I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a men’s draw this predictable. Most of the analysis I’ve seen (including my own) breaks it down exactly the same way. Real life doesn’t always follow the script, and for sheer entertainment’s sake we can always hope for a shake-up. Maybe Federer vs Nadal doesn’t give us the best final after all this time?

I don’t know how to read Djoko’s first round win; I mean he got stronger as the match wore on, which is the opposite of what most people say about him. The best set was that last, which he should’ve won 6:1. And we know his competition, while ranked lower, was threatening as Roger had that tough match with him. But does this mean he’s not looking good, or that he is because he was able to fight through? Guess only time will tell. But the way you write it up Sean, he does seem to have a tough quarter - I hope he can make it to the semis again, but I don’t know.

I agree Rafa and Fed will get through their quarters - and probably Nalby unless, as others have noted, Almagro finally breaks through at a bigger event.

hmmm….i watch ESPn,but theres no game show..why is it???someone…..

Andy Murray is the king of topsy turvy matches. Here he slugging it out in the 5th set when I thought he’d sail through. Sigh.

Maybe he’s a periodic walk-about like Nalbandian? Who wasn’t walking about today, however.

Let me start with Guga’s last match, follow up by Jane’s comment on Djoko, and touch on a few others.

First off, Guga deserves our deep homage and lasting tribute for his contribution to tennis. The 3 times Roland Garros champion deserves a grand farewell. He played his last match with Mathieu this morning. We will remember his greatness forever.

About Djoko’s 1st set loss, Jane, I was a bit worried at the beggining, but not so much after how he handled the lefty in the 2nd set. And, as you mentioned, the 4th set could have been 6-1 or even 6-0, but the gradual progress that you noticed asserted his worth to be a contender for the semi at least. We may want to look at the pattern. Whenever he has passed the 1st round this year, he has made it to semi or better. And today’s result is good enough for me to stay rest assured that he will get there again.

Nalby had the best performance so far of all the players, in his win over fellow Argentine Berlocq, nearly matched by Almagro’s play over Serbian Pashanski. Both looked pretty formidable today, winning without much sweating.

Blake made it in straight sets despite a lot of struggles in the 3rd set: A good news for us Americans. Dancevic gave a good fight, winning a set and pushing 2 other sets to tie break, but was a bit short in his effort. I am glad that Del Potro had an easy ride to the next round, one of my favorites.

Murray started strongly but awfully struggled in the 2nd and 3rd sets, but in the last 2 sets, he showed some of his best tennis and moves to the 2nd round. Moya, already in the 5th set, is having hard time to warp up the match. It looks he might not go very far.

Among the newbies, Gulbis is playing amazingly, something to watch in the next few rounds. I hope my boy Acasuso survives a few rounds to show some of his best.

Finally, good luck for Isner against Chela today.

Hi Shital Green,

I hope you’re right about Novak; Gremelmeyre has been to the semis of 2 (?) clay tournaments this year, I think, losing only to Rafa and Roger, so I knew it’d be a tough opener.

You say “Nalby had the best performance so far of all the players, in his win over fellow Argentine Berlocq, nearly matched by Almagro’s play over Serbian Pashanski. Both looked pretty formidable today, winning without much sweating.”

And these two are both in Rafa’s section. Rafa can beat Almagro, but Nalbandian is definitely the “unknown” entity who could, in reality, win this whole tournament. IF.

Yes, Jane, that was a heck of an opener for Djoko. Gremelmayr’s play against Djoko today was similar to the one he had against Fed at the Estoril semi. That guy almost won that match, taking first set easily and pushing 2nd set to 5-7.

But today, I thought Djoko would get back to level the match 5-5 in the 1st set. When Gremelmayr was serving at 5-4, Djoko had 0-30 but he plundered his chances to let the guy have 3 straight points, missing one forehand and another at the net. Then, it went to deuce. I still had hope, but Gremelmayr served big both times, and as Djoko’s returns were weak, he took the 1st set.

The 3rd set was the scariest one, in which Djoko was 1-5 down. His come back was the Nadal moment. Till the end, Gremelmayr did not flinch, at least in appearance: He kept his cool in his face, wearing gentle smile through out. But, on the other side, Djoko felt uneasy and a bit baffled by his opponent’s determined, calm look. It must have been sigh of relief when Djoko took early lead in the 4th set to eventually close the match.
From one angle, he may not want to face another match like this one soon. But from another angle, if he gets to play a couple of grinding 5 setters, he could be physically prepared better for the semi. Definitely, he would want to win quarter final like Nalby did today to save energy for semi, at least to have a respectable match against the King of clay.

Error: “in which Djoko was 1-5 down”
Correction: “in which Gremelmayr was 1-5 down”
And in the next sentence, “His” refer to Gremelmayr.

Yeah, I am not sure, as I said, what I think. Djoko claims he wasn’t happy with the match, in that he made a lot of UEs and lost focus. But he acknowledged Gremelmayr’s fantastic results on clay this year as well; the people he took out at Barcelona, including Almagro, to get to the semis reveal his caliber. Anyhow, it’s good that Djoko is through that one and maybe it’s even good he’s had a tough one. He had a marathon with Stepanek in the first (?) round at the USO and look how deep he went, so we can still hope he’ll get to the semis; if he gets farther than that it’ll will take, perhaps, a small or large miracle.

Well this week Novak has been busy at the Eurovision event, his birthday parties, and I think he was at Nenad Zimonjic’s wedding. He did just enought to win.

That Djokovic lost a set to Gremelmayr is all that shocking. The disturbing thing about Djokovic was his serve unraveling. Lost his first two service games - that was surprising. But losing your serve TWICE trying to close out the 3rd Set? That’s most definitely not a good sign at this early stage of the tournament. I’m wondering if he’s starting to feel that weight of expectation a lot more heavily now, since he’s had a successful year to this point. If so, he’d better suck it up quick - the last thing you want potential opponents to see is your own awareness of the pressure you’re feeling to live up to a proscribed standard. And he may wanna re-think approaching the net. He’s not a naturally gifted net player, so he provides a target rich environment for any adept passing shots. And the deeper you go into the draw, you’ll find more and more of those adept passing shots.

All the principal players get a tough one in a Major, and maybe this one was his. That said, the bottom line is that Djokovic didn’t play well, and Gremelmayr got a little too impetuous in the 4th Set, or we might have had to watch a 5th Set. Djokovic better get the ship righted fast. If not, he could be gone before he ever gets to the Semis.

djokovic tries to let everyone think that nadal and federer are the nervous ones, with with his big mouth, he’s the one that has everything to prove. too bad he wasn’t gone today….

Jane, coming back to the seedings issue:

“jane Says:
Agassifan - since 1 would still be on the opposite half of 2 he’d still be protected from him”

The point of seedings is not just to protect them from each other. In that case, they would have just had 32 seeds, with NO ordering amongst them - they would still be protected from each other.

The points of seedings is also to have a heirarchy. So 1 should have some advantage that 2 doesn’t. WIth that in mind, 1 should face 4, and THAT is the small advantage 1 deserves.

Choosing where some of the seeds fall reduces this heirarchical effect.

Also, I strongly believe Nadal should be the top seed at the FO - it is ridiculous to have anyone else as the top seed.

It goes back to the same old wimpish “politically correct” reasoning - they don’t want to do something that may create a problem, even though it may be just.

THis also applies to prize money - we all agree that it should be equal pay for equal work. I am all for women players getting equal prize money, AND playing best of 5 set matches in the grand slams to earn it, just like the men. Heck, I would love to watch a 5 set Ivanovic-Vaidisova match!

just to add - most things that are politically correct are actually incorrect in reality.

“Also, I strongly believe Nadal should be the top seed at the FO - it is ridiculous to have anyone else as the top seed.”

Thanks for your reply Agassifan; I agree with your above point, and then in that case, I guess Nadal would have Djoko if we went by my equal distribution method, so no different. LOL.

The politically correct thing is touchy but certainly *some* politically correct stuff is bunk.

I think the women ought to get equal pay if they play only one set through the quarter finala. To limit the boredom is worth the money. One may have a chance of seeing some exciting play in the semi or the finals - maybe.

I just realize that if Djoko beat Nadal and go to the finals, it will be his third Slam final in a row. Now that would be something?!

Well, if Joker can beat Federer’s 10 straight grandslam finals then i’ll be impressed.

Dr. Death:

You’ve said it — but seriously, that’s another bone of contention for me. Why is it that the women feel they are entitled to equal pay for 2 sets in a GS? Extremely unfair to the guys.

__________________
Shital Green:

“Blake made it in straight sets despite a lot of struggles in the 3rd set: A good news for us Americans.”

I’m hopeful for Blake to make through to the QFs; poor Sam Querrey, tomorrow could probably be the beginning and end of his ‘08 FO run. Very depressing for the young guy.

Its unlikely that anyone in our lifetime will beat the 10 slam finals in a row record!!

Jane,

Nadal should be 1, fed 2, djoke 3, and fed should play djoke in the semi. its unfair to nadal - he should have the advantage over fed, just like fed should have the advantage over him at wimbledon.

I do agree, there is less diversity in playing styles on the women’s side. Justine was an exception, its sad she has gone. All most of them do it two handed backhands and top spin forehands, poor serves, running like crazy side to side, trying to hit as hard as possible, not that much touch.

On the mens side, players are very different from each other, so its much more fun to watch.

still, I would pay top dollar to watch a 5 set match between ivanovic and vaidisova!!

“its unfair to nadal - he should have the advantage over fed, just like fed should have the advantage over him at wimbledon.”

Yep. This is what I said on the previous thread, thinking along the lines of Shital’s post about surface results.

Nalbandian played well yesterday. A nalbandian nadal 5-setter in the QF would be fantastic!

Though what I would really love to see is a Fed-nadal Rome type 5 setter in the final. WIth no tie break in the 5th set, it would be fantastic if they play out to 20-18 or something, and then Fed win in 6.5 hours!!

Now lets get back to reality. Reality is - Fed has a tough match against Sam Querrey - the guy serves like crazy, and is no slouch on clay, can really rip his shots from the baseline. This is not a pushover first round match like Nadal has. After that, Fed does have an easier draw.

Lets see what Higueras finally brings to Fed’s game. Its been over six weeks since they hooked up, so it has got to make some slight difference, at least in tactics and shot selection, so I don’t agree with Nadal when he says nothing can be done in 3 weeks (then all those training camps are a waste, right??). Especially on the mental and strategy side - it can make a big difference. And Fed has had plenty of time to test out some new things (like more drop shots, more angled short backhand slices), since he has played 18 clay matches already since hooking up with Higueras.

And the results are obvious. Tactically, he has improved against Nadal. Almost beat him twice. Of course, mentally, he choked both times, so we’ll see how that plays out.

I think djokovic has a better chance of chasing down nadal more than federer? Infact djokovic has more power on his shots than federer and that gets to nadal many times.Federer after losing so many matches wont really be able to beat him.If we analyse after he lost that match in rome where he lead nadal by 5-2 in the fifth he’s never really been able to challenge him when nadal is on.Matches like that stay with you for a long time.Even in hamburg what happened in monte carlo haunted federer and he lost in hamburg too.Now in the french open the hamburg comeback from nadal (5-1 lead) will haunt him and he’ll lose his lead there also.Anyway reality is always far from hypothesis so we’ll see what happens.

One thing which is ignored in most discussions is:

Federer does not need to win the French Open to be the GOAT (I am not saying he already is, he is almost there though).

Borg could never win on hard courts - 4 US finals.

Laver never had to play a slam on hard courts. 3 of the 4 were on grass. Plus the level of competition before the Open era was not that high, since many of the top players (like Laver himself), became professionals. So his track record is not without question marks (though for no fault of his!).

Lendl, one of the greatest, could never win wimbledon, though he was in 2 finals and many semis. Just like Borg couldn’t win the US open.

Agassi won all 4, and multiple finals in all four - but was never that dominant, so he can’t be GOAT.

Sampras was MISERABLE on clay - just one semi in 13 tries. In fact, in terms of all round play, of the list of players above, the biggest weakness is with Sampras. So in this list, if there is one person who can NEVER be GOAT, its Sampras - you cannot be so miserable on one surface and be called GOAT.

Fed so far has 2 finals and 1 semi at the French. He is downright superlative in the other 3 slams. SO he is right now in the same boat as Borg (or Lendl), I would say. Again, Laver is not comparable.

There hasn’t been ANY perfect player so far, ever. So is perfection the yardstick for GOAT? GOAT just means the best of all time, SO FAR. I guess you could make a case for any of the players above for the GOAT status, with the case for Sampras and Agassi being a bit weaker than the others.

Fed should continue to persevere. Heck if he has 5 french finals, even if he doesn’t win it, he is GOAT. Especially if you consider ALL his other monumental records already so far, some of which will surely grow in the next 2-3 years.

My feeling is he will win it this year and seal the GOAT argument forever.

Andrea: Djok…with with his big mouth

Big mouth indeed.

“I know I can beat him. I’m the one playing aggressive. I’m the one trying hard. I’m the one taking the risks in those matches, so I think I have positive chances of winning here,” said Federer regarding Rafa

Tennis Channel Djok/Gremlmayr 4th set chat.

McEnroe:Novak has so many weapons, has improved so much, it’s scaring fed and nadal.

Robinson: Do you ever get the feeling around the locker room that Fed thinks Novak’s confidence or some would say cockiness is an irritant to Federer?

McEnroe: Yeah, that and his playing. But I bet Fed respects him. Any guy who can talk and back it up you have to respect.

Which Mcenroe are you quoting?

Patrick can’t tell his head from his ass.

John I would take more seriously.

Hello all,

I’m new here but have been lurking around long enough that I felt I now is as good a time as any to start chiming in…

Agassifan,

I’m pretty sure it was John that said that, but not positive. But although John knows his head from his ass, I’m not convinced he always chooses the right one in any given situation.

Yes, it was John. I just heard it again…

And what is written above is paraphrased and not exactly accurate, but it is pretty close.

P.S. Sorry about the rapid-fire afterthought posting. This is all new to me.

Ra-ra-ra:

Funny comment about Johnny Mac, and welcome. It’s a good quote; because as much as people say Roger and Novak have all this strife between them, and there is some no doubt, they also have to appreciate each others’ talents. Djoko talks for his own sake, imo, and sometimes it may even backfire & put more pressure on himself. He’s toned it down a fair bit too.

“This time last year I would have said Federer would beat Sampras’s record. Now I’m not so sure,” said Djokovic. “His aura has gone. He’s not as dominant as he was, and since I beat him in Australia he’s looked frustrated. Players are beginning to challenge him now, especially myself and Rafa. He’s got 12 Grand Slams to his name and maybe he will beat Sampras, but now I’m here it will be tough for him.”

This is a man with an instinct for drama. First, he paints the picture - the occupant of the throne strolling to the record. Then he injects the sense of doubt, incidentally introducing himself as a major player. He lets us know there is another pretender to the throne, but doesn’t make too much of that. And finally, he reminds us that despite the current champion’s formidable record, he himself, the tale teller, stands in the way, ready to deliver the coup de grace.

Delight, rage, and perhaps amusement, are the natural responses - but never indifference. We are much in his debt.

Thank you, Jane. It is nice to be welcomed.

I agree that the essence of what McEnroe said has truth to it. The part that I can’t totally get behind is Rafa and Roger fearing Djokovic. To me it seems a bit presumptuous to say that at this point. It is all of course just speculation on my part, but I have not been quite as taken by Novak’s level of talent as so many seem to be. Having watched him sporadically over the past several years and more frequently over most of the last 12 months, I can say that he is an exceptional athlete with a lot of great aspects to his game. When they all click for him, he plays a great game of tennis, no doubt. But I have yet to see enough of a consistently exceptional level from him to say he is anything beyond a very good player (although I may very well just be slow on the uptake. I do watch just about all the tennis to which I can gain media access, though, at the expense of sleep and work). At the same time, however, I’m not ruling out that he may still be on a fairly steep part of his learning curve… Actually, I could go on and on about his game and where I think it may or may not go, but I have long since digressed. I’m just not convinced he’s shown enough to warrant the “fear” of the world numbers 1 and 2 just yet. Respect (in terms of
tennis ability), sure. I know he has a great deal of that from them because they’ve both said as much to more or less of an extent.

I should also mention that I agree whole-heartedly with your implicit notion that not all of the scandalous sensationalism is to be believed.

As for addressing the topic of Sean’s article:

The Monte Carlo and Hamburg finals made it abundantly clear to me that Federer is quite capable of besting Nadal whenever he is mentally ready to close the deal. To my eyes, he without question had Nadal’s proverbial number in both of those matches, and when he (Federer) played his new clay court brand of tennis in stretches, it looked to me like no amount of fleet-footedness or defensive magic could save Nadal. Whether or not (in the event of a repeat RG final matchup) Federer will actually close the deal against Nadal is another story. But can he? Undoubtedly.

Concerning Djokovic, I simply can’t see him undoing Nadal on clay at this point. He did play quite well against Nadal in the Hamburg semifinal, and from that I would have to say it is vaguely possible that, if they meet in the RG semifinal, Novak could have another “best clay court tennis of [his] life” match on a sub-par Nadal day, and perhaps the upset could result.

Attempts at prognostication are fun and all, but as they say: “On a given day, anybody can beat anybody.” I imagine that is even truer when talking about the top three ranked players in the world and on a surface that often has a mind of its own.

Sean,
please, I beg you, for heaven’s sake, don’t pick Rafa for anything! Pick Djoko or Fed by all means!

*******
It was very emotional to watch Guga today. But he obviously could not play, so it was more of an exhibition match than a GS first round and to be frank, it was not enjoyable. Maybe Guga’s innocent happiness and the crowd’s reaction justified that. Personally, I prefer a retirement like Justine’s.

I think it was awkward for PHM too, who did a great job. He was also very cute when he said, “if I could say Guga, Guga, …I would have done the same”.
but no question, Guga is very sympathetic and “huggable”.All the best to him.
*******

Rafa and Fed tomorrow. Can this French Open be any harder for RAfa? As if having Nalbandian and Djoko and Youzhny …is not enough, he has a very tough qualifier too. In one way, it is good for Rafa to get on his game. Hopefully if he can reach the semis and the final, these tough matches will be good for him.

***
I think Rafa can handle Djoko and even Fed here. I am more nervous about Nalbandian. I really hope someone can take him out before He reaches the QF!

Zola:

“I think Rafa can handle Djoko and even Fed here. I am more nervous about Nalbandian. I really hope someone can take him out before He reaches the QF!”

What a scheming little mind you have! Seriously though, if I were in your place I would wish for the same. However, Nalby looked very good today. He also looks like he’s lost a ‘few’ pounds, and that always helps in one’s movement. Just a few more hours and Rafa will be playing the qualifier. I hope you will be awake for his match, or have you been to nervous to sleep?

Gotta beat the donkey again after watching the Jerkovic match.

That jerk had the gall to throw dirty looks at a linesman who made a good call. The shot was overruled (called in), but the hawkeye replay showed IT WAS INDEED OUT.

Why is it so easy to not like Jerkovic? Because he has such an assinine attitude on court. Before seeing his match, I was willing to let his skills balance out his assinine behavior. But now, I see just how haughty and disrespectful the guy really is.

I sure hope he loses early. Some higher power has got to humble this guy - divine OR human!

Anybody watch the Baghdatis/Bolleli match? FANTASTIC tennis without the Jerkovic attitude!

grendel,

Your post is funny because it completely undermines one thing I said in the one directly before it: that Djoko had toned it down. Of course he hasn’t based on that quote. I like your response to it as well, perhaps because I like Djoko’s drama and lack of kowtowing.

Why would you want Nalbandian to lose early? If Nadal deserves to win a 4th French Open then he should prove it by playing someone like Nalbandian. Honestly I was hoping Djokovic and/or Nalbandian would be in Federer’s half just so Federer can really be challenged and prove himself. Unfortunately Federer’s probably gonna breeze into the final and get hammered by whoever he faces (probably Nadal or Djokovic/Nalbandian if either one gets lucky) because he is unprepared for a real test.

Ra,

I agree: I doubt Roger or Rafa are too “afraid” of Djoko; they are probably a little annoyed and a little amused by him, and certainly aware of the threat he can pose. He won’t beat Rafa here, but if he gets to the semis I’ll be happy with his run.

I also concur that this may be Roger’s year to win the French; i have a hunch. Besides, his win would go well with the unpredictability we’ve had thus far this season. Roger came so close in the last two matches against Nadal, with those two strong leads, but he’ll need to hang with Rafa through 5 sets. That’s the thing, possibly the kryptonite. I am not surprised Roger handled Sam today; he’s a tough server, but Djoko handled him in the MC quarters quite well too. I’d like to see Sam continue to develop his clay game, and maybe he’ll be someone to watch on the grass this year.

Anyway, I’ve said enough.

Von - was it you who said you thought Coria would do better? Anyhow I agree; I thought he had a shot against Robredo.

Grendel,
Can you please post the link to the source interview where he said this “delightful, [out]rageous, and amusing” stuff? Thanks.

Hi Shital Green,

I found this link, which may be where Grendel found the quote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1021675/Djokovic-warns-friend-Andy-Murray-Youve-got-stronger.html

But I’d like to read the whole presser if you come across it. Djoko is nothing if not audacious, and you can take that word for its positive or negative connotations. I know how you’ll take it because we’ve liked this guy from the get-go. Nice to have someone shake up the calm waters.

Zola, it’s a shame Rafa’s match is rain delayed. It’d be nice if he could get it out of the way today and not have a late start. Sorry about my hunch above. I don’t know why I feel Roger may win this year, but it’s been a hunch for a while, since MC really. But as I said, he’d have to stick with your guy for 5 sets, I would think, and Rafa has never lost a 5 set match on clay.

Von,
I am awake, but there is rain delay!

Shock of the day , Canas out in the hands of Odesnik!

Jane,
I think the way this French Open and the draw is going, everything is lined up for Federer to win. He has a very easy draw and so far no annoying rain delays. His win here will not be unpredictable.

About Djoko, I agree that RAfa and Fed are more annoyed by his immature remarks and behavior than being intimidated by him. Federer is probably the best player of all times and Rafa perhaps the best clay court player of all times. Novak, alththough he is close to them in points (this year), still has a long way to be in their league.

btw,
tennischannel website has streaming for 4 courts from 5am-12 pm (ET)
http://video.tennischannel.com/schedule.jsp

they don’t show the center court. right now I am watching it from here:
http://www.justin.tv/banki

Jane,
I just posted something, but it waita moderating (maybe because I have links in it).

But don’t be sorry about your hunch. It seems everything is lined up for Federer this year. from the easy draw to the nice weather for him. In contrast, Rafa has an impossible draw and as if having Belucci was not enough, he has to sit in rain delay again.

jane
you can read whole pressers on roland garros website. press on news and then on the left coulmn look for interviews.

Grendel,
I found the source of that quote: Ian Stafford wrote that two days ago in Daily Mail, but I still have to find when, where, and to whom he said that. While the tabloid’s Nazi and Fascist history in the past and Racist stance in the recent days may not discredit the piece, I will continue to take it as gossip until I verify its authenticity. If it turns out to be true, I will have to say he did not word it right. I would have said, “Fed will still beat Sampras’ record but not with the same ease as it appeared a year ago when there were few challengers.”

Thanks for the information on pressers Zola; that’s not to say I hope Roger will win b.t.w.; I’d rather see Rafa tie Borg or maybe someone unpredictable come in and win it - like Nalbandian, who is unpredictable not for lack of talent but for lack of consistency.

Djoko’s remarks may be immature (he did say your guy is the best defensive player in the history of tennis and Roger one of the best ever too though, so it’s not like he doesn’t say kind things) but I think he’s a bit of a “tale-teller” as Grendel put it. This may backfire, and give others motivation to crush him - so in that case those who dislike him shouldn’t be too perturbed - or it may not. He may follow up at some point. So far he has a pretty good record of following up on his comments on the court.

Shital Green,

I agree the press is sensational.

And you say “If it turns out to be true, I will have to say he did not word it right.” Maybe he didn’t word it right, or politically correct, but Djoko says what’s on his mind and has a tendency to be blunt. Good on him for rattling the cage, storming the Bastille, whatever. Roger will shrug it off anyhow. He’s used to Djoko by now.

Jane,
Thank you. I like Djoko’s sensationalism, too, but there is something else in this quote that Grendel convincingly objects to.
If it is authentic, the problem with the piece is not Djoko’s challenge but his questioning of what Fed will or will not achieve in the history of tennis. The risk of questioning Fed’s future will lead to evoke his past. Djoko does not have that historical cushion to raise a question mark until he achieves a legendary status comparable to Fed’s, which is more questionable than his own question. To be on safe side, I would have stuck with the “present,” where his challenge can spark some dramatic effect and has some validity, and I would not have barged on Fed’s past, with which his future is inextricably linked. For his PR, even if Djoko begins “pasting” or “archiving” Fed’s greatness, he should word the acknowledgment of Fed’s achievement in a way it would be perceived as his source of inspiration.

P.S: This is coming from Djoko’s No. 1 supporter.

Shital - the word play in your comment is great “which is more questionable than his own question.” But you make an excellent point too: Djokovic’s future is still up in the air; Roger’s past is not. So he should be careful in that regard.

I am also a huge supporter of Novak’s, as you know, but that doesn’t mean I can’t be objective. I like his blunt-style and his willingness to challenge and seek the top, but it’s true that he could word his challenge differently.

This is purely speculation on my part, but I wonder if he doesn’t want to cite Roger as an inspiration as he still wants to overcome him, and therefore any bowing down to his greatness might put a damper on that desire (and reassert the aura players are tearing at, or trying to). I could be wrong, of course, by my thinking is that in Novak’s mind he knows Roger is certainly one of the best in the sport but he’s not going to say that now, when he wants to beat him.

“Why would you want Nalbandian to lose early? If Nadal deserves to win a 4th French Open then he should prove it by playing someone like Nalbandian” (Sensational Safin). This is a moral consideration, whilst your next point about Federer’s relatively easy draw is a pragmatic one.
But suppose Federer does win, overcoming the hurdles of lack of proper matchplay which you posit. Would this, then, diminish Fed’s success in your eyes? Or would you say: Federer won the French Open despite the obstacle of having an easy draw, so he deserves it more than ever? For that seems to be the logic of your position. Please don’t think I am taking the p, I think moral questions often turn up surprising and even funny conclusions.

And what about Nadal himself? Do you think he is the type to want to win by beating everyone worth beating? Of course, given that that is easier for him than for anyone else, on clay, it’s not quite as noble as it sounds. Do you think anyone is like that? Or do they all just want to win regardless?

One thing is for sure. Anyone would like to be able to say AFTER they have won, that they did so by beating all worthwhile contenders. But who would be prepared to take the risk - if it was on offer?

Shital Green: I was puzzled by your comment that I “convincingly objected” to some thing in Djokovic’s remarks. On reflection, I think you must have thought I was being satirical, or even sarcastic. I am from time to time, and I see also that what I wrote could be interpreted that way, so that would account for it.

But you know, I actually was writing straight. I do think there is an impish streak in Djokovic, and that it is a mistake to take him too literally. Even though what he says is, in a sense, undeniably true. It is up to Federer to prove that he is, shall we say, premature in his conclusions. Needless to say, I hope Federer does. But that doesn’t stop me being amused by Djokovic’s brashness. It’s also bold, in a way. Because he could look rather silly in a years time. So he is taking a risk.

Sensational Safin: with regard to my post above, I haven’t made it clear that I think you raised an extremely interesting point - but one which has quite a lot of ramifications.

To Zola:

In case Rafa doesn’t win the title this year (which, if it really happens, would be close to impossible), I just hope you’re not going to blame the rain delays and that Brazilian guy named Tomaz Bellucci for Rafa’s loss Come on, girl! Even if he had to play on one leg, Rafa would be still the undisputed No. 1 favourite to win the title, so why all this fuss?

From Glenn:
I sure hope he loses early. Some higher power has got to humble this guy - divine OR human!

I sure hope some higher power gives you everything you wish for Novak.I too hope some divine power lets you have losses in your life.

The quotes from Djokovic regarding Federer prove to me what I’ve always suspected about him. He’s always promoted himself as though he’s already got a long resume of achievements that merit instant access to the Hall of Fame. There’s a Cart-Before-The-Horse quality as to how he describes himself and his game, with his bravado bluster thus far outstripping his actual on-court accomplishments. His alleged comments to Murray are an example of that kind of talk. But I still smile when I think of that ATP Production of The Perfect Player interviewing several players asking their evaluation of which players today have the best shots and attributes in tennis. Not one single player named Djokovic as having “the best” anything, including his “good friend” Andy Murray (incidentally, Murray called Nadal’s Forehand the best there is since it does plenty of damage AND gives up very few errors in the process).

It’s the players indifference to the Djokovic game that impresses me the most, not the media or blog posts assessments of his game. Players know Djokovic has a solid game, but he isn’t causing a bunch of sleepless nights in the ATP Locker Room (whereas Federer still does, despite his slump). I sometimes wonder if the real reason Djokovic spends so much time loudly blowing his own horn about his ability isn’t an attempt to try to psych out foes, which is funny, since no one seems to be buying into it. And agree with Jane: neither Federer or Nadal has any fear of Djokovic; Novak only wishes they did. You can bet the Gremelmayr walked away yesterday truly believing he could, or even should, have won that match. He broke the serve of the World #3 four times, after all.

Djokovic may get to the #1 ranking some day (not this year though), but there’s a HUGE difference between getting to #1 and staying #1. I remember reading recent comments by Paul Annacone and David Wheaton weighing in on the Djokovic game, saying it’s solid hitting off both sides, and great scrambling ability, but both said the same thing (as have many others): Djokovic lacks The Weapon shot, and no one can dominate without one. Sampras’s Serve; Federer’s Forehand & Movement; and Nadal’s Forehand & Movement on clay are the principal reasons they achieved what they have for the length of time they have. Since Djokovic has no shot of that magnitude, it’s extremely unlikely he will dominate to the extent these other have.

During the Sampras reign of winning Majors from 1993-2000, it’s worth remembering the sheer number of guys that also held the # 1 ranking at various times in that same span: Agassi, Kafelnikov, Muster, Rios, Moya, Rafter, Guga, and Magnus Norman. Any amount of time Djokovic has at #1 will be intermittent; we won’t be seeing him parked there for 230-plus weeks like Federer. He’s still too vulnerable on his favored hard court surface, having lost to far too many guys on Deco Turf since he won Canada last summer. The thing to watch will be what happens to him once he gets the #1 Ranking and then slides from it. His MO thus far would seem to identify him as one that won’t handle that kind of a situation gracefully. Time will tell.

Skorocel,
I am not blaming anyone for anything. If Belucci or someone else can topple Rafa, good for him.

But in a grand slam, you would like to see the guys fight in reasonably similar conditions. Last year’s wimbledon was a disaster with that genius denial of using the middle sunday and thus forcing players of the lower part of the draw sit during rain delays and play 5 matches in 7 days while those in the top half were having hair cuts!

now, here, again a very unbalanced draw, plus the not so very pleasant rain delays, just doesn’t make me very happy!

Just because Rafa has a good record here doesn’t mean that he has to go through hell.

Re Djokovic, I think he is just thinking out loud, reflecting the expectations imposed on him by his family. I read about incidents involving his father and his uncle tackling the serbian media for not being very patriotic and we have read his mom’s quotes. Imagine being brought up in a family like that!

he has too many conflicts to resolve. within himself and with the outside world. I also agree with voicemale regarding how he is perceived within the ATP players. he has lots of work to do.He also has to be careful about some provoking questions or requests from the media.

I take Hamburg and Rome as a positive sign.I think he is trying and I would like to wait and see how he evolves as a person and a player. If he can learn to bite his tongue and don’t say anything silly, he might restore some of his image.

Ahhhh….I wish Coria had a little easier first round than Robredo. I would have liked to see him win a few rounds before running into a heavy seed. Surprisingly, I am going with Nalbandian to hold up the trophy (maybe I feel bored picking Nadal?), and this has little do to with his first round ass kicking. I just have a hunch

Voicemale1

” You can bet the Gremelmayr walked away yesterday truly believing he could, or even should, have won that match. He broke the serve of the World #3 four times, after all.”

We shouldn’t forget, though, that he broke Roger’s serve, that is to say, the number 1’s serve at least twice in the semi at Estoril & that he knocked out Almagro at Barcelona to get to the semis there as well. Add those clay chops to the fact that Djoko wasn’t having an “on” day on Sunday and the match itself was not surprising. I expected it to be a tough one for Djoko given Gremelmayr’s results this year.

Personally I am waiting to see if it was a sign of things to come for Novak at RG or if it was just a combination of factors and a blip in his run.

Jane:

What does your response below have to do with my assessment that Gremelmayr walked away believing he could or should have won the match? What does breaking Federer in Estoril have to do with it? That’s got nothing to do with his match yesterday. Yeah..it was a tough one and looked it on paper. My point wasn’t whether or not it’d be a tough match for Djokovic - my point is that Gremelmayr had his chances to win it and knows he could have, or should have. His awareness of that has nothing to do with Estoril or Federer or what happened last week, last month or last year.

Or are you trying to imply, infer or insinuate that Gremelmayr had no chance in that match yesterday? If that’s what you mean, just say that, in plain English. I’m missing the connection you try to make with the match in Estoril and his match yesterday. It’s baffling.

Voicemale1

” You can bet the Gremelmayr walked away yesterday truly believing he could, or even should, have won that match. He broke the serve of the World #3 four times, after all.”

We shouldn’t forget, though, that he broke Roger’s serve, that is to say, the number 1’s serve at least twice in the semi at Estoril & that he knocked out Almagro at Barcelona to get to the semis there as well. Add those clay chops to the fact that Djoko wasn’t having an “on” day on Sunday and the match itself was not surprising. I expected it to be a tough one for Djoko given Gremelmayr’s results this year.

Voicemail 1,
Magnus Norman never held No. 1 position, whose record is meager one time RG runner up and one master series winner. And by any measure and regardless of the context, it is not fair to lump Agassi together with Rios, Kafelnikov, Muster, Rios, Moya, Rafter, Guga, and Norman. I am not gonna go into each of these players’ histories here. Djoko does not have a history as such yet, even though he might compare well with some of these guys you mention just fine with his about a year long, tiny record. His meteoric rise in just about that short span has been undeniably a matter of curiosity.
The issue of One Weapon Shot is subjective in that it is variable. It might work against many players, but the same shot could be less lethal or closure to average against a few others. It is variable also on the surface. For instance, Rafa’s ONE Weapon Shot that you mention has been more effective on clay than other surfaces, as his results from AO and US Open evidence. Were that One Weapon Shot enough, it would have helped Rafa produce better results on hard court Slams, though I do not dispute that One Killer Weapon is always a plus, not a ticket to maintain No. 1 ranking for 230 weeks+ once you get there. And I take your description of Djoko’s “solid hitting off both sides and great scrambling ability” as a complement, even if it is only for intermittent No. 1 position. To conclude, I am not good at predicting where his ranking will be by the end of this year, though I hope he does better than last year, at keeping closure to the goal post.

jane,

“This is purely speculation on my part, but I wonder if he doesn’t want to cite Roger as an inspiration as he still wants to overcome him, and therefore any bowing down to his greatness might put a damper on that desire (and reassert the aura players are tearing at, or trying to).”

I believe your speculation is backed up by actual fact. I can recall Djokovic singing Roger’s praises as recently as 2 years ago. One can even find instances on youtube where Novak (prior to his impersonations becoming well known through on-court performance) refusing to imitate Roger because Roger is just “too perfect”. I find it sound to conclude that Djokovic at some point realized or was informed that bowing down to someone is not likely to result in defeating them.

Voicemale1,

I fully agree with your assertions of Djokovic putting the “cart-before-the-horse” in his commentaries. Granted, he is the one that capped Roger’s streak of GS final appearances at 10, but in reality, he is still a player that has yet to rise beyond 3 in the rankings. How many players in the past have shown great promise and picked up a GS title and a few Masters’ titles along the way only to fizzle out thereafter? I find it grossly premature for him to imply that he is anything beyond a blip in history at this point. That he has ambitions to become more than just a blip is wonderful and healthy for him, but I really don’t see him as remotely close to part of the conversation about tennis greats.

To be fair, as far as “The Weapon Shot” goes, his backhand down the line is quite venomous when he is dialed in. Also, it seems to me that his serve is proving to be one of the more formidable and dangerous strokes of the circuit. Still, he lacks a certain consistency in both. But, to me, that inconsistency just reinforces that it is still too early. His game may well have matured comparatively, but I’m not ready to call it mature on the whole just yet. Even so, for all we know, we’ve already seen the best of it. Not to mention that, in my perception, the specific physical nature of his game does not lend itself to longevity. Again, though, there is still plenty of time for that to change or for adjustments to be made along the way as necessary.

Just for kicks, I’m gonna put this out there:

My completely unfounded guess is that we’ll see somebody young and unknown rise to the mainstream and trump Novak’s talents before he has a chance to leave much of an impressive mark on the historic scoreboard.

^refused

Is there really no way to edit comments? This little text box is a bit difficult to proof-read…

Voicemale1,

The connection I was trying to make, or what I was responding to specifically, was your comment about the four service breaks; I wanted to note that Gremelmayr is capable of breaking anyone’s serve on clay: not just just Djoko’s 4xs but also Federer’s 2xs at Estoril.

Ra,

“His game may well have matured comparatively, but I’m not ready to call it mature on the whole just yet. Even so, for all we know, we’ve already seen the best of it. ”

This is reasonable; it’s a waiting game with Djokovic. It’s too soon to tell since it was less than a year ago, or just a year ago now, that he really broke through into the top echelons. So we still need to wait and see what comes of it and if (or how much further) his game can develop, and perhaps whether his running commentary on his career goals & achievements will evolve as well.

Either way, I enjoy watching and following him so far.

Voicemale,

“Or are you trying to imply, infer or insinuate that Gremelmayr had no chance in that match yesterday? If that’s what you mean, just say that, in plain English. I’m missing the connection you try to make with the match in Estoril and his match yesterday. It’s baffling.”

For sure Gremelmayr had a chance yesterday as he played Novak close; but I honestly think he would’ve known that going in based on his results on clay this year. He also had Roger on the ropes. So to clarify, I was responding to you on two counts: (1) the point about the servic