3. Murray’s 1st % was very low in the first two sets. Matteo started getting tight in the third. Fourth set was close as well.

Karen Khachanov advances past Jack Draper after the Brit was forced to retire with injury. Draper was in the ascendance when he got hurt. Draper was 5-2 up in the third before his misfortune.
Khachanov wins 6-3 4-6 6-5 ret.

Casper Ruud outlasts Tommy Paul to win 7-6 6-7 7-6 5-7 6-0 in a match going over 4hrs.
The Norwegian remains in the hunt to take that #1 ranking.
Ruud certainly has that little bit of prime Thiem about his game.

Ajla Tomljanovic beats Serena Williams 7-5 6-7 6-1 to end the Serena era of tennis.
The Aussie played really well in the face of a massive pro Serena crowd.
I’m not the biggest fan of Serena’s antics over the years but 23 majors I doff my cap. Congrats on a legendary career.

Defending champion Daniil Medvedev made light work of Wu Yibing. The Russian winning 6-4 6-2 6-2. A much better serving display as well.

Nick Kyrgios beat JJ Wolf 6-4 6-2 6-3

Medvedev vs Kyrgios In the next round

Jeff Navarro wrote:Matteo Berrettini beats Andy Murray 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-3. Murray’s 1st % was very low in the first two sets. Matteo started getting tight in the third. Fourth set was close as well.

Yes Berrettini's serving was immense for the first (almost) three sets. Murray's battling spirit kept him afloat and saw him take the third set after fending off so many break points but forcing none of his own. The nail in Murray's coffin was the start of the fourth set when he gifted back an early break of serve at a time when Berrettini seemed vulnerable. Still no disgrace to lose to Berrettini and although Murray will kick himself for failing to keep the momentum going in that fourth set he must be pleased with how well his body held up with no sign of cramping and he moved pretty well to. Going into the US Open some media outlets were again whispering about retirement for Murray but I think this mini-run in New York and how well his body held up will lead Murray to extend his career for another year.

Bad luck for Jack Draper picking up a hamstring injury when he was in the ascendency. A cruel way to exit the US open but his career is definitely on an upward trajectory. He has shown lots of promise this year and has shown he can beat some of the best players around.

Cameron Norrie continues on his way seeing off Holger Rune, the Brit winning 7-5 6-4 6-1. I like this guy Norrie.

Andrey Rublev outlasts Denis Shapovalov to win a 5 set classic. The Russian winning 6-2 2-6 6-7 6-4 7-6. Rublev faces Norrie next.

Carlitos Alcaraz eased past Jenson Brooksby 6-3 6-3 6-3.

‘Big Foe’ Frances Tiafoe takes down Diego Schwartzman 7-6 6-4 6-4

Rafael Nadal wallops his buddy Richard Gasquet 6-0 6-1 7-5. 18 straight wins for the Spaniard over the Frenchman. 34 consecutive set as well.
Nadal’s second serve is an issue.
Nadal vs Tiafoe in the next round.

This guy Rune appears talented but temperamental. He's likely to start throwing his toys out of the pram at any stage.

Tough now for Cam Norrie. Rublev next and even if he wins he'll probably face Rafa after that.

Dan is out. I always thought Cilic might be too much for him.

Although three GS champs are left in the women's draw, I wonder if we might get a new winner. Garcia, maybe? Jabeur is also in the mix.

For various reasons I can see Norrie beating Rublev. He has had the more comfortable route to the 4th Round with the minimum fuss and energy used. Rublev cannot say the same and has dropped sets and been involved in long matches so his energy levels will be depleted. Also Norrie's career (you feel) is on an upward trajectory whereas Rublev's has stagnated somewhat. I can see Norrie winning in three tight sets or four.

CC - Wish I could share your optimism about Cam in the Rublev match. I admire Norrie enormously for his fighting abilities, his fitness and his consistency.

But he just doesn't have the big serve/ground strokes to worry the top players. Yes, Cam could beat Rublev, but if the Russian is on form (and not too worn out) he will win .

Rublev is essentially a ball basher so this plays to Norrie’s advantage. If he can get a lot of balls back the Russian will implode as has happened many times previously.

Been seeing a few clips from the Rublev-Shapo match. Looked a fine contest.

Down now to the last 16 in the tournament. Only three unseeded guys have made it thus far, while the women have four unseeded.

Of the men's seeds, it could be argued that Medvedev has the hardest immediate task in the shape, and form, of Kyrgios. Berrettini, who keeps getting easy draws, has inevitably got one of the unseeded players and could well make the semis.

Cilic-Alcaraz could be interesting although I'm still expecting Rafa to emerge from the bottom half of the draw.

All three GS champs are in the top half of the draw in the women's. Both Gauff and Garcia are looking dangerous and could meet in the quarters.

Swiatek seems to have found her mojo which was definitely lost at Wimbledon. My last four would be Swiatek, Collins, Garcia and Jabeur. Knowing the unpredictability of women's Slams of late this prediction will be entirely wrong.

Everyone's favourite Roman, Matteo Berrettini, advances to the quarter finals after beating Alejandro Davidovich Fokina 3-6 7-6 6-3 4-6 6-2 in a topsy turvy match.

Casper Ruud beats Corentin Moutet 6-1 6-2 6-7 6-2 to reach first HC major quarter final. By and large a top performace by Ruud, letting the third set slip by.
Still remains in the hunt for number 1 ranking

Berrettini was given more trouble by D-Fokina than I expected before coming thru in five.

The Italian will at least - and at last - have to play a top 10 player in the quarters, with Ruud disposing of LL Moutet in four. Over the last two years, a meeting with a top 10er has usually meant the end of the road for Berrettini.

sirfredperry wrote:Berrettini was given more trouble by D-Fokina than I expected before coming thru in five.

The Italian will at least - and at last - have to play a top 10 player in the quarters, with Ruud disposing of LL Moutet in four. Over the last two years, a meeting with a top 10er has usually meant the end of the road for Berrettini.

You love Matteo really SFP

Medvedev-Kyrgios. The winner takes it all?

Medvedev is favourite against anyone except Nadal.
Nadal is still the favourite

Karen Khachanov beats Pablo Carreno Busta 4-6 6-3 6-1 4-6 6-3. First quarter final in New York for the Russian. Strange match PCB seemed be to struggling with illness in set 3. Then went all nuclear in set 4.

Medvedev loses to Kyrgios in four - and loses the number one position.

No one should be too surprised, knowing that if Nick could keep it all together and play well he could beat anyone. His ability has never been in doubt, just his temperament and motivation.

Given match fitness and a desire to play well and not just play the fool it was just a matter of time before the Aussie came good.

Medvedev hasn’t been the same since losing to Nadal in Australia.

I thought Medvedev would be in the final.

Kyrgios reached quarterfinals in wimbledon 2014 and australia 2015 and never got that far again, untill this last wimbledon, that he got to the final and now he has beaten world number 1 and is in quarterfinals again, and he is favourite against Khachanov.

I dont know how far will he get, but one thing is clear, he changed something, he is really performing up to the expectations now

That was the best I've ever seen Kyrgios play, and the first set tiebreak was probably the best tiebreak I've ever seen. Great match.

I think Kyrgios has to be favourite for the tournament now.

Not overly surprised to see Medvedev lose. Obviously he would have been favourite last night being the better player but his form has not been very good this year. Ever since he lost that 2 set lead in the Oz open final, he seems to have struggled to win in the bigger matches. Kyrgios has been in very good form in recent months, reaching wimbledon final etc. Although he got absolutely destroyed by Fritz in his last tournament.

We all know Kyrgios has the potential even if he is a complete circus clown a lot of the time. I dont like his antics on court and he doesnt come across particularly well but there is no denying the guy can play. He does bring something different, I will give him that.

I still cant help thinking the tournament is devalued with Novak not there especially having just won Wimbledon

slashermcguirk wrote:Not overly surprised to see Medvedev lose. Obviously he would have been favourite last night being the better player but his form has not been very good this year. Ever since he lost that 2 set lead in the Oz open final, he seems to have struggled to win in the bigger matches. Kyrgios has been in very good form in recent months, reaching wimbledon final etc. Although he got absolutely destroyed by Fritz in his last tournament.

We all know Kyrgios has the potential even if he is a complete circus clown a lot of the time. I dont like his antics on court and he doesnt come across particularly well but there is no denying the guy can play. He does bring something different, I will give him that.

I still cant help thinking the tournament is devalued with Novak not there especially having just won Wimbledon

There are always some big absences in slams, normally they are due to injuries, in this case Djokovic decided not to play. Of course one has to respect his decision.

Different case was Wimbledon with russian players, but thats another story

Djokovic didn’t decide not to play - he’s not allowed into USA

Jeff Navarro wrote:Djokovic didn’t decide not to play - he’s not allowed into USA

In my opinion he decided not to play the USopen

There is a quote that says "Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler" because when they do they no longer make sense or are just plain wrong.  

Saying that "Djokovic decided not to play the USOpen" is an example of this, and there is too much of that in the news media that spawns UNNECESSARY division, wasted energy and poor thinking.  

'Djokovic decided not to TRY to enter the US because he would have been blocked by US customs and sent back and so for that reason he "didn't confirm his entry for" / "withdrew from" the US draw.'

I think that is the simplest statement that can be made that still makes sense, and which doesn't create any unnecessary division, wasted energy, potential poor thinking.

No name Bertie wrote:There is a quote that says "Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler" because when they do they no longer make sense or are just plain wrong.  

Saying that "Djokovic decided not to play the USOpen" is an example of this, and there is too much of that in the news media that spawns UNNECESSARY division, wasted energy and poor thinking.  

'Djokovic decided not to TRY to enter the US because he would have been blocked by US customs and sent back and so for that reason he "didn't confirm his entry for" / "withdrew from" the US draw.'

I think that is the simplest statement that can be made that still makes sense, and which doesn't create any unnecessary division, wasted energy, potential poor thinking.

Djokovic decided not to get vaccinated, which, at this moment, is mandatory to enter USA if you are a foreigner.

naxroy wrote:Djokovic decided not to get vaccinated, which, at this moment, is mandatory to enter USA if you are a foreigner.

I have no quibbles with that statement. That was sort of the hidden elephant in the room behind that earlier (oversimplified) statement.

One bad service game, and sadly Cam can sometimes chuck in a horror game, has cost Norrie the first set against Rublev.

Gonna be difficult now for the Briton although you can be sure he'll keep fighting. Alas, his record against top 10ers ain't great.

Rublev takes the opening set against Norrie. Pretty nip and tuck until 4-4. Then Rublev suddenly elevated his level. Rublev serve was on point

Rublev now a break up in the second set.

Bit bizarre. They stopped play for 8 minutes. Didn’t close the roof. One more game. Then they stop again to close the roof.

Rublev leads by two sets to love

Rublev wins 6-4 6-4 6-4 and being brutally honest he outclassed Norrie