Djokovic's got a very tough draw and so has Andy Murray. Federer's gotta good one though. The matchup against Dimitrov may be a potential spoiler, but I guess its relatively hassle free compared to the other top players.
Printable View
Djokovic's got a very tough draw and so has Andy Murray. Federer's gotta good one though. The matchup against Dimitrov may be a potential spoiler, but I guess its relatively hassle free compared to the other top players.
Arvind have u booked tickets to NY?
Was waiting for the draw. I might in a couple of days time.
Well, we wouldn't accuse ATP of "fixing" the draw as "you know who" is not playing this year! :) However, there are others who think ATP, USTA and other vested interests have been manipulating the major tournaments for many many years!Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
The following reports are three years old, but probably still relevant:
U.S. Open random draw questioned
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...tically-likely
How 'Outside the Lines' analyzed the U.S. Open tennis tournament draw
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/...t%E2%80%90draw
Here is an analysis by EU and sports law academic Ms. Katarina Pijetlovic:
Facts and statistics indicate fixing at the very top of men’s tennis
(Please google the above title and click on the link for this PDF document.
US Open draw:
Draws for top 4:
Djoko:
1: Schwartzman
2: Muller/Mathieu
3: Garcia-Lopez
4: Isner/ Kohlschreiber
QF: Tsonga/ Murray
SF: Wawrinka/ Nishikori/ Raonic
F: Fed
Wawrinka:
1: Vesely
2: Belluci/ Mahut
3: Chardy
4: Robredo/ Youzhny
QF: Nishikori/ Raonic
SF: Djoko
F: Fed
Ferrer:
1: Dzumhur
2: Tomic/ Brown
3: Simon
4: Cilic/ Anderson
QF: Berdych/ Gulbis
SF: Fed/ Dimitrov
F: Djoko
Federer:
1: Matosevic
2: Groth/ Ramos-Vinolas
3: Karlovic
4: Fognini/ Batista Agut
QF: Dimitrov/ Gasquet
SF: Ferrer/ Berdych
F: Djoko
So many people are carried away by false hopes that Fed is going to have it easy.
Yes he has a slightly favorable draw compared to Novak, but at this stage nothing is given. Any top 30 player can trouble Federer on his day.
I see a real challenge from QF onwards (Dimitrov/Berdych/Novak). Berdych has not done well this whole season, but who knows could have a decent run here.
Surely a great oppurtunity for Fed but will he have enough left to grab it??
+1...Gotta agreeQuote:
Originally Posted by omega
Quote:
Originally Posted by raagadevan
All very interesting to read. I would not be surprised by draw-fixing at all. TV viewership is the major source of revenue for the tournaments and it is in their interest to do whatever they can to help top players find easy passage to the semis. In spite of their efforts, Fed goes and loses to Gulbis and Nadal to Kyrgios so the great game of tennis keeps trumping their attempts to get eyeballs. But it is indeed getting more and more programmed and predictable...because that's what the viewers want. Viewers have become lazy, they want the same match ups over and over. Tennis is not the cinema box office, it is a sport with in built unpredictability. When seeds toppled last year at Wimbledon, I noticed a lot of people were upset as they would be denied the chance to watch Rafa/Fed (esp since most don't even tune in during the early rounds). That's not the way to enjoy tennis but then the casual fans are much, much greater in number than serious fans so such a situation can't be avoided.
It's interesting that the numbers are much better for RG and Aus Open and these two tournaments have traditionally been relatively less predictable (though no longer the case in Aus Open). Of course RG of now is nothing like what it was in 90s when it was near impossible to predict the winner from among a big clutch of specialists but at least the chances of all of the big four reaching the semis or seem to be less bright in it and Wimb. In fact, RG is the only slam in which there was at least one instance between 2008-2013 of only one of the big four getting to the semis (Fed in 2009). And Wimb the only one where all four have never reached the semis in the same tournament.
It is perhaps also why RG and Aus are treated as lesser siblings in the media and it's Wimb and USO that have traditionally attracted all the glamour and hype (and the numbers from 2008 onwards suggest there has been an 'adjustment' in Aus Open?). The way tennis is sought to be marketed as well as what people want to see in pro tennis are, as in many other big moneyed pro sports, at odds with the true essence of the game. Can't be helped. But I'll watch as long as at least a few players play good shots. Count me out if it ever gets total bashball.
Got the ticket for the final. Costed me about $172. But I guess it should be worth it.
Happy for you, Arvind! :) It sure would be more than worth it irrespective of which two players reach the finals.
^True...
Super Arvind
Kvitova machine guns her way to the New Haven title, her second in three years. Can she finally, finally convert that into a good performance at USO is the question. Apparently doesn't like New York and that's a tough starting point. Would really love to see her get to GS no. 3 and preferably not at Wimb again and pull clear of Li Na and Azarenka, as she is more talented than either of them.
Fed's draw can't be possibly true. It's his best chance to win USO back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
Berdych or Dimitrov could, if they catch Fed-error, upset him. If he gets to play Gasquet and Ferrer instead, yes, he might coast along to the final.
An injury timeline and tournaments missed by Nadal over the course of his career. Finally, somebody puts together a list of which I wanted to lay my hands on for a long time.
Rafael Nadal out of US Open – Injury timeline of the 14-time Grand Slam champion
By AFP @indiacom | August 18, 2014 9:14 PM | comment Tags: Rafael Nadal, Rafael Nadal injury, US Open
MADRID, August 18, 2014: Rafael Nadal, who said Monday he would skip the 2014 US Open because of a right wrist problem, has been plagued by injuries throughout his career.n AFP Sports looks at the problems suffered by the Spanish former world number one, winner of 14 Grand Slam titles, including a record nine French Opens:
2003: Misses French Open with elbow injury.
2004: Misses French Open and is three months off tour with left ankle injury.
2006: Left foot injury suffered in November 2005 means Nadal only starts 2006 season in February.
2008: Tendinitis in his left knee forces Nadal to retire from Paris Masters in the quarter-finals. Withdraws from Masters Cup and Davis Cup final.
2009: As four-time defending French Open champion, Nadal’s 31-match winning run at Roland Garros ended by Robin Soderling in the fourth round. Withdraws from Queen’s and Wimbledon, where he was defending champion, with tendinitis in both knees. Out for nine weeks in total, loses world number one ranking to Roger Federer. (9 weeks)
2010: Retires in quarter-final of Australian Open against Andy Murray with right knee injury. Off tour until Indian Wells in March. (6-7 weeks roughly)
2011: Loses in straight sets in Australian Open quarter-final to compatriot David Ferrer, complains of left adductor problem. Off tour for two months.
2012: Loses to world number 100 Lukas Rosol in Wimbledon second round on June 28. Tendinitis in left knee sees him miss Olympics, where he was defending champion, US Open, World Tour Finals and Davis Cup final. After six months out, cancels plans to play in Abu Dhabi exhibition.
2013: Misses Australian Open with stomach virus. After a seven-month absence in total, Nadal returns to win 10 titles in career-high 14 finals and finish world number one for third time. (1 month)
2014: Affected by back injury in his Australian Open final defeat to Stan Wawrinka and takes a month off. On July 30, Nadal withdraws from ATP World Tour Masters 1000 tournaments at Toronto and Cincinnati due to a right wrist injury and on August 18 reveals he also won’t play at the US Open, where he is defending champion, because of the same problem. ( 2nd month running currently)
http://www.india.com/sports/rafael-n...ampion-121905/
More importantly none of Rafa's injuries has ever needed even a minor surgery....He sure does have a great medical team with him!!
Ho ho ho, Halep drops a set against a college level tournament winner and wildcard Danielle Rose Collins. This is seriously pathetic. And it's not like Collins is some Capriati-like sensation. She's moonballing enough to make Nadal cringe and Halep can't handle it! With such strokeless wonders in the top 10 - no.2 to boot - how can BJK possibly say it's not about the no. of sets (w.r.t men v/s women) with a straight face! :rotfl:
Meanwhile, Kyrgios wins set no.1 against Youzhny and is a break up in the second too. Boom boom boom!
USO R1:
Roger Federer defeated Marinko Matosevic 6-3 6-4 7-6
Stan managed to drop a set against Belluci. Wow-rinka indeed! :| Seeds tumbling as usual in the women's draw. Pliskova served quite well to help Ivanovic choke herself to defeat. Radwanska lost to veteran Shuai Peng yesterday. Court is playing pretty fast this year, expect more upsets along the way.
^ True..Arthur Ashe especially...Supposed to be the slowest of all courts there, but seemingly the fastest this time around.
Exactly. Some of the smaller courts are still quite gritty and grinding but in Ashe it seems to be zipping away. As fast as at any time from 2001 onwards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
I am sure that "You Know Who" and Uncle Toni (Antonio "Toni" Nadal Homar) have to be (somehow) responsible for that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king
Hey guys... I'm just joking! :)
Eh, maybe, on a serious note, the Grand Slam organisers did get fed up of their incessant whining and the lack of decency to even just serve within 25 seconds and not crib if the umpire docked him points for time violation. Because all three, Aus, Wimb and US Open have played faster this year than in quite some time. That has also been the case with Brisbane and Toronto. I called Brisbane on this thread at that time itself, if you recall. Maybe they decided it's time for a change, again.
Kyrgios won easily against Seppi. Faces a potentially tricky match against Robredo. Still, if he keeps his head together and serves well, he should probably win. I hope he will. Verdasco falls to another promising youngster Kuznetsov.
Continuing "on a serious note", there is more than enough evidence that the "the Grand Slam organisers" have been scheming, manipulating and fixing schedules and matches so that the "popular with the crowd hero" will keep winning more tournaments (eg. Ferrer losing to Federer in the third set (2-6) of the finals at the Cincinnati Open after drubbing him 6-1 in the second set) and make "our" guy the GOAT (and of course sell more tickets for the tournaments)!
I think the Ferrer case has more to do with Fed's own wild swings of rhythm because otherwise he is flat out the better player and has never lost to Ferrer ever. But on the larger point it's true that organisers do try to align draws and schedules in such a way that unduly favours the crowd favourites. Even yesterday morning, they put Azarenka-McHale on Ashe because McHale can pull local crowds. Whereas Nishikori and Andujar were put on the Grandstand and they were playing a much more entertaining match. As it happened, Andujar withdrew 2 sets down but this kind of thing has been happening for a long time and as their TV revenues increase, is getting worse. As I said in my last comment on this topic, the viewers also have to take some of the blame for this. They are lazy, they want to see stars all the time, they are not necessarily interested in just good tennis. I wonder how RG would have been marketed in the 90s if such had been the mentality at that time because it was completely unpredictable. I thought the unpredictability adds charm to events like the Slams or the Football World Cup but I wonder if a lot of people don't think like that anymore.
Sure! We will ignore the allegations of ATP fixing the outcomes of Grand Slam tournaments and the Olympics (tennis) finals in favor of a player (not "you know who!), and we sure will believe that a certain old player's sudden resurrection into winning Masters 1000 and possibly more Grand Slam events is just the result of that player being the GOAT! :)
I am not ignoring them. I only said in this particular case I am not very much convinced and you will have to live with that. Please, he just beat Ferrer, Raonic and the likes, not Djokovic or Nadal (THAT would have merited some serious attention). It is not comparable to his 2012 Cincy when he bageled Djoko in the first set in the final.
I do find the cries of Federer the favourite for US Open suspicious because while he has found a second wind, it is not so overwhelming as to conclude that a player who lost to effing Robredo last time would suddenly become the hot favourite. My favourite for the tournament is still Djokovic, it's only a matter of whether he gets to the final or not. Either the commentators are being very fanboy-ish or this is an attempt to build up hype. It is well known that the US audience cares more about Fed and not so much the rest (in his absence), except maybe Nadal (who is also not playing). So claims of a Fed revival would get crowds back to the tournament. Overall, it is not a good prognosis for tennis. I think people should be more excited about the rise of Kyrgios than an 18th slam for a player who already has the record.
And out of curiosity, what evidence exactly do you have which you claim is more than enough to PROVE that Cincy was fixed? Pl share it if there are any links, would like to read. You are talking about it as if it's all out there and it isn't.
Whatever I have said about Nadal is in the papers. I don't have to reach too far to back it up. It was he who said he hated Sampras's brand of tennis and called it boring. So much for respect for a past champion and all time great. Seeing as it was 2012, probably his pastings at the hands of power hitters at Wimby since then might be Karmic retribution for his hubris. It is he who has often painted hard courts as enemy no. 1 of tennis just because it possibly hurts his knees, arguing for fewer tournaments when faster courts and shorter matches would suffice to reduce the extent of physicality in tennis. It was his uncle Toni who decried the reports of Aus Open playing faster (even before the tournament was even a few days old, maybe even before it started, I don't remember the exact timing) as it would deny the spectacle of long rallies. It is not too much to conclude that for a time ATP may have slowed down the courts to give Nadal a leg up on the traditionally faster surfaces because they like match ups and rivalries. We HAVE seen the courts slow down and we have seen some of them play faster again. It's not made up stuff. Basically he and his uncle can't seem to be able to keep their big mouths sewed lately (used to be that they were more subtle and less forthright about it for a long time).
On the other hand, if you want to say a sudden dip in form and a rebound is due to fixing and not something that just happens in tennis matches, you have to substantiate it. I am all ears if you can show some indications for it. Did you see Ferrer miss absolutely routine shots for no reason at all in the third set? Anything that or more blatant? I have seen that kind of stuff in cricket, that I can say for sure. It has to be a bit deeper than only circumstantial indications. I know that Fed winning Cincinnati is what the ATP wants to see and I wouldn't rule out rigging even if I am not personally convinced based on what I saw. But if you are going to argue that it was rigging beyond all doubt, then I need more than that to agree with you.
I for one will not rule out the possibility of the draws being rigged to get favorable matches for the who's who of tennis. But just that and not any further. After that its left entirely to the players to get the win IMHO. Going by your logic RR, am sure the organisers would have wanted a Federer win at Toronto. Wonder why that didnt happen. Was Federer's play that day so horrible he couldnt even force a rigged win ?
^^^ Indeed. And Fed has won Montreal in the past by the way. Maybe, even though he doesn't admit to it, raga gets upset with the Nadal-bashing on this thread. So let me clarify here that none of this is to say that Nadal necessarily needed slower courts to win, especially against Federer! :P He beat him in Miami back in 2004 itself. He nearly beat Fed in Wimb 2007 as well. Last year, he produced a brilliant hard court season in North America. Winning Cincy was truly awesome. :) It has more to do with the organisers' desperation to see a match up that would thrill viewers (esp since it was Fed-daylight-competition in 2004-07). And it saddens me to see Nadal play up to that and try to pretend that this is how tennis should be played all the time, long, grinding and punishing rallies with no attack. I used to like him, but not after I heard him baselessly bash tennis tradition like that. There is a reason we have four slams and not all on clay and Nadal should respect that.
There have been allegations of match fixing for a long time. I won't rule out fixing per se. Just that I am not convinced it was going on in Cincy. Maybe in other tournaments. It's not like we are suddenly seeing the arrival of Fed the clay GOAT. He is only winning on surfaces where he holds what remaining edge he has. He hasn't even been doing well in Indian Wells, a tournament he has won lots earlier. And even if an ageing Fed as the no.2 seed in USO is inappropriate at his age, it is hardly such a travesty as pygmy-sized timid Halep at no.2 in the women's draw. And is it just fixing or the complete lack of consistency as well as injuries for the other top guys? It still continues to be about big four with Wawrinka the only tentative addition to the club. Nadal didn't play and Murray is out of form for quite some time so who else but Djoko and Fed. Says more about the inability of the likes of Tsonga or Berd to play great tennis on a sustained basis.
For alll the hype around I don't think Fed is winning this at all. He may not even reach QF..
So Nadal worshippers can rest in peace. I am also very sure that Nadal will come back and start sweeping the tour again.
^^^ +1, except I would back Fed to get to semis. Same as Aus Open. Will probably run out of steam and switch on Fed-error mode at that stage. And with Djoko a bit distracted, Murray off colour and Wawrinka becoming Yargh-rinka, it's all set for another Year of The Bull. Could be a 2010 to draw level with Fed.
Looks like you've not been paying attention to anyone other than Bull....Quote:
Originally Posted by raagadevan
Olderer has been playing great throughout this year. He is 50-9 so far for the season. Has reached 4 Masters 1000 final (2 of them when the chronically injured Bull was around). Has reached 1 GS Final (again when the stem cell fixed Kneedal was kicked by a 19 year old 144th ranked first strike tennis player). He has done pretty well in all the tournaments which had played faster than normal. This was not the first season he had won Cincinnati (it was his 6th). We know who had won it for the first time last year & promptly didn't show up to defend his title (because it was not clay).
So cut your crap about old player's sudden resurrection.
But like I said you don't have to worry much, Olderer could lose to anyone at this stage of his career. So the target will still be 17 & I don't see it becoming 18 inspite of an easy draw at the Open.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king
If Olderer's revival is not a good prognosis for tennis, then its even worse for a chronically injured guy to have won 14 slams right?
Pardon my ignorance..
Coming back to Olderer, I think ever since he started using his 97 Prostaff his forehand has lost the zip. He is hitting with more loop which is either falling short or losing steam. However it has helped his serve & BH to certain extent. I know he must be still working on it but his once a big weapon (FH) has suffered the most. But then I can't complain much as his FH started to fade even with his old racquet last season. We can't have all of it I guess @ 33.
Roger certainly playing well this year. I hope he will reach the final at US Open become a winner in the last edition of GS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
You got me completely wrong. Pl relax a bit and read what I said properly. I am saying what is not a good prognosis for tennis is the fact that people are more excited about yet another slam for Fed (or Djoko or Nadal for that matter) than the rise of an exciting young player like Kyrgios. I love Fed too, I like Djoko as well but tennis has to move on ultimately. And it needs new stars for that to happen. I wonder if Kyrgios will really win a lot of popularity even if he wins a few slams. People seem to be terribly obsessed with the Big Four. Not that everyone is like that but generally speaking that is the case. Most people don't even tune in before the QFs or semis of slams. We could see a sharp decline in interest in tennis once the big four are done or simply cannot play well enough to win slams anymore. Something similar is likely to happen in WTA too once Serena is done. I guess that's why WTA is already trying desperately to push young stars though picking Bouchard for said purpose is probably not going to help their cause.
None of it was ever intended to be a knock on Federer. He has played well this year...exclusively fast court tennis. He seems to have given up on finding a winning strategy on slow courts (refer his comment after losing in RG, was almost like a good riddance to clay). But that's where he has the best chance to do well anyway and he has focused on that.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that Ferrer was told that he had to lose the Cincinnati finals. He agreed (had no other choice), but wanted to make a point. He played his “normal” game in the second set and won it 6-1, giving Federer, ATP and whoever else was behind the “fixing” panic attacks! And of course he lost the third set as per the “arrangement”!
Well; I do not believe that is what really happened. I agree with crimson king that “the Ferrer case has more to do with Fed's own wild swings of rhythm”. I was happy that Federer won another Masters 1000 trophy. The point that I was trying to make was that wild speculations and accusations could me made against any player, with or without “convincing” proof. I am 100% certain that similar allegations would have been made on this thread if a certain other player was involved in a similar match! :)
It is my personal opinion that Roger Federer is the most graceful player ever in the history of tennis. All considered, I also feel that he is the greatest of all time (GOAT!) as of the present time. It is also likely that Nadal would take over that position in the coming years.
We also have several up-and-coming youngsters who could beat any one of the top guys (veterans) on any given day. Let us hope that a few, if not all, of them would develop into great players mastering multidimensional skills in the art of tennis.