Thank you, Sean, for once again being on top.
Actually, I like this draw, though I’d have preferred Djoko once again meeting Rafa in the semi. The assertion that Fed got a tougher draw is valid because Djoko is on his side, like in AO. Rafa does not have an easy draw either. A qualifier can be an upsetter. Plus, if I were Fed or Rafa, I would choose Monfils over Gulbis. Youzhny can always topple him. I like Roddick’ draw: At least, he’s not on Fed/Djoko’s side.

Let me copy and paste my post from the other thread.

The biggest news of the morning is that Djokovic is on the same side of the draw as Fed.

1st Quarters:
Fed Federer will play Dominik Hrbaty in the first round. He could be meeting with Monfils in the third round; then Lleyton Hewitt in the fourth round. Ancic, Gonzu, Berdych, Ferrer, Bolelli, and Nishikori are also in this quarters.

2nd Quarters:
In the 1st Rd, Djoko will play Michael Berrer, a difficult opponent to get by. Djoko could face Wawrinka in the 3rd Rd. with Nalby or Baghy in the 4th. Ivo, Safin and Del Potro are also in this quarters.

3rd Quarters:
Roddick will play Eduardo Schwank in the first round and with Blake and Davydenko in the later rounds. Tipsy, Mathieu, Cilic are in this quarters.

4th Quarters:
Rafa has drawn qualifier Andreas Beck in the 1st Rd. In the later rounds, Rafa could face Kiefer, Youzhny and Stepanek. Gulbis or Isner or Minar, Jane’s dark horses, could be trickier for Nadal’s chances against either of them in the 2nd Rd. In the Quarters, Rafa could be playing the winner of Murray and Gasquet, who are likely to meet in the 4th Rd.

I posted the following from the Wimbledon Website on another thread:

Another Borg Prediction:

10:24am While we wait for the ladies’ singles to commence, here’s a recent comment from Bjorn Borg: “I pick Rafael Nadal as winner and my second choice is Novak Djokovic, my third is Roger. For [Roger] to beat those guys at Wimbledon he needs to play much better than he did last summer. He knows he will have to play some unbelievable tennis to win again. This is the most open Wimbledon for years.” So Bjorg thinks Djokovic will beat Federer in the semis.

Posted June 20th, 2008 at 5:59 am

____________________

Von Says:
jane & Shital:

Djokovic is on Federer’s side of the draw. any thoughts?

Posted June 20th, 2008 at 6:01 am

____________________

Von Says:
TO ALL:

FYI: From the Wimbledon Website:

11:25am Abbey from Ireland writes: “I wonder what Djokovic feels about his luck in slams. He always gets to be in the draw of the defending champion. What do you think about the draw? Whose half is more difficult? And what do you think of Nadal’s chances against his possible 2nd round opponents, Gulbis or Isner? Can’t wait for Wimbledon to start! VAMOS RAFA!”

You would have to say that Federer will be having more restless nights than Nadal with this draw. He has Monfils, the Australian Open finalist, and former Wimbledon winner Hewitt. David Nalbandian has a couple of players in section that could cause some headaches, the likes of Ivo Karlovic and Marco Baghdatis.

11:20am The draws have been completed. We will post the full draw for each event on the website as soon as possible.”

Posted June 20th, 2008 at 6:34 am

If Nadal can make the final, he will more likely to grab the Wimbledon crown. Rafa needs tough opponents to improve himself. Good news is he may face Isner or Gulbis in 2nd round. The game is now better than AO 08

Nadal is going to have a tough second round match. He gets either Isner or Gulbis.

Fed has a couple of potential early round hard matches with Soderling and Monfils.

Gulbis is my pick to beat Isner although in the early rounds grass plays more like grass right? Gulbis-Nadal in round 2 is a good match right out of the gate. As for Federer-Djokovic well that is just the way things go. At U.S. O 07 and FO 08 Djoko was on Nadal’s side of the draw and at W. 08 and AO 08 he was on Federer’s side of the draw. Tennis does not seed like the NCAA basketball tournament so this can happen and players just have to play the draw in front of them.

Gulbis can easily to do to Nadal what Tsonga did to him in AO 2008.
Gulbis has great game for grass.

Looking at this thing more closely I would say the Roddick-Davydenko quarter is the easiest, but potentially good matches can be found throughout the early portion of the draw.

Thanks to everyone for the update; I woke up to all of this exciting “draw” news.

Von,

Regarding what you posted from another site, I think Djoko will be facing a tough opponent in every slam semi if he gets through to that far - just because he’s third. He’ll always face either Rafa or Fed until the rankings shift.

What do you think of Roddick’s draw? Nice that he lands on Rafa’s side for a change. Maybe we could have a Roddick vs. Djoko final?

Shital,

Rafa’s draw looks pretty tough; I agree with you that he has a few more dark horses. Djoko’s lucky in that Nalby and Baggy, if both get that far, will tire each other out before either one faces Novak. I wonder if Novak will beat Roger on grass? It’s a tough order for him, given Roger’s records on grass, but for some reason I think Novak’s game matches up a little better with Roger’s than Rafa’s. We’ll see!

Branimir,

I agree - Gulbis might be dangerous for Rafa.

Shital - Ivo will be dangerous for Djoko, don’t you think?. Novak had trouble with his serve on clay this year, so on grass it’ll be even more lethal. It will depend on who can come through the tiebreaks. It could be a barn-burner. It depends if Novak - a great returner - can get a read on Ivo’s evil serve.

Sean, thank for the prompt info of the W. draw. I cannot wait for Federer to dismental Djokovic. We will see if he will be man enough to stand up for the challenge this time. No more sore throat excuses, please.

I believe Nadal has a tough time in the second round.

The grass is faster in the first week, and Isner or Gulbis can be extremly dangerous to him in that situation.

Actually I think Gulbis is going to beat him in that second round.

But, If Nadal win that second round and become confident, he could get to SF.

If he get there, he will probably face Roddick and everything can happen.

Federer will reach SF easily, and I believe Djokovic will be there as well. And then Federer will beat Djoko in the SF.

I would love to watch Federer-Djokovic and Nadal-Roddick semifinals, but anything can happen and I somehow feel that some of those four players are not getting to SF.

David Ferrer and Fernando Verdasco (both from Spain) reach the final in Hertogenbosch and Nottingham respectively.

They are probably thinking: “If Nadal can win on grass, ¿why can’t we?”

It seems that spaniards players are taking grass-court tennis more seriously than years back.

Dan,
Thank you for your encouragement (ref: the other thread). I will do so after a couple of months.

And, yes, Roddick cannot expect to get better than this draw. He beat Cilic at Queen’s last year. Davy is no match for him on grass. Who else is left?

Jane,
Ivo just beat Monfils today. And like you mentioned, Djoko beat him in Hamburg recently, but that was on clay and that was the only time they met. I think Ivo’s serve is more effective on grass as evidenced by his performance not just against Monfils today but also against Rafa last week. Ivo is really a weak returner, though he can play at the net fairly well. He does not have any formidable shot. This guy can play entire match with his backhand. Djoko not only have to serve perfect, but also be able to return at least 50% and return every ball to Ivo’s forehand side so that he can avoid tie breakers. One of the best things about Djoko is he can read most of opponents’ serve accurately. With that said, Ivo is still an opponent every one wants to avoid because he can take out any player on the tour just on the basis of his serve plus if he can get 15% return points.
About Djoko meting Fed in the semi, we differed earlier. You chose Fed, and I chose Rafa. I think, though unsure, Djoko would choose Rafa on any surface but clay. I would not play a guy who has not lost on grass for 6 years and has won 10 titles on this surface, a record tie with Sampras. But, maybe, you are right Djoko feels more comfortable with Fed, gets more motivated and has more confidence against him. We will find out.

Of all early round matches, Gulbis upsetting Rafa is more imaginable than others. Gulbis and Rafa have not met before. Gulbis is fearless. He has big serve. He will just have to up his 1st serve percentage. His backhand and forehand are really good. He moves on the court as nearly well as Rafa does. Rafa is best on positioning, which is a huge advantage. Rafa is definitely the best overall returner on the tour, but who can return 1st serve better? I don’t know. The metaphor “dark horse” fits in here. There lies the secret until they play each other.

wow. do you think novak might actually finish his semi final against roger? assuming they both get that far of course….

Andrea is cynical as usual.

You got to say it is a fairly tricky draw for both Nadal and Federer. Believe it or not Fed is 0-2 against Hrbaty. Only active player other than nadal that fed has a losing record against? soderling has been in good form and then you have hewitt, and gonzo. I do think fed will make it to the semis without dropping a set though. Djokovic-Federer is a totally exciting prospect. I do believe however, that outside of clay, djokovic would rather face nadal than federer. Especially on grass where djokovic’s movement is not as good as it is on the hardcourts. That said, the pressure will be all on Roger. It is going to be a great match nonetheless.

Nadal’s draw is quite tricky too with gulbis, kiefer, youzhny/stepanek and murray. You gotta like nadal to make it through based on what we saw at queens but i would not be shocked if he did not make it through. I think he will make it, though I would love to see murray/gasquet make a run. roddick has the easiest quarter and his fitness is more of a question mark than anything else. It will be great if he can make it to the semis.

Fed-djoko - i will take fed and rod-nadal, will go with nadal.

Fed will beat nadal in atmost 4 sets

I think Roddick has the easiest passage to the semi-final and he won’t ever get an easier route than this.He should reach the sf easily if his shoulder is ok.Tipsarevic is a bit of an enigma and could prove a bit tricky but there is no other player in that part of the draw who could be a threat to rod on grass.
Had i not seen rafa at queens,i’d have apprehended a potential upset against gulbis.keifer and yuzhny can also trouble him but i really don’t see who-apart from rod at his best-can prevent rafa from reaching the final given the form rafa is in at the moment.murray,haas and gasquet can play well on grass but have not done much recently to inspire too much confidence.
fed has a tricky match against soderling who has a very dangerous game for grass if he can put a high first serve percentage in.all his potential third round opponents serve well but they or hewitt in the next round don’t seem capable of an upset.it’d be interesting to see who amongst berdych,kohlschreiber,llodra,ancic and ferrer goes on to meet fed in the qf.i’d have picked ancic but his recent defeat to ferrer shows that ferrer can’t be totally dismissed.ancic’s match with llodra could be the biggest match of the first round if llodra has recovered fully from his recent injury.
Novak should have very little trouble reaching the quarter final.i expect baghdatis to beat karlovic and then beat either lopez or nalby to go on and meet novak.that qf could be a very good one if marcos were to bring his ‘a’ game.Novak should prevail though.
the expected semi-finals(and this line-up appears almost a certainty)i.e. fed-novak and rod-rafa could really turn memorable if rod and fed are on form.otherwise,i expect novak to prevail in a tough encounter against fed and rafa should subdue rod.my pick-purely because of the way he played at queens- is rafa.he should beat a tired novak in the final.So much for speculation:)I just get the feeling that this might not be fed’s year and rafa gets my vote over novak only on current form.however,as a lot of people have said rather curiously,fed remains the favorite till he is actually beaten on the wimb lawns.

noel,

That’s a good bracket analysis; I agree that Fed’s the favorite, if not on current form certainly on past for at Wimbledon. I also agree that if Rafa makes it to the final, he wins it all. I just think he’s gunning for it this year because he knows he came within a hair’s breath last year. I am not sure if Djoko can beat Fed on grass, but we know he can beat him on hardcourt, which are also fast. Jack mentioned that Novak’s movement on grass isn’t as strong as on hard, and I’d agree. A lot depends on Roger’s form and it looked good at Halle.

Jack,
Andy murray also has a winning record against fed.

Plus, let’s not forget Roger will want revenge on both Novak and Rafa, and he’ll be out to prove himself since the press / pundits have been speculating about him all year. So that could be an x-factor. But is his confidence still good? We don’t really know; he says it is, but surely against Rafa it’s always been a little questionable.

I hope federer doesn’t plan to show up wearing that pompous and elitist dinner jacket again this year he would only end up looking like a bigger joke after his embarrassing bagel beating in the french open final.

fed gets the djoker in his half this time, yesssss!

Noel,
A lot of what you say sounds convincing except maybe, Djoko taking out Fed, which verges on optimism and I would happily take that. We all know Fed-Djoko match will be the tougher semi of the two, and it will stay as everyone’s curiosity even after Djoko leads 2-0 until it is over. Also, I am not so sure about Rafa, despite his impressive run at the Queen’s.

The most likely part of your assessment is Baghy eliminating Ivo as well as Nalby to face Djoko in the quarter. Baghy defeated Ivo this year in their only meeting at Marseille. Against Nalby, he has 3-1 H2H record. The 3 wins are on grass, carpet, and hard. The loss was on clay.

Jane,
I agree that novak’s movement on grass is not as good as rafa’s or fed’s is. rafa exposed that-only a few players can make you move as much as rafa does- in the queens final.however,it becomes less and less of a factor as the tournament progresses.not only do the players start adapting,the courts also become less slippery especially if there is not too much rain.the wimb centre court grass on the second saturday/sunday is not the same as the one on the opening monday.players can be caught a bit cold in the earlier rounds particularly by big servers.hence the genuine threats posed by the likes of gulbis and soderling.
There is no question that federer at his best is well nigh invincible on any surface except clay but he has not come anywhere close to his best form this year and with all due respect to you, halle is a bit irrelevant to me-and i presume to fed also- as far as fed’s form is concerned although it must have reassured a lot of his fans.there is at least nothing that would alarm them. we are not doubting if he can make the semis or not.the point is whether he can beat novak or rafa on current form.both of them were at queens and i was extremely impressed by what i saw.rafa’s game has improved in every area and he looks unstoppable unless he has peaked a bit early.his level(while very scary but somehow expected at rg)on grass scared me and it doesn’t happen that often to me.nole wasn’t too far behind and the final was a joy to watch.i think it is the first time in several years that i have taken the queens result seriously as a pointer to possible wimb form.this was entirely due to the level at which rafa played and the way nole fought him.their levels on grass were quite astonishing.nole would prefer to meet fed in the sf under the circumstances.he is much more confident about his chances against fed.i get the feeling that he rattles fed mentally as much as with his game.i also think nole will progress much more easily compared to last year and would be much fresher for the latter rounds.the outcome that i expect is far from being a forgone conclusion though.a fed-rafa final or even a fed win is hardly beyond the realms of my imagination.the crucial question is whether fed can recapture his best form in time for the sf and final.

Jane,
i totally agree that fed would like to prove a point and he’d be really motivated and if he can’t get confident on grass,he probably won’t get confident anywhere else.

Shital,
nole’s win by no means is a certainty.i have talked about a tough encounter and that too is dependent on fed playing a bit below his best.if fed plays at his best,he goes through relatively easily.period.
i know that rafa somehow still fails to convince many people about his grass credentials despite having reached the last two wimb finals.i myself didn’t expect him to do so well the last two years but i am more convinced this year because of the way he has improved this year.he is now a better all-round player and his movement on grass is hardly any different from his movement on clay.he will win some matches on sheer will-power.his mental toughness and motivation appear unmatched.he also has a big advantage in best-of-five matches which he somehow manages to grind out even if he is not playing at his best and that is why i think he will get through in potentially tricky matches unless he has a horrible day.of course,nothing is cast in stone and much stranger things have happened.as i said,so much for speculation:)

Noel,

As usual your post is both intelligent and illuminating. I don’t put a lot of stock in Roger’s win at Halle, given the competition; however, he did get the title without dropping his serve or a set, which tells me his form on grass at least is better than what we’ve seen up to now this year. As I mentioned above, I also think he’ll be out to prove himself - whether that adds pressure or helps him to focus and buckle down remains to be seen.

As for the Djoko vs/ Rafa Queens final, I totally agree that it’s an indicator of who may prevail at Wimbledon this year: what a fantastic final. I find their rivalry very exciting, and I would even go so far as to argue that it’s in part Djokovic who has pushed Rafa to improve, being right on his heels since last year. Rafa’s wins over Djoko at Hamburg and especially RG were celebrated more visibly than his wins against Rog, which suggests to me that Rafa is well aware what Novak is capable of. That said, Rafa clearly has the upper hand in their rivalry.

Roger and Novak are another story. Although Roger was beating him when he retired at MC, which I’ll take as sincere on Novak’s part, it wasn’t anything near a rout, and Novak wasn’t at his best. And although some devalue Novak’s win over Roger at the AO due to the mono, they can’t do the same about his win in Montreal, nor his close fight (and yes, choke) at the USO. So for some reason I agree with you that Novak will be happier to face Roger in the semi than Rafa; I may be wrong, but it’s just a hunch.

With these three, and even with Roddick, so long as his shoulder doesn’t trouble him, “everything is possible” at SW19 this year. But I wouldn’t be surprised, either, if some upstart or surprise makes it to the semis instead - it’s happened at both slams this year, with Tsonga and then Monfils. It’s not unlikely it’ll happen again. The question is, who are the real dark horses?

Ivo Karlovic is going to be a tough draw for anyone at Wimbledon. He’s shown some great form in the last couple of weeks, first at Queens where he took Nadal to three sets and wasn’t broken, and now this week at Nottingham, where he’s into the final. I wouldn’t be surprised if he went a long way into this tournament - at least to the second week, given his form and grass being his most favoured surface.

The fact is, the depth of the field means that there are potential banana skins throughout the draw. Lleyton Hewitt, Robin Soderling, Janko Tipsaravic and Verdasco on course to meet top seeds in the first few rounds, but essentially, Djokovic, Federer and Nadal should comfortably get to the SF without too much trouble. Federer’s path already looks like it’s been made a bit easier with Monfils injuring himself in his match against Karlovic today, and now looking doubtful for next week.

In terms of British interest, Murray looks like he’s got a pretty tough draw - potentially Malisse in the 2nd round, then Robredo in R3 and Gasquet in the last 16. He has the potential to beat all of those, but I question his consistency and ability to last in a grand slam.

Whatever happens, the draw looks as though it’s going to offer up some fantastic opportunities to watch some great matches - weather permitting, of course!

Noel:

“i also think nole will progress much more easily compared to last year and would be much fresher for the latter rounds.the outcome that i expect is far from being a forgone conclusion though”

There is the possibility that Djoko will progress more easily as he goes through the early rounds as compared to his ‘07 Wimby performance, but that is contingent upon how much of his strength/energy conservation he has has learnt to manage. Additionally, his time management on court is another area of his game that needs to be addressed.

Question: Has Djoko demonstrated in his post AO ‘08 tournaments that he is conserving more energy, thus leaving some, or a decent amount of it in the tank for the big matches? Or, will he continue, as has been exhibited in the past, to drag and/or grind out his matches in order to secure a win after fighting to the bitter end in 5 setters?

If Djoko cannot make quick work of dismissing his opponents in a timely and efficient manner in 3 sets, then when, and if he reaches the QFs, he’ll be struggling. Regardless of what is said that his listless look is more attributed to play acting than reality, it is visibly noted that he does become “wobbly” as his body is subjected to the rigors of grinding through lengthy 5 setters and/or fighting off tough opponents. Therein lies Djoko’s success and/or failure in reaching the QFs and progressing beyond onto the SFs. The burning question: Is he capable of energy conservation and/or can he do it???? It’s easy to say that he knows he must do this, but, will his opponents allow him this luxury?

Von,

What do you think about Tipsy as possible trouble for Andy? I know it was a long time ago, and not Roddick’s high point to say the least, but Tipsy pushed Andy to 4 sets that year at Wimbledon and he got to the R16 last year beating Gonza along the way and fighting Ferrero, who took a set off Roger last year, well. Any other potential threats for Andy in your opinion? I think his draw looks pretty good all the way to Blake, but there are a couple of toughies on the bottom half of his quarter - Mathieu and Cilic. Still, I think Andy should get through.

Von,

I know your question is addressed to Noel, and I am sure she’ll have a good reply.

But to add my 2 cents re: Huckleberry post AO 08; here are some of his results:

At Dubai, he lost no sets, until Roddick, who won.
At IW, he lost no sets, until 1 to Fish in final, and won.
At Rome, he lost 1 to Andreev & 1 in the final to Wawrinka, and won.
At Hamburg, he lost none until Rafa, who won.
At RG, he lost only 1 set until he lost to Rafa.

You’re right that sometimes his fitness/ energy seems challenged, but I think so far this year he’s done a pretty good job of avoiding long grind, like last year. Hopefully he can keep that up!

I think Tipsarevic is just one of those players that can challenge a top player on any given day, but also go out to a relative unknown as well. And, I believe he’s really the only one that could threaten Andy early (unless Andy’s injuries return).

Fed couldn’t have had a better warm-up (much better than the last time he played Halle when he went 3 sets nearly every match). He didn’t lose his serve once, which is impressive.

Djokovic did well at the French to win most of early matches quickly. With his health questionable towards the end of events (at times), it was important for him, especially with all the delays, which could happen again at Wimbledon.

I still think Nadal is a question mark. And, I don’t mean any disrespect with that. Even with his great performance in the final last year, he struggled through some of his matches. I think he has the toughest draw of “the 3.” If he gets pushed numerous times, I wonder if he can continue to pull them all out. If he can, major kudos. But, there are a lot of players that could take him out. I don’t think I’ll be surprised if he makes the final (or wins) or if he goes out early, simply because his draw is difficult.

PJ -

I think Nadal has stepped up his game considerably since last year’s Wimbledon. And let’s remember - despite, as you put it, struggling through last year, he still managed to take Federer to five sets in the final.

I don’t think ’staying the course’ will be a problem for Rafa, and really, although he might have a tough draw, should get through to the SF at least without too much of a problem.

If he gets Gasquet or Murray in QF, that could prove to be a fantastic match - it’ll be interesting to see how Murray’s moved on compared to Nadal since he took him to five sets at the Australian Open in 2007 - provided he gets through, of course!

I definitely agree that Nadal is better than he was last year, and he may not struggle against some of the players I think he might. He just has a lot of players in his draw that could challenge him on a fast surface (Gublis, Stepanek - if not injured, Youzhny, etc). Again, these are players that COULD challenge. We thought a lot of players may challenge him at the French, and we saw how that turned out.

jane:

“What do you think about Tipsy as possible trouble for Andy?”

Tipsy could be a handful for Andy if he’s still struggling with his back. However, before thinking about Tipsy let’s not forget that guy,Eduardo Schwank, who pushed Moya to 5 sets in the FO, could be problematic for Roddick from the first round. I don’t understand the statements that the Roddick/Davydenko quarter has an easy draw. Davydenko yes, but not Roddick. Davydenko is in the unenviable position where the focus is on the top 3; he and Ferrer seem to always luck out with the easy draws after the top 3 draws are done.

This year’s Wimby is questionable for Roddick — bad back, not enough match play, and two tough first and second round opponents. The nature of the best — but, only time will tel.

Von,

I did not see you this morning until after I posted my comment. And then you were gone. My comment had a response to your query, though it did not address you specifically. This is a makeup for that.
About a week ago, I responded to your comment about “old friends.” It appears you did not bother to read it. That is alright.

In your post above, you are raising a question about homeostatic imbalance resulting from inability to sustain protracted physical stress. The precautionary remedy, as you and Jane, pointed out, is conserve energy by shortening the length of stress. If economy, i.e. literally efficient use of resources, fails, then the option available to the player in question is to either recreate energy by allowing irritation from the opponent or gather and apply new tactical information quickly enough to bedazzle the opponent though at the risk of reverse overthrow. Looking at the landscape, Djoko could face, once again, Baghy in the quarter and, with him, a possible prolonged match. Let us hope Jane’s historical data are symptomatic of his new found immunity against lengthy matches, in double sense.

And, what’d up, you are not saying anything about your huckleberry? Where do you see him?
I am just secretly hoping the two huckleberries meet in the final.

Von,

Oh I had forgotten about / overlooked Schwank, who was a tough “out” on the clay, pushing Mathieu to 4 sets also.

Well, all we can do is hope for the best for our guys! I’d like to see Andy through to the semis at least; in fact I’d very much like to see him hoist the trophy given his battles with Fed in the past. But we’ll have to see. I’m with Shital - be nice to see our guys in the final.

jane:

“But to add my 2 cents re: Huckleberry post AO 08; here are some of his results:”

The results you quoted for Djoko are 2 of 3 sets. -

- IW he lost one set to Fish in the final — I believe he was tired; Fish was only serving at 35%; if Fish had upped his serving percentage he could have won that match.

- Rome, he had a retirement from Stepananek,was rested and still lost 1 set to Wawrinka in the final.

- Hamburg, he wasn’t really pushed by Montanes, until he met Rafa.

In the 3 of 5 format when he loses one set the match becomes more critical for him because he’s automatically pushed to a 4th or maybe a 5th set, and that’s where the grinding and the energy problems will begin to arise. If he can keep his Wimby performance to 3 straight sets per match, then he should be rested with the one day in between, and then if and when he gets to the QFs and SFs, he’ll be just fine.

I wish the best for him for your sake. How about sending him some wheaties to the rescue or a munch of grass for a salad. That should do the trick!

Von,
In my post, I did not count Davy, Ferrer, and other top ten below Roddick as serious title contenders. I had Roddick among the top 4 title contenders. In comparison to Fed and Rafa, it appears that he has an easier draw from early rounds through the quarters. That does not mean he will not have to play or will win his way through semi more easily than others. As the tournament starts, our speculations can go wrong, and he may end up facing tougher challengers than the top three’s.
However, your huckleberry will eat Schwank alive in straight sets, regardless of his bad back. Mark my words. Roddick will have to play, maybe, 4 sets in the quarter final. Rest assured he will be in the semi. Stay hopeful.

Good to see tennis get some much deserved recognition for a change. Good on Mr.Federer for raising the Gold standard in tennis to insane heights!

Long live the King!

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-GREATEST08.html

From the “Who’s in the trunk” section

“Bjorn Borg
We get a little testy when Roger is about to break our records, don’t we? Picking him as the THIRD horse this year? Can you retire from talking to the media?”

Absolutely Did you see his sour face expression when Roger finally broke Nadal in fifth set last year and grabbed the trophy.

About more and more Spaniards reaching the finals of grass tournaments… yes, grass is definitely slower than hardcourts now, it probably matches the American “green clay”.

I don’t like that, every surface should have its charm - I enjoyed watching Wimbledon as a kid, because matches were dynamic and didn’t last for hours like on RG. On RG, you can always raise your level and get back in the set, but Wimby was like a chess game - one or two bad moves (serves), and you go a break down and most probably a set down as well.

Look at the Karlovic’s matches as an example how it used to be to play against big servers on Wimbledon… you can play perfectly a whole set, but make a single mistake in the tiebreak, and it’s over, just like that.

Shital:

“About a week ago, I responded to your comment about “old friends.” It appears you did not bother to read it. That is alright.”

I never saw your answer to my facetious swing at you about “old friends”. I was kind of ‘miffed’ that you didn’t bother to reply (now I realize that was wasted emotion as you did indeed reply) considering I went to such lengths to inflict some kind of guilt trip on you. Anyway, where was your reply posted? I’d like to still read it — I’m sure a laugh or two would be in the ‘offing’(emphasis added for Skorocel).

“In your post above, you are raising a question about homeostatic imbalance resulting from inability to sustain protracted physical stress.”

Well, let’s hope that there’s the proper homeostasis synchronization evolving in the huckleberry’s body at the required intervals to sustain the protracted physical stress, to enable him to perform as a finely tuned machine; and, I mean ‘homeostasis’ and not ’stasis’ or else that will be lights out for the poor huckleberry. You are correct that he can garner energy by giving it his all when push comes to shove, by firing some aces or some dreamy backhand shots down the line to finish the points. The last thing he would want is to get involved in long baseline rallies, which would extinguish his fire and send him into stasis for sure. This poor guy has provided much materiel in the laughter department. However, all will be good if he can channel his nervous energy in a positive manner to fend off the opposition. A creative way would be to break out in one of Stepanek’s worm dance — how’s that for improvisation and bedazzling the opposition?

“Let us hope Jane’s historical data are symptomatic of his new found immunity against lengthy matches, in double sense.”

I’m sure you know what they say about stats — “It’s all elementary, my dear Watson.”

“And, what’d up, you are not saying anything about your huckleberry? Where do you see him?
I am just secretly hoping the two huckleberries meet in the final.”

I’m trying to follow TD’s directive — she does not want any talk about Roddick!

___________________
Skorocel my friend:

English 101 - I’ve added two new British words for your vocabulary at the beginning of this post — ‘miffed” and ‘offing’. Hope you like them.

Von,
The response is there around 15-16th post from the bottom in the thread titled “No Denying Nadal, Not Even on a Grass Court.”
That should sauté your miff fine.

Shital:

“That should sauté your miff fine.”

It sure does. I missed all of those posts on that thread beginning with yours down the line. It was good reading them.

So after I finished Federer’s book, I started Sampras’s. I’m a little bit more than halfway through it. I definitely recommend both books. Anyways.

It’s absolutely ridiculous to think Federer will not win Wimbledon. As good as Nadal has gotten, as much improvement Djokovic has made, it doesn’t matter. There’s more to it than disproving the critics for Federer. It’s even beyond setting the record with 6 straight Wimbledons. On ESPN, one of the writers predicted Nadal beating Federer in 4 sets. No way. If Federer loses, it won’t be the way he’s lost the French, not just this year but in years prior. He seemed to go away at times in the French finals. But at Wimbledon, he will stay in it till the very end. If Nadal wins it, it’ll be 7-5 in the fifth at LEAST.

Djokovic won’t stop Federer on grass, not yet anyway. He may be happier to face Federer than Nadal, but this is grass. This is Wimbledon. It’s Centre Court baby. Federer won’t give it up easily, and he definitely won’t give it up to anyone but Nadal.

First round will be very interesting. Federer has never beaten Hrbaty. Why is that so overlooked?

sensationalsafin,

I looked that up; Fed hasn’t played Hrbaty since 2004!! And he’s only played him once prior to that, in 2000. So I hardly think that stat matters anymore (both were on hard/carpet). Were talking #272 versus #1. If Fed doesn’t win that match then the press can talk “end of an era” all it wants. LOL.

Thanks for the recommendation on the books; I read John McEnroe’s book a while back and enjoyed it. I may read Pete’s.

After Zvereva beat Graf at Wimbledon after being something like 0-18 against her, I believe anything is possible. But yeah, no Federer fan can say anything redeeming if Federer goes out to Hrbaty in the first round of Wimbledon.

I still thing it’s interesting to note. But I think it’s pretty clear I have a lot of faith and confidence in Federer.

I read McEnroe’s book back when it came out, too. I thought it was great, but then again I think anything tennis related is great. Something interesting to note, if you read Sampras’s book, is their reaction to Vitas Gerulaitis’s death. I never knew until I read Sampras’s book that they had become good friends during Pete’s years on tour. But both McEnroe and Sampras talked about how distraught they were and anyone else connected to Gerulaitis, who must’ve been one helluva guy. McEnroe said he hadn’t talked to Gerulaitis for quite some time before the sudden death while Sampras had been with him only a few weeks prior. I don’t know, I think it’s really interesting.

Since the French Open is still fairly fresh on everyone’s mind I wanna make a few remarks about Sampras and his results at the French. He’s very often criticized for never even coming close to winning it, but that’s not completely true. Sure he was upset in the first round at one time or another, but he was consistently making the quarters. Yeah he only made one semi but that really could’ve been the one time he won it, too. He was coming off an injury and Tim Gullikson had just died. He played like 2 matches on clay prior and lost both. But at the French he beat Bruguera and Courier. Then he was facing Kafelnikov in the semis, which is like Federer facing Davydenko. He said after losing the first set, which didn’t phase him, he ran out of gas and kinda saw his and Gullikson’s dream of him winning the French shatter. It’s a real shame but now, more than ever, I say Sampras is the GOAT until Federer breaks the slam record. Because Sampras was a very capable player in many ways. Federer just happens to be the most talented player ever, which explains his UTTER dominance. But Pete was very dominant, too. Sometimes, a lot of the people on this blog undermine what both of these players have achieved and how much they had to go through (in Federer’s case is still going through) to claim their place at the top of tennis history.

But I don’t wanna be completely biased. I’ll admit Sampras and Federer are easily two of my favorite players and I have tons of respect for both. And I often criticize other players for whatever reason, Nalbandian for example. But reading these books I realize that great champion or consistent top 10 performer or journeyman, every player has a story behind his accomplishments that deserve a lot of respect. I don’t promise I’ll never criticize another player, but I hope in the future you guys notice that I’m not gonna say I flat out hate someone like I used to. It’s tough to be a pro, especially a top pro.

Notice I didn’t mention the women at all because I have yet to find a reason to respect them.

Why is anyone worried about Karlovic? Doesn’t anyone here realize Karlovic has lost in the 1st Round at Wimbledon for the last 3 years???

There’s all the proof you need about two things that big servers like him aren’t a gimme at Wimbledon: 1) the longer grass and heavier ball blunts their huge serving; 2) the Best of 5 Format hurts them as much or more. Most of them, like Karlovic, can keep up the huge hitting for a Best of 3 sets match, but when it gets to a 4th or 5th they far more often than not run out of gas. Like Robert Kendrick when he played Nadal in 2006. Dominated Nadal for two sets, then lost the last 3 sets, and by the 5th he was exhausted.

It’s not like the days when Sampras and Ivanisevic dominated there with Big Serving- it’s a completely different court now. It’s slower, and you need an athletic, powerful and varied ground game to win it today.

The reason nobody’s talking about Hrbaty being a threat to Federer is mainly due to Hrbaty’s absence on the men’s tour for quite sometime now being sidelined by injury. His ranking has dropped severely, and he’s now gotten a few years older — probably close to 30 or so. That being the case how much of a threat will he be to Federer. That H2H is now moot — a thing of the past. I’d say Federer will win that match hands down in 3 straights; 6-1, 6-3-; 6-0, or some ridiculous stat like that. unless Skorocel wants to help his countryman in the serving department or running around Fed’s backhand.

Roger’s reign on the wane: Woodforde

Linda Pearce in London
June 21, 2008
[…]
Curious and perhaps telling, Woodforde believes, was the decision to announce that Federer had been suffering from glandular fever after he had lost to Djokovic in the semis of the Australian Open to end a run of 10 consecutive grand slam finals.

“Why mention it after his loss in Melbourne? Who has heard of it affecting a player for only eight to 10 weeks? Ask Mario Ancic - he took more than 10 months to overcome glandular fever,” Woodforde said.

“Why not simply let the Djokovic loss slide by and keep it in-house? Was he and is he feeling the pressure more?”
[…]
http://www.smh.com.au/news/tennis/rogers-reign-on-the-wane-woodforde/2008/06/20/1213770923479.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

I am glad that somebody of Woodforde’s calibre has said out loud what many of us have been saying for months- that Federer’s announcing his glandular fever right after losing to Djokovic was tasteless, crass, and in some ways desperate. It’s almost as if were making excuses via the media for his loss and deliberately trying to take Djokovic’s win away from him.

I am still not completely convinced that it was glandular fever to begin with but whatever it is old news now and he is healthy again (Roger that is).

Von- “I’m trying to follow TD’s directive — she does not want any talk about Roddick!”

Yes! thank you, We dont want to blow Roddick’s cover now do we? Let him slide in unnoticed and unremarked upon. Instead let’s talk about more dangerous floaters like Ancic and Nalbandian.

Woodforde’s comments are fallacious - Federer mentioned his contracting of mononucleosis after his loss to Murray in the first round of Dubai. Apparently, Federer didn’t even know of the diagnosis in Melbourne.

In any case, he certainly wasn’t “trying to take Djokovic’s win away from him.” His agent stated in March (excerpt):
***
“He doesn’t want to make any excuses and take anything away from anybody,” Roger Federer’s agent, Tony Godsick, said Friday.
***

TD:

“”Instead let’s talk about more dangerous floaters like Ancic and Nalbandian.”"

Do you really feel that Ancic and Nalbandian are dangerous floaters? After Ancic was so quickly dispatched at the FO in 3 sets; it’s questionable to me that he’s a dangerous floater — I’d say he’s a threat sometimes, but not all of the time. However, Ancic does have a physical problem which is very visible at times — it seems to weave in and out, Ancic’s mono will always be a life-long problem — one that doesn’t go away. Federer was fortunate that his mono’s duration only lasted for 8 weeks. In the majority of cases I’ve seen, it’s a long term struggle which befalls its victims whenever they are over-fatigued by too much strenuous exercise. But what’s Nalbandian’s affliction? Perhaps a case of too much lunch, coupled with being out to lunch. He was a case of the proverbial potted plant in his SF match with Djoko. To be truthful, I had expected him to take out Djoko and Nadal. He certainly has the game to do it. So much for wishful thinking.

I will do my very best to leave Andy’s cover intact, as per your wishes.

I think this is what federer really needs.Atleast this draw is better than fed crusing through the finals and then getting beaten up by nadal.If fed comes through this draw he’ll be confident enough to take on nadal since he has beaten djokovic, and all the other dangerous guys.If he is not in form its better that he loses to someone else than losing to nadal in the final.

Von said:

“I’d say Federer will win that match hands down in 3 straights; 6-1, 6-3-; 6-0, or some ridiculous stat like that. unless Skorocel wants to help his countryman in the serving department or running around Fed’s backhand. :)”

Oh no! We don’t want to see Dominik lose 0, 0, and 0, do we?

—————————-

“Skorocel my friend:

English 101 - I’ve added two new British words for your vocabulary at the beginning of this post — ‘miffed” and ‘offing’. Hope you like them. :)”

Absolutely! As far as the first one goes, I only found “miff” and “miffy”, but I guess it’s pretty much the same as being “fed up”, isn’t it? Re: “offing”, well, this one surprised me a bit, since in my English vocab it says: “sea” But I guess “in the offing” (i.e. “near”, or “not far away”) should be more appropriate, isn’t it?

Anyway, I’m still waiting for you to explain me why there’s that number of 101 in the English course name

To sensationalsafin:

I completely agree with you re: Sampras! Even now, lots of people still tend to overlook him and his achievements, but why? Was he/his game boring or what? Huh? On the contrary, it was one of the most exciting games I’ve ever seen! He could play from the baseline (even though maybe not as versatile as does Fed), but at the net, he was the best!

P.S. Agree that Fed still has some work to do if he wants to be considered better than Pete - at least in terms of achievements…

Jane,
It has become difficult to pick the real dark horses at wimb primarily because the conditions(courts,balls etc) there have changed so much as voicemale1 has pointed out on more than one thread.it is no longer a serving shoot-out although big servers still have an advantage.it also depends on how you define a dark horse these days because I don’t see anyone outside of the top three –except rod at the us open- having a serious shot at the slams.similarly,very few thought till very recently that fed could be beaten at wimb.going by that everyone else becomes a bit of a dark horse but generally it’d be an insult to call the likes of rod,murray etc. dark horses.i’d have picked soderling and gulbis had they not been drawn to meet fed and rafa.while gulbis has a tougher route in case-unlikely as it is- he were to beat rafa,soderling can potentially reach the sf in case of an equally unlikely fed upset. If one were to go by the trend this year i.e. the top three plus a talented Frenchman-I am being more specific for no apparent reason:)- in the sf,then only mahut is ‘available’ because the others are in the top three’s quarters.ancic’s game has actually gone down from what it was a few years ago..all the other big servers like karlovic,querrey,cilic,Anderson etc will need a lot of luck to do well. A fit haas has the game for grass but he just isn’t match-fit.ditto for berdych, Hewitt and to a lesser extent,keifer.feliciano lopez has the game for grass but somehow seems to lack the confidence.youzhny,who, like gulbis ,is an unbelievable player on the practice courts,has just not been able to do justice to his immense talent.i hope murray does better.

I also find the rafa-nole rivalry very exciting and you are right when you say that rafa is very aware of the nole threat.i do think that nole’s game is better-suited(as compared to fed’s) to challenge rafa on clay and on current form,probably even on grass.however,nole will beat rafa very easily on a fast hard court.i guess nole’s powerful backhand(esp the up the line one)and flatter groundstrokes neutralize rafa’s lefty fh edge a lot.i also will be very curious about the way fed copes with nole’s power on the hard courts.i watched all the fed-nole matches that you talked about in your post.it was in montreal last year that it first hit me that the next-gen power hitters had arrived.that was an insanely fast court and fed was simply overpowered by nole’s groundies.the stats would show that fed made a lot of unforced errors but most of them were actually forced errors.fed wasn’t allowed to play well.i got the feeling immediately that fed’s days of hard-court domination were numbered.nole basically lost the us open final despite having many chances to win both the first and the second sets.however his ao campaign was very impressive.it’d be unfair to say that he won because of fed’s mono although fed did look strangely out of sorts just as in the fo final.i also agree that novak actually played very well at mc despite being less than 100% in that sf and he definitely had some breathing problem.
I find fed’s mono situation very fascinating.normally mono doesn’t go away so early.either he doesn’t/didn’t have mono-I’d think fed has enough credibility here for us to discount the possibility of a major lie-or he is continuing to play despite still having the problem.it could be something other than mono.some of his performances have been very strange and his movement is certainly not what it was.that loss to fish at iw was inexplicable and to think that fish had less than 40% first serves!!

It is true that the the top three are pushing each other to imrove their game.fed raised the bar first and rafa responded.these two have forced the rest of the field to improve as well.there was a time when rod’s serve and fh sufficed most of the time but even he had to work hard to add variety to his game.even then,he is not quite in the league of the top three except on fast surfaces.fed’s bh couldn’t have been what it is if rafa hadn’t pounded his bh relentlessly in their encounters.fed’s and nole’s hard court superiority has forced rafa to add more variety to his game and become more attacking. Such had been the fed-rafa duopoly that nole had to reach a very high level very quickly to compete with them and he has worked extremely hard to be where he is.nole is still a work in progress and going by what rafa has shown recently,rafa is not a finished article either.nole has the potential to dominate tennis when his game improves and matures as he approaches his peak physical conditioning.only murray seems to have the talent to challenge nole on the faster courts in the future when fed’s era inevitably ends.murray seems to be going the fed way so far as the results are concerned.fed was a relatively late bloomer and i hope murray does not join the ranks of those who promise so much and deliver very little.safin,who many consider to be even more talented than fed,at least won two slams.i can never forget the way he gave pete the pasting of his life in the 2000 us open final.pete said later that marat could win as many slams as he wanted.a combination of factors-esp injuries, marat’s lack of ambition and hard work-ensured that he didn’t realize even a fraction of his potential.i hope murray does better than that.

Von,
Jane has been kind enough to answer your question and has provided a lot of proof from the stats point of view and this should settle a lot of arguments about nole’s ability to win his earlier rounds without finding himself stretched. i’d like to address your question in terms of the overall improvement in his game and smart scheduling.
there is no doubt that nole has emerged as a major force in the men’s game and really established himself this year as a player capable of competing on equal terms with roger and rafa and beaten both at big tournaments.the fourth player is way behind him.these three are a cut above the rest.for novak,it wasn’t the same last year even though he had some great results.admittedly he wasn’t the fittest player and that showed at the end of the season especially at the tmc.he realized very quickly that he had to concentrate on the big ones and worked hard on his fitness in the off-season.the experience of playing at a high level teaches you a lot.for instance,he finishes the point earlier by coming to the net more often.his volleys are much better now. he played a lot of tournaments/matches last year.i think he played more than a hundred singles and doubles matches in 2007.he has already skipped adelaide and estoril this year and i am sure he will become more federer-like in his scheduling as he becomes more confident and enters his prime.as it is,he is playing at such a high level that he can dismiss most of the lesser opponents pretty comfortably in the earlier rounds on virtually all the surfaces although that ability is most obvious on a fast hard court.this is obviously as much a function of his improved tactics,skills,focus,mental toughness,motivation and confidence as it is of his better physical/athletic conditioning.losing just one set in winning the ao is no mean achievement and i haven’t seen him struggle too much in the earlier rounds this year. he is far from being in his best shape but different players peak at different times w.r.t their physical conditioning.remember,roger’s fitness was not very good in long matches as late as 2003/2004 and some still think that he’d struggle in a really long match.he worked hard on his fitness the last few years and that is why he has been so successful for so long.on the other hand,it appears as if rafa was a ‘beast’ even at the age of sixteen.tennis is such a demanding sport physically these days that one’s talent can only take one so far and not further unless it is accompanied by very good physical/athletic ability. novak couldn’t have had these great results without a decent fitness level.he has had a lot of success at the masters series events which are-despite being best of three- arguably more demanding physically than the slams because of back to back matches against top players without any rest days.

Noel, you write a book: You already have the 1st chapter above. Sensationalsafin, you read for us, get wiser and help us do the same. Skorocel, you keep learning Eng 101. Von, you keep providing us comic relief (without truthfully expecting anyone taking out Nole, maybe except A-Rod). If you did not know, Jane once said, long long ago, I say “whacky” things. Let me quote her for old time’s sake: “While you post some whacky things, and some that I disagree with, you have resolve and mettle to admire. Keep posting and shaking things up” (Sep 20, 2007). I am afraid I cannot be “w[h]acky” any more. I am matured now, under Jane’s tutelage.

Andy Murray in the most recent interview, if you have not read already:
“I think I’m going to get further than the fourth round sooner rather than later,” he said. “And that doesn’t really bother me that much because I don’t just want to get to the quarter-final, I’m interested in going further than that.

“I think when I play my best, I can play at that level,” he said. “It’s just a matter of being able to do it consistently over five sets. Even Federer struggles – as you saw at the French – to play at the level Nadal is playing at. He basically plays like that the whole time, he never drops down from that level. He’s so intense and he’s so fit that he’s able to do it.

“Djokovic and Federer can sometimes definitely play better than Nadal but I don’t think they maintain it for as long a period of time as Nadal does. I think I can get to that level, it’s just a matter of being able to hold it there for long enough.”

I said no such thing. All this is rubbish, I can’t progress further until I have confidence. Cheerio