6 Things I Think I Thought About Roger Federer’s Cincinnati Win, His Service Attacks And US Open Chances
by Sean Randall | August 25th, 2015, 5:17 pm
  • 155 Comments

Another summer lead-up and more of the same. John Isner played well in the smaller events, Novak Djokovic still can’t find the mark after Wimbledon and Roger Federer is up to his usual tricks winning another Cincinnati title, his seventh!

I’ll get to Isner, Djokovic, Andy Murray and the others in a separate post, but for now a few thoughts on Roger remarkable run last week.

1) He’s 34
That’s right. 34. He’s older than Andy Roddick who’s been out of the game a few years. He’s the same age as the broken-down Lleyton Hewitt who ranks 345 spots behind Roger. And he’s just a year younger than Marat Safin! Remember him? Of course you do. He hasn’t played in forever.

Point is, Federer just won his seventh Cincinnati title without losing serve, without losing a set and by beating the top two in the world on back-to-back days.

That impressive for anyone let alone a guy who just turned 34 with a wife and four kids.

Regardless of the court surface, fatigue factors with his opponents and the cushy early draw, it’s just an awesome performance.

2) The Sneak Attack Service Returns
So who didn’t enjoy watching Federer short-hop serves all week? I know I did.

It’s a tactic that was used back in the 80s – the chip and charge – but has gone away with the proliferation of the super strings and and high-tech racquets. But Federer took the tactic to an extreme in Cincinnati, not really chipping at all, just rushing and disrupting.

“I’m not going to play the way they like it,” Federer said Sunday. “I’ll always come out and make it an athletic match or make it uncomfortable in the sense that they don’t know what’s coming. Can’t always do it. Some surfaces allow you to do it better than others, but this week it worked out well. Let’s be honest, I didn’t do it on every single seconds serve, but I was very aggressive the a second serves, and I am happy to see that actually it’s also a way forward for me, because for quite a long time my career I was very content to chip it and be aggressive with the forehand.”

I don’t know what the finals numbers were – did he win 50% of those points? – but it was fun to watch and while it didn’t win him any matches, it sure did annoy his opponents and give them some extra to think about.

That said, I’ll be interested to see how he employs it going forward. The Cincy courts were quick, so that was a suitable place to try it. I don’t know yet if the US Open courts will be as fast.

But it will be certainly interesting to see how players continue to react. And like I said, it does give his opponents a little some extra to think about. And that’s often a good thing in this mental sport of ours.

3) Let’s Temper This
OK, so he won another Cincy, but if you want to make the case Roger had a dream draw early on and then he ran into two tired Big 4 guys at the end, well, I’ll listen.

Let’s be real, I don’t think many gave Murray much of a shot against Roger in the SFs. Not after Andy just won Canada then had to win two matches on consecutive days from a set down just to make the semis. In fact, Grigor should have done the deed in the third round, but couldn’t get his hands off his neck to finish it.

Djokovic looked like crap most of the week – David Goffin should have ended his run if not for a similar Grigor choke. Alexandr Dolgopolov had him on the ropes in the semis but couldn’t find the belief. And I credit Novak (and Andy).

Still, in the final I thought early on Djokovic rose up to the Federer challenge in the first set, but Roger was just too good taking the breaker. Then I felt the Serb relented a little bit. Maybe it was all the tennis he’s played or just the fact he can’t seem to win Cincinnati, but he looked out of it in the second, almost resigned to defeat.

And the event is played on one of the fastest outdoor hardcourts on the circuit. Like Dubai, which Federer also won this year for a seventh time beating Djokovic. But a few weeks later it was Novak winning the bigger title over Roger at Indian Wells.

4) Fresh And Confident
But hey, Roger’s not thinking that he got lucky last week. He’s thinking he’s fresh and full of confidence for the US Open.

And he’s right.

He goes into the US Open with more momentum than anyone else. And as he said, he’s got his matches, he’s got the confidence and he’s fresh. I really don’t know what more he could want? A win over Rafa in the Cincy quarters? Injuries to Novak and Murray?

5) The US Open No. 2 Seed
Federer says he doesn’t care much about it, but I think he does.

By getting the second seed, he now has a chance of avoiding Murray in the semifinals. Had he been third, he wouldn’t have that chance as he would have been drawn to face either Murray of Djokovic in the semifinals. Now there’s a chance he won’t see a Big 4 until the final. Which, at 34, has to help.

Then again, Murray could get put in Roger’s half anyway in which case the seeding wouldn’t have mattered at all.

But Federer’s often had the luck of the draw, so even though it’s a 50/50 bet where Murray lands, most would say he’ll fall with Novak. We’ll see on Thursday!

6) Does This Improve Roger’s Chances At The US Open?
Of course!

However Cincinnati and the US Open are two very different events. Yes, they are played on hardcourt in American, but Cincy has the quicker courts, the more compact schedule and the matches are best of 3.

In New York, it’s best-of-5 and players will get a day of rest between matches. So imagine Federer having to play Murray in Cincy after the Scot had a day off. Or Novak in the final after a day off. To me, that’s a big difference.

Then again, maybe Federer has a long match so he’ll have his time to recover. So it works both ways.

Point is, the best-of-5 format makes it tougher for Roger to win, and that’s something he hasn’t done at the US Open since 2008, and he hasn’t made the final since 2009.

Since his last US Open title, not including this year, Federer’s won Cincinnati four times and none of them resulted in a US Open title a few weeks later.

So that’s something to chew on as we wait for the US Open draw to be unveiled on Thursday.


You Might Like:
Tennis-X Funk/Trunk: Murray, Rafa, Kim-tastic
Watch Ryan Harrison Attack Roger Federer’s Serve [Video]
Breaking Down the No. 1 Ranking Between Federer, Nadal
Cilic Wins Cincinnati; What Does Andy Murray’s Loss Mean?
Here Are The Highlights From Roger Federer’s Win Last Night Over Grigor Dimitrov In Brisbane [Video]

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

155 Comments for 6 Things I Think I Thought About Roger Federer’s Cincinnati Win, His Service Attacks And US Open Chances

Travis Bickle Says:

“Then again, Murray could get put in Roger’s half anyway in which case the seeding wouldn’t have mattered at all.
But Federer’s often had the luck of the draw, so even though it’s a 50/50 bet where Murray lands, most would say he’ll fall with Novak. We’ll see on Thursday!”

I am really glad that Sean in the above paragraph basically revealed what he thinks of draws…
Sean puts it diplomatically that Federer has often had luck in draws and that most reasonable folks would say he will have the same “luck” this time and avoid Murray in semis. I agree with Sean on this one!

Let’s just say, I am willing to bet $1000 that Murray will be “randomly drawn” in Novak’s half…


chris ford1 Says:

Nice analysis of Federer’s prospects by Sean.


Daniel Says:

I think draw is vital for Fed and he can’t play any five set in the process, specially semis or quarters (as was the case last year with Monfils).

what would be a great draw for Fed:
1- Nadal or Ferrer in Quarters. Don’t know if Ferrer will play but even so he will be rusty. If he doesn’t Cilic bumped to 8 and Nadal 7.So getting Cilic would also better than Wawa or Berdych. As long as he avoids Wawa, who is the most dangerous of the 5 to 8 pack. We may want Nadalbut if Nadal is there to play him, meaning winning 4 matches best of 5, he may unleash his old self and we Fed fans may not get the result we want;-) But I still think he is vulnerable.
2 – Avoid Murray in semis. Not because he can’t beat them but to force the potential Djoko x Murray clash on the other side, which we know will go 4 or 5. Murray took Djoko to five in RG and won next time in Montreal, so that match could be draining gas both with leave everything on court.

If those two things happen he gets a great draw already and it can get even better if he draws a good match up for R16, say Goffin, Gasquet or Anderson.
That would be a dream draw, a quarry to open play (no dangerous first round) and voila, his chances increase dramatically.

Of course, he will still have to beat Djoko, Murray or Wawa in finals and who ever of this 3 gets there will be difficult to beat. But, better have to face only one of them them both. And all will have issues as well: Murray ddin’t won a Slam in 2 years, lost last 5 to Fed; Djoko’s port record in USO finals and lost last match; Wawa never in USO final and never beat Fed on HC


Travis Bickle Says:

Daniel,

Speaking of good Nike (pardon Federer) draw at USO, how about Bautista_Agut in 4th round, then Monfils in quarterfinals and then Cilic in semis, while Novak, Andy and Stan are placed in the other half in such a way that Novak has to beat both Andy and Stan just to make the final.

Wouldn’t that be a great draw for Roger this year?


jane Says:

“in such a way that Novak has to beat both Andy and Stan just to make the final.”

nooooo! novak already had to beat rafa and murray at roland garros just to reach the final. not another one please. although the pattern would certainly hold.

stan has been on novak’s side at all the hard court slams since he almost beat him AO 2013.

USO 2013, AO 2014, USO 2014, and AO 2015

(in addition to this year at Wimbledon)

and since winning it in 2012, andy has been on novak’s side at both the past 2 USOs, 2013 and 2014.


Rui Says:

Everybody is talking about how easy Federer draw was.
Dont forget that, for example, Djokovic had to play Kevin Anderson in 5 sets at Wimbledon, and the head to head between Bautista and Dimitrov is 1-1.
It was Federer agression that made those matches easy. Federer never had problems with Gasquet or Dimitrov. Wawrinka seemed to have his mind out of the game and Cilic is very inconsistent.
Sorry about the english


Ahfi Says:

@TravisBickle, 6.27pm – LOL. I love it, love it..Yes, it will certainly be a great idea for Djoker to beat everybody so my Fed just strolls into the final…..Who wouldn’t like that for their favorite? While at it, why don’t we also add Nadal to Djoker’s draw, just to avoid any unexpected you know what….ha ha ha


jane Says:

have good draws worked in roger’s favour in the past couple years? at the french stan surprisingly won even after fed beat him easily at rome and even though murray, novak and rafa were all on the other side.

then in the past few years at the us open – 2012 and 2014 when rafa didnt play, and 2013 and 2014 when andy, stan and novak were all been on the same side (indeed kei too last year), fed lost to berdych (had w/o the round before), robredo and monfils respectively.

the last time fed won a slam was wimbledon 2012 and he did so by beating both novak and murray, just like cincy last weekend. maybe a tougher draw is actually better in some ways, as he doesn’t sail along and then run into a surprising difficulty?

i am not being facetious. fed fans have suggested the same on here before. and other novak fans and i have had that discussion, as well, noting that novak almost does better when he’s “on guard” from the get-go.

perhaps age is another factor where fed is concerned though.


Daniel Says:

Jane,

One correction last year (2014) Fed lost to Cilic.

Hard draws are food when you are in your in prime. Fed needs all the help he can get. I prefer he has to play only one tuff match and that being the final😜


kriket Says:

I’m also expecting Murray to “randomly” end up in Novak’s half of the draw.

Unrelated, here’s a fan video made by Novak’s India(n) fans. Just thought it’d be nice to have it posted somewhere on this forum, for archival purposes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snEPFEu54BY


jane Says:

thanks daniel; of course that’s right. and yeah, that’s why i put at the end of the post that “age” might be a contributing factor now moreso than in 2012 for example.


jane Says:

hey, will the roof be ready to go at the us open this year? hope so!


Okiegal Says:

I heard the commentators make mention during Cincy that the roof would be ready fir use this year. This is great news!!


Okiegal Says:

For use, not fir use…I do know the difference, but my fat fingers don’t….:)


jane Says:

great news, okie.


Michael Says:

I just cannot understand this fatigue factor attributed to Novak and Andy.

Novak didn’t play a tournament after Wimbledon and Andy was beaten at Washington earlier in the tournament. So, all that they played is Monetreal and Cincinnati and both are three setter tournaments with byes in the first round. If that makes one tired, then I think you are unfit to play this sport !!


Michael Says:

I do not rate Roger’s chances highly at the US Open. It is completely a different surface from Cincinnati and doesn’t play as fast or bounce harder. It is a surface more suitable for sloggers like Novak, Andy and Rafa. True, Roger has won this tournament five consecutive times in his career and made six straight finals and yet at 34, you have to say that his chances are bleak. Last year, he had an excellent chance to win the title with Novak out in the semis upset by Nishikori. But unfortunately, Roger wasn’t able to convert it beaten by Cilic in straight sets. This year, it is going to be pretty tough and I would be very much surprised or even shocked if he manages to win the title !!


Margot Says:

Fed’s usually first out of the blocks too which, given the volatile weather that seems to occur at the open is…italics here….a bit of an advantage.


Eric Says:

“for quite a long time my career I was very content to chip it” — you couldn’t have had this epiphany five years ago, Roger? that there are better ways to return? laziness in this arena has cost him many a match, starting with a lot of those QF slam losses.


Eric Says:

If we’re going to talk about “luck” and Roger’s draws, esp. at the USO, even a basic sense of intellectual consistency would start with the admission that Roger and Novak have played each other in the semis how many times? Almost every year it was possible, right? So how is there a history of Roger getting cushy draws? Ridiculous…

But I agree with Michael that Fed is no USO favorite.


Thangs Says:

Wow..Federers Cincy win (noting new, he won many times already without sweating) got a praising thread whereas Nadal’s 2013 summer sweep was commented as lucky run.


First Serve Says:

Doesn’t matter who he plays and at what stage in the 2nd week, as long as his First Serve is on. If it’s not on then too it doesn’t matter because he’ll probably go down to just about anyone who makes it to the 2nd week.


Klaas Says:

I would like Federer to avoid Cilic, because C will remember his extraordinary play last year, and be a factor.


Margot Says:

Cilic has got shoulder problems. Has he had surgery? Dunno. But hasn’t yet this year shown the form he did at last year’s USOpen.


roy Says:

last year federer had the easiest us open draw ever seen in the ‘big 4′ era. quite remarkable cilic won.


sienna Says:

last year it took the greatest slam performance of decade to beat Federer.
Cilic played tennis we will see in 5 years time.
just like Roger did in his TMF years scooping aan whole generation with supersonic game from future.
This year Federer considerably better and Cilic is down.
But what Federer showed at Cincin was not
some regular performance. It was even more so then Cilic tennis beyond comprehention of todays standards. I would not say tennis of future because their simply is no one to follow up.
The Goat has no one to follow his footsteps.


calmdownplease Says:

Is there any chance Sean actually reads our posts, as I would say he was pretty much spot on to about every letter!
lol


calmdownplease Says:

`I just cannot understand this fatigue factor attributed to Novak and Andy..`

Andy looked like a drunk at the end of a particularly heavy night for most of his matches.
I’ve seen his `acting` in skits so it was no pretence.
Andy himself Identified the issue;
After Wimbledon he was straight onto DC which he almost single-handedly won for Britain.
This was a mentally and physically momentous event for Andy to basically beat France on his own, and then onto the HC US swing where he won Montreal.
Sorry, Andy was definitely gassed for Cincy.
I’ve seen him even worse after trying to qualify for the WTF with nothing left in the tank.
What was the score again?
Oh yes 0 and 1
;-)
Still, as Sean said, it was a singular performance over the week by Federer.


Gordon Says:

Their is nothing more idiotic than saying a player who had to face the number 1 and number 2 guys in the world had an “easy” draw. Face it – Federer and Novak always have “easy” draws because they are just too good.

And Sean – don’t tell me – as it seems you hinted at – that these draws are fixed? That one is older than the Rafa was on juice crap.


elina Says:

Well Eric I assume you are referring to the 13 consecutive non-clay slams that Novak was in Fed’s half.

This incredible streak (or not so incredible depending on how you look at it) mysteriously ended at the Australian Open in 2012 after Novak proved he was a different player than the one Roger routinely dismissed prior to that.


calmdownplease Says:

`Face it – Federer and Novak always have “easy” draws because they are just too good…`

Er NO
Novak, one can say, has `easy` draws because he is `too good` and always seems to be at the end of tournaments.
Not Fed however.
His draws are easy because, well, they (usually) are easy.
And his scheduling etc and so on.
Don’t try to lump the two together. Novak is on another level to Federer now despite this recent defeat.
Keep it real fedling


Ben Pronin Says:

I’d just like to point out that even though the US Open is apparently better suited for the sloggers (what?), Federer was actually blown off the court by an even more aggressive player in Cilic. He wasn’t beaten down by one of the so-called sloggers.

Same actually goes for Djokovic. Whatever other factors you can bring up, the fact remains that Nishikori was a lot more aggressive in that semifinal and took his chances a lot more than Djokovic did and that’s how he got the win.


elina Says:

Disagree. They are 3-3 in the last 12 months.

As far as best of five goes, Novak’s form is the same as it was last year at the US Open (i.e., susceptible to extreme humidity/heat, wind especially in the final).

Federer’s form is better than last year. In the Cincy heat, Federer only looked better at the end of the second set where Novak was fading.

But your statement on Federer’s historically preferential draw/scheduling is quite accurate for reasons already discussed.


Ben Pronin Says:

If Federer hadn’t looked so amazing throughout Cincy then there would definitely be more mention of his pretty insane draw, both on paper and with how it played out. He had to play Murray and Djokovic back to back. He almost played Nadal-Murray-Djokovic. I think playing Kevin Anderson in the third round is a pretty rotten deal, too. He’s not great against the top guys generally but he’s still dangerous especially that early in a tournament. And yet Federer basically destroyed everyone. There’s a reason he’s being praised for this. And there’s a reason why people are hopeful of his US Open chances.

Also he mentions that he’s fresh. Recall last year he made the finals of both summer Masters and then played a long 5 setter against Monfils in the QFs before coming out flat and gassed against Cilic. Skipping Montreal this year could be the difference between coming out flat in the semi or coming out strong. I’m not saying it’s definite, but I have a feeling Federer is thinking along the same lines.


Miles Nicholas Says:

Federer having cushey draes? Now I’ve heard everything. Drawing Djokovic in 13 consectutive majors (exccluding RG) is easy? When he won W in 2012 he had Djokovic (again!) in the semi-final and Murray in the final. This year, the reverse – that was easy wasn’t it?

He’s had horrendous draws at the AO now for 5 years, too.

The guy who REALLY has had the easiest draws in majors is Nadal – he RARELY gets a tough opponent in the first week. For years he’s also benefitted from facing a either a knackered Federer or Djokovic in finals, after they’d had to fight it out in the semis, while Nadal was wiping the floor with players of the calibre of Youzhny, Melzer and Ferrer!


elina Says:

No, not easy but rightly or wrongly, Murray was clearly avoided because of his losing head-to-head record against him compared to his relatively easy matchup with Novak.

At the end of 2008 when this streak began, Roger was 7-2 vs Novak but just 2-6 vs Murray.

I would be interested in Mile’s take why this streak occurred. Random chance? That’s a 1 in 8192 chance of random occurrence. Even worse if you consider that during this streak, it didn’t follow at the French where Murray was relatively weak compared to Djokovic.


skeezer Says:

“The guy who REALLY has had the easiest draws in majors is Nadal – he RARELY gets a tough opponent in the first week”
True dat.

If you believe Fed gets preferential draws are you are saying that draws are rigged?


courbon Says:

@Michael: “I just cannot understand this fatigue factor attributed to Novak and Andy.”
“If that makes one tired, then I think you are unfit to play this sport !!”
So, Federer skipping Toronto-not too get tired-means, he is not fit to play tennis….interesting


calmdownplease Says:

`Disagree. They are 3-3 in the last 12 months..`

They are 3-2 this year.
Both of Feds wins coming on lightning fast courts.
But over the last 12 months?
Well say from China onwards they are 4-3 to Novak again
And 5-3 if we more accurately include Wimbledon `14
And even if they WERE even-stevens on wins, so WHAT?
In the last 2 years Novak has won 3 slams and countless (for me right now anyway lol) masters.
Fed, with the odd masters and a smattering of 250s isn’t even close on tournaments won let alone quality, in fact nobody is so yes I stick by my assertion that despite this recent loss Novak is on another level to Fed.

`I’d just like to point out that even though the US Open is apparently better suited for the sloggers (what?)`

I didn’t say this, but I believe that it is clearly less suitable to Fed than Cincinnati is.
Particularly at this stage of feds career.
It’s still a pretty fast court after all, just not as fast so more players can do well on it.


courbon Says:

Yes Sienna, Cilic plays ‘future’ tennis-level that only aliens play on planet Zorg…
What about playing ‘present’ tennis-it would be more convinient, right?


jane Says:

michael, people have already explained andy’s fatigue at cincy, with DC and then a match at washington. as for novak he played singles and doubles in montreal, going to semis in doubles and finals in singles, which meant playing 2 matches a day for a couple of those days, sometimes till very late in the evening, and most of his matches – in both singles and doubles – went 3 sets. so it was like playing 5-setters on back to back days. even at slams they get a day between. then at cincy, most of his matches went the distance too. so natural fed was fresher than both of them at cincy. i am not saying that is why fed won; he played excellent attacking tennis obviously. but i think the idea that andy and novak were maybe feeling a little tired is valid too.


Ben Pronin Says:

Someone said sloggers.

I agree that Cincy suits Federer about as well as a tournament can suit a player (Nadal in Monte Carlo… or any clay tournament…). And he’s certainly had some struggles in New York the last few years.

But it hasn’t been because of Nadal or Djokovic or Murray and their baseline heavy games. In 09, he lost to Del Potro who out muscled him off the ground. In 2010, he actually lost to a more daring Djokovic. In 2011, he basically fell a part because of a few daring shots by Djokovic. Both of those matches ended 7-5 in the fifth but it didn’t really seem like Federer was beat physically. In 2012 he lost to heavy-hitting Berdych. 2013 is hard to count but I thought Robredo played as well as he could. He just wasn’t missing. But it wasn’t a physical beat down. And in 2014 he lost to heavy hitting Cilic.

What I’m saying is, the US Open still favors attacking tennis. You can rally all day but you have to be willing to attack in order to win.


jane Says:

courbon, ha ha! you always are so witty.


courbon Says:

Blimey, the draw is not out yet, but the war is already ON! And it would be a dead silence ( after USO open final ) if Gulbis wins… and very funny.


calmdownplease Says:

For the record, and not to be like some cheesy `FED FAN`in this respect..
I will be honest and say that I think Fed would probably (or more likely) have won even if Novak and Andy were neutral.
He’s just the best on that kind of court, & when he isn’t then he really will be done.
I don’t think Novak was too tired anyway, I just think that there is a reason he hasn’t won at Cincy (but I bet it doesn’t last his whole career).
But he has beaten Fed at the WTF, twice, so I’m not ruling him out doing it at Cincy either.
Possibly next year.


courbon Says:

Hi Jane, I like all your post.We think very similar, so I do not bother to write things, because you so eloquently and better then me write…so only thing left to me is to joke.
And because I support Joker-it is fitting (-:


calmdownplease Says:

again Ben (lol)
I didnt say that it favoured grinding. It is a fast court but more players can play their game on it.
Del Potro and Cilic have done NOTHING at Cincy because of their movement no doubt
But clearly the courts are a bit slower to benefit them overall.
Attacking yes, but a lot of players can attack.


elina Says:

Let’s look at the draws at the two US Opens Nadal won

In 2010, his draw in the first sour rounds were Gabashvili, Istomin and Simon.

Roger drew Dabul (who?), Beck and Mathieu.

In 2013, Nadal drew Ryan Harrison, Dutra da Silva (who?) and Dodig.

Roger drew Zemlja (who?), Berlocq and Mannarino.

So where are the so-called easy first week draws for Nadal compared to Roger?


Gypsy Gal Says:

Courbon lol if Gulbis wins,it was bad enough Cilic doing it last year,but then again didnt see that one coming either,but really really hope not,still stranger things have happened….


Ben Pronin Says:

CDP, I don’t think we’re disagreeing.


courbon Says:

Gypsy-”bad enough Cilic winning”-If Serenna see this, she will scratch your eyes!!


elina Says:

Your statement that Novak is on another level doesn’t really hold water when we are talking about the conditions.

Novak is not at his absolute best in the finals at the US Open other than one occasion four years ago.

Roger is currently at his best and handles these conditions better than Novak plain and simple.

Novak will likely be coming off a long battle with Murray (who WILL be in his half), and likely Wawrinka in the quarters.

Should they meet in the final, it will go four sets and I favour Federer.

It’s all about the conditions, draw and scheduling combined with Roger’s training, planning and high level ATM.


skeezer Says:

USO 2010
And what was Nadal’s opponents from he fought rd on? Didn’t he play Youhzny in the Semi?
And what was Feds?


skeezer Says:

It’s tough to say “easy” or further “fixed” draws. Seeds have earned their seed, and more than not they will have byes or easy early rd opponents. Once in awhile it doesn’t happen, and that is just the random of the draw.


skeezer Says:

11:15 fought = fourth


jane Says:

courbon, no way – wit is very very eloquent. and you have a way of swooping onto a thread and lightening everything up with humour. thank goodness!


i’d agree with CDP; fed likely would’ve won regardless


elina, rafa has had some nice later draws at the us open, though, in that they’ve opened up very comfortably. indeed, he’s had some luck that way over the years. for example, here’s an astonishing fact: in 2010, when rafa won three grand slams, he played only 11 matches versus top 10 players – 11!!! that is crazy. but it happened. not his fault of course, and he was the one who capitalized, but just true.


skeezer Says:

btw #1 is always at the top and #2 always at the bottom, but numbers 3 and 4 may be placed in either the top half (#1) or the bottom half (#2).


Okiegal Says:

Youzney beat Rafa, Melzer has beaten Rafa and Ferrer has beaten Rafa. As Rafa has stated a time or two, everybody causes him problems…….so true! Rafa, ever so humble…… :)

Rigged draws….just don’t buy it……


RZ Says:

@courbon – a Gulbis title would be hilarious! I would stay up to watch all the late night interviews with him and would read up on his celebrations.


calmdownplease Says:

`Roger is currently at his best and handles these conditions better than Novak plain and simple…`

What?
Handles the US Open better?
Not recently he has, or for the last 4 years in fact, but we shall see.
I mean, I’ll have to see it before I believe it
You’re set in your ways about this based on one masters title, these conclusions certainly couldn’t have been drawn from the LAST tournament on which they met. Personally I’m going to wait for that one, I think.
Also, If Andy does meet Novak at the US don’t be SO sure it is Novak that prevails or that Fed will have made it to the final.


Ben Pronin Says:

Jane, 16 if you count the WTF. But yeah that is a crazy stat.

I really hate that about tennis. 1 seed should play the 4th and 2 seed should play the 3rd. It’s just dumb that they’re random. That’s not how seeding is supposed to work. It’s like a weird way to randomize the match ups when in reality the rankings change often enough, even between 2 tournaments, to cement the seeds in place. But this is tennis and screw logic.


calmdownplease Says:

And remember who beat who the last 2 times Novak and Roger played in NY?


Gypsy Gal Says:

Courbon lol,but Serena is no match for a tough 47 year old Yorkshire lass from a back streets council house no sir,but anyway i would still put money on her retaining the title than i would Cilic,which as ive said as awesome as that was,it seems to me it was all a bit of a fluke(well hopefully)as the guy makes my skin crawl….


jane Says:

ben, sorry bud but it’s 11!! double check. and don’t accidentally count the “L”s :)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/players/rafael-nadal/n409/player-activity?year=2010


courbon Says:

Rigged draws….ah, here we go again.
So, for years I have been listening how that big advertising company ( MGM ? ) have been influencing Fed’s draw…but then Fed left them and they are representing Novak for last two years but somehow they are not helping Novak. But wait a moment-it was not MGM but Nike that has grip on ATP! ( latest theory on this blog )…but they represent Fed and Rafa so that is bit difficult right? Actually , ATP rig draws without any exterior influence…Ok, let see how that works.
9 masters and 4 Grand Slams…wait a minute-Grand Slams are not part of ATP! Crap! What shall we do now? No problem-conspiracy can continue… Ok, so they ( Grand Slam mafia ) will meet with ATP Godfathers in small restaurant somewhere in Brooklyn and discuss how to make rig draws…
Shall I continue or this is crazy enough?

P.S.-At least 60 people would be involved in riggin draws ( tournament director, his assistant and techinical director ) but there is no whistle blowers…People whistleblow CIA ( with the good chance of being killed ) but they are scared to do ATP…because they may hit them in the head with the latest HEAD raquet…)

Maybe sometime, some tournament have done it…quite possible but to say that last 10 years all tournaments worked together in rigin draws is simply impossible.


jane Says:

ben you’re right he had 15 matches versus top tens. i should’ve clarified victories. thanks for pointing it out.


calmdownplease Says:

I lean towards some rigging at the box office level due to the sheer statistical support there is for it
Rather than ruminating about how difficult it would be to pull off, which is debatable.
It’s quite difficult to see how it is not rigged (to an extent) when that is factored in.


courbon Says:

Gypsy-Sienna not Serena. You now Sienna-crazy and rude poster, who thinks that Cilic invented tennis?,
Serena? Soory but she would beat a crap out of you sweetie… ( sorry for language )

RZ-It would be great! His madnees and arrogance would shot to the sky…I actually like his tennis-when he is playing well.


Gypsy Gal Says:

I never care really about draws personally,unexpected losses can happen,people also gave Andy a hard time at W in 2013 saying his was easy just because Federer and Nadal both lost early,it wasnt supposed to be it just turned out that way,so its hardly the players fault….


Gypsy Gal Says:

Courbon lol nah neither of them would,as the saying goes the bigger they are the harder they fall,i have a black belt in origami(-;….


courbon Says:

CDP-that is like Dogma, what are you saying
Well, I’m still waiting to hear how is done.I’m debating it and apart from some bloggers on net there was never proof in public…
As I said-sure, probably it is sometimes happening but with all tournaments over 10 years period is quite imaginative…


courbon Says:

Origami? I thought that is herb you put on pizza?


skeezer Says:

“Youzney beat Rafa, Melzer has beaten Rafa and Ferrer has beaten Rafa”
Did any of these guys beat Rafa prior to 2010?


Gypsy Gal Says:

Courbon no thats Oregano,Origami is Chinese paper folding….


jalep Says:

When I look at tennis draws, it’s tough to believe there is not rigging of seeded players. #1 and #2 are set but looks to me there has been adjusting of seeds according to potential match-ups with ticket sales in mind.

But lately even the qualie rounds are starting to be suspicious – did I take my medication? hmm…need my anti-skeptical pills.


courbon Says:

I know Gypsy, I know, just pulling your leg…


calmdownplease Says:

The stats courbon
The stats!
It all seem very unlikely when looked at purely from this perspective
besides its not all tourneys and allof the moving parts, its the ITFand the ATP
Look at FIFA corruption at the highest levels for money might be more of a norm than you think.
This is when Elina is meant to jump in.


calmdownplease Says:

the draw outcomes seem unlikely I mean.


calmdownplease Says:

What swung it for me was the Nicholas Mahut John Isner draw 2 years in a row.
After their initial ludicrous match.
Yeah, I’m reaching for my tin foil hat on this one and saying that I think that some key draws are more than coincidences lol


Daniel Says:

Ben agree ref positions of seeds. 1 should play 8 in Quarters and 4 in semis; 2 should play 7 in quarters and 3 in semis; 3 should play 6 in quarters and 2 in semis and 4 should play 5 in quarters and 1 and semis.

I think if this was set in stone prior to each tournament it would be more fan than random draws. Top Players could manipulate their rankings if they want to meet ta particular payer in Quarters or Semis and we would know beforehand. Without this expectations of draws or conspiracy theories.
Only thing affecting would be withdraw.

For example if Djoko as #1 draw Murray #3 and Wawa #5 he got a tuff draw notably by the player but the rankings. #1 should play lower top 8, not the first of the bunch. At least is how I see it and always dislike this process. think would be more fair if they stick to math and proportion of rankings, avoiding injustice. The #1 player eared his status and he should play #16 in R16, #8 in Quarters and #4 in semis, whoever they are. And the same goes for #2, #3 and #4 and other seeds. My tow cents.


courbon Says:

Influencing who will get World cup ( and it was discovered ) is one thing, riggin 25 matches a yaer, over 10 years period, for Manchester United to win Championship is different…kind of impossible not to be discovered.
The stats? Apart from Novak being in Feds half all the time ( which does looks strange ) all other draws look random to me…
But hey-you may be right and if gets blown one of these days, I will write 100 times ( like Burt Simpson on blackboard at school ) on this blog:
I was wrong, I know nothing…


courbon Says:

CDP, smoking crack is illegal. So if are about to get your thin foil out, you should be not talking about it…
To be serious for the moment- you may be right at some level-time will show.By the way, good luck with Andy’s US Open campaign , I hope he lands in Feds half. (-:


jalep Says:

+1 Daniel.


calmdownplease Says:

Bart Simpson
Bart!
:)
C’mon the draws look plenty dodgyquite often
All of these stories they want to create etc.
It’s all coincidence?
And just because we don’t know how doesnt mean it isn’t happening?
maybe not always however (probably not in fact)


elina Says:

courbon, no not crazy enough. Certainly nowhere near as crazy as 1 in almost 10,000 being just a random event as cdp has shown.

And ESPN already whistle blew the USO for evidently rigging the early rounds for the top two seeds in an attempt to increase the odds that their best known players will go deep.

Why would they leave it to chance when it is fully in their control?

And skeezer, you accuse me of cherry picking lol. Besides, we are talking about the draw which, for that single round, Nadal had Ferrer in his quarter and Roger had Soderling. Surely you can find a better mismatch than that? Especially when you are looking at a single round?

mew mew


jalep Says:

+1 cdp ….Isner/Mahut. Stopped believing in Santa Clause too.


Ben Pronin Says:

The point system is complicated enough that I doubt players would be worried about manipulating their rankings.

Skeezer, cmon…

I’m inclined to agree with rigged draws. I think it was mat4 who posted the stats regarding the Federer-Djokovic halves being so incredibly unlikely. Especially since it was over a few years and both of their rankings shifted enough times to really make you scratch your head. Fed’s 1 and Djokovic 3? Same half. Fed’s 2 and Djokovic 3? Same half. Fed’s 2 and Djokovic 4? Same half. And yet those same combination of numbers never resulted in a Nadal-Djokovic half or Nadal-Federer half until just recently.

I wouldn’t be surprised one way or the other regarding the rigging. The ATP can pretend to be a classy organization and whatnot but it’s still in the money-making business. Just because the NFL is worse doesn’t mean they’re not in the same category.


calmdownplease Says:

`CDP, smoking crack is illegal. So if are about to get your thin foil out`

?
I said `tin foil HAT OUT
NOT TIN FOIL OUT

Bwahahaha!


sienna Says:

Nadal dropped out of wimbly 09 just hours after he heard the draw and knew Hewitt was his second round opponent. So yes Rafael tends to rely depend even demands to get easy draws in first week.


calmdownplease Says:

And Courbon, you should know by now that most fun things are Illegal
sigh
;-)


skeezer Says:

Ben,
Some interesting read…here it does appear they manually manipulate things if a seed pulls out:

http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/a-primer-on-tournament-draws-and-seeding/?_r=0

I made my stance on “rigged” draws along time ago that they are suspect imo( hence my alliance with mat4 on the matter ). I mean. that run where Novak and Fed were on the same half was unreal… But I am not going to go all out (yet) and say draws are rigged. Very suspicious? Yeah. Maybe it would help if an official of the ATP answered on such matters.


skeezer Says:

elina,
Just checking, when we disagree, there is no cherry picking or there is cherry picking? Just trying to follow your lead..;)


Gypsy Gal Says:

I just dont buy that the ATP/WTA whatever would be in the habit of rigging draws for any one particular player,it certainly wouldnt say much for the credibility of the game if they did still JMO….


courbon Says:

CDP- I humbly apologise for my spelling and drug mistakes.It will not happened again!
And yes- I know about fun illegal things…spent 90′s in London as a young man…ah,it was fun (-:

@ elina: Some tournaments yes, but all tournaments together sychronized? ( because Fed and Novak been in same half in all slams ). Also, 1 in 10000 is still posible, right? Still not conviced ,but who knows


sienna Says:

Usopen already admitted that they tend to protect the top players few years ago.
That was Fedal and djokovic as big three. Even their appendix got favored.


Okiegal Says:

@Ben…..I have always been puzzled by why number 4 isn’t grouped with the #1 player too. I think that is strange. Being number 1 in the world should give you that little something extra in the seeding process. Yeah, do not understand that. I’m glad you made that comment because now I know someone else is thinking the same thing.


Gypsy Gal Says:

Agree with Courbon the draws not even out yet,Brandos not here ATM,but he always one of the first to burst a blood vessel the minute it comes out….


Okiegal Says:

@Courbon
@Jane……..Birds of a feather, flock together! Gypsy and I were always being accused of agreeing with everything each of us said on certain topics, but we really don’t agree on every little thing….but our love for Rafa as a tennis player, we wholeheartedly agree!! I like the way the fan bases hang together and chat back and forth. I have not one friend that even likes this sport, so I have enjoyed this outlet…..however feeling sometime that I’m talking to myself……I’m beginning to think I support the wrong guy…….


courbon Says:

Gypsy, Brando will get you for this one…(-:
But where is Brando anyway?


Ben Pronin Says:

If the draws are rigged, I don’t think they’re rigged for one player specifically.

I don’t think it’s as simple as “let’s get Federer to the final”. I think it’s more about getting the most intriguing match-ups as much as possible. It just so happens that will help protect someone more than someone else. In other words, everyone wants to see Federer play 7 matches. The Djokovic-Murray rivalry is gaining some real steam. If they play in the semi, then you get an awesome Federer-Murray/Djokovic final. This is bound to draw a lot more viewers than a Murray/Djokovic final simply because Federer is that popular (especially in NY). But you still get your Murray/Djokovic match-up.

I don’t know. Don’t even read that. It sounds like gibberish. Rigged, shmigged.


Okiegal Says:

@Skeezer…..Do you dance?


courbon Says:

Oki:It is good to talk to yourself…anyway, famous Blackader once said: “I talk to myself, beacause that is only way to have intelligent conversation around here…’


jalep Says:

Gypsy,

Read your message on the other thread.
I’ll post a link tomorrow, Okay?

There’s might be a WTA bracket challenge for US Open on WTA site. Haven’t checked yet but there was one for Cincy and Toronto. Not sure if they do groups/pools though – and that’s the fun of it. GTN only has ATP iirc.


RZ Says:

Someone did a paper on the statistics of the big 4 draws and how it seemed that it came down to attempting to get a Federer-Nadal final and whether there is a likelihood of match fixing.
http://www.playthegame.org/fileadmin/image/knowledgebank/Tennisdraws_Katarina_Pijetlovic.pdf


Gypsy Gal Says:

Courbon i believe he said he wouldnt be posting till the end of the year,he and i did get along once,but had a disagreement he wouldnt give me the time of day after that….


courbon Says:

Thank you RZ, interesting read


Okiegal Says:

@Courbon…..Lol! Around my neck of the woods the saying goes: It’s OK to talk to yourself, but if you start answering yourself……BIG PROBLEM!! :)


jalep Says:

Thanks RZ

Everyone please read the study in RZ’s link, whether right or wrong, worth a look.


Gypsy Gal Says:

Thanks Jalep count me in….


jalep Says:

Okay then, Gypsy. I’ll post it and invite all tennis-xer’s brave enough to give it a go ;)


courbon Says:

Good one Oki! Clever folks in Oklahoma…


courbon Says:

Jalep, sorry for not answering some of your responses last week-I’v seen them days later so felt silly to write back…anyway, finger cross for tomorrows draw!


RZ Says:

The person who wrote that paper also did a presentation on it as part of a broader panel discussion on match fixing in sports. Her part starts at 42:11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mc_tEXd3yl8


RZ Says:

^ Sorry, that is the wrong link. That is her presentation on low level match fixing (not rigged draws). I’ll look for the relevant presentation


sienna Says:

Daniel
You stole my idea from last draws set in stone.
crazy Shei..er.

Dont take my points and act Im crazy.


jalep Says:

Was interesting anyway, RZ.

Felt that Kollerer got a bum deal in case. They banned him for life in a case that was word vs word. Wayne Odesnik claiming he was offered fixing from Danny. No solid evidence. And a large part of the decision had to do with Danny being a loose cannon on court, which is much different than match fixing.

courbon. no problem – can’t remember it now. Plus, I don’t take it personally when someone doesn’t respond on these forums. There’s too much going on to get back to everyone individually sometimes. But thanks for caring. That’s how you are – a good soul.


courbon Says:

Thanx Jalep for understanding


elina Says:

@okie hahahahahaha

do you dance!

Girl, that was just gold! Too funny!


elina Says:

RZ, here is the link. Just close the download pdf viewer window and the video will start.

Here’s video of Katarina Pijetlovic presenting her theory. Her presentation starts at 13:00

http://www.livestream.com/playthegame_dshs/video?clipId=pla_44809e94-aa04-46c7-9f1e-35b212ba9d46


Jock-KatH Says:

@ Ben Pronin
Yes to many comments but don’t understand by Kevin Anderson in a Federer draw is a rotten deal.

????
Kevin is a good player but his most recent best performance was at Queen’s where he was beaten – even though this was one of his best performances.

Re. Jalep 12.05 pm

Don’t quite understand – Anyone can end up meeting Novak – but not everyone can beat Novak no matter which half they are in.


RZ Says:

@Elina – thanks for posting the correct link!


Okiegal Says:

@Elina…..My family is noted for our quick wit!! Lol. I’ve been out most of the day. I will catch up on comments to see if I got a response…..but prolly not. He doesn’t socialize with any Rafa fans much. I guess it’s agin his religion…… :)


Okiegal Says:

@Courbon 1:47

We Okies try!! I wish you could meet my cousin Bruce…….the family stand up comedian! I love humor….it takes more face muscles to frown than to smile…..this is why I have very few wrinkles…bawahaha woot woot and all that jazz! I’ve been trying for a couple of years to make Skeezer smile…..no luck!! Lol


Okiegal Says:

@Skeezer 12:01

Just got my research done, been out most of the day. Ferrer and Youzney garnered wins against Rafa before 2010…Meltzer’s win was in 2010….But what I noticed mostly in doing my research was how many times he beat Roger and how close his rivalry was with Novak…..and yes I saw all of his losses from the lower ranked players throughout his illustrious career…….


jalep Says:

Jock-KatH – just on the way out the door for work, so won’t be checking here until tomorrow.

I am confused that you bring up Nole. My post was not about him or the upcoming US Open draw. My post was about draws in general. #1 and #2 are set already every tournament but the other seeds after 1 & 2 seem to get placed in a suspicious way. I’ve grown skeptical over the years was my point. Not referring to Nole specifically.

elina – great job hunting down that link! Very interesting. I have my doubts that it is a subject any investigative journalist with bills to pay wants to pursue. But kudos to Katerina Pijetlovic for her work and trying to shed a light on a taboo subject in tennis.


jane Says:

what an interesting, open and engaging discussion about draws, with reason and some humour thrown in for good measure.


jane Says:

“With Djokovic and Murray in less favorable parts of the draw the likelihood of the desired finals between Nadal and Federer increases.”

this line in RZ’s link does make one wonder about who was paying, (or pulling) for (or planning) this result – probably tournament organizers, t.v. channels, and likely nike too. that’s a lot of money invested in a particular desired outcome.

it’s kind of sad, really. : /


wilfried Says:

The ‘r’ of randomize and the ‘r’ of rigging.
Both words start with the same letter ‘r’, but they represent entirely different worlds to me…
I already wrote here about the 32-years sequence of Roland Garros (1983-2014) without the seed 1-seed 6 combination in the 1st quarter of the Roland Garros draw, an outcome whose probability has to be absolutely rejected when the hypothesis is that the draw has been composed in a random way at every single draw of that sequence.
Randomized draws exclude in my view also the existence of patterns in a shorter sequence.
How random is it for instance to have the 3 successive completely identical draws, like it was the case in 2011, 2011 and 2012 at the ATP 250 Bastad event, with:
seed 1 (on line 1) in the same quarter with seed 8 (line 8),
seed 3 (on line 9), in the same quarter with seed 6 (line 16),
seed 7 (on line 17) in the same quarter with seed 4 (line 24),
and seed 5 (on line 25) in the same quarter with seed 2 (line 32) .
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/scores/archive/bastad/316/2012/draws
I invite those who don’t believe in rigging, the Gordon, Courbon and Rubi’s of this site, to explain me for a second how random it is to have three years in a row an identical draw as far as the placement of the 8 seeds is concerned at an ATP 250 event, apart from any underlying reason for it to happen this way.


sienna Says:

if posters like CDP claim rigged draws based on hand picked draw let him atleast be aware of rules regulations cincerning draws. Specific slams.
My goodness what a flapdrol.


elina Says:

wilfried, nailed it AND preached it all in a single post! Well done.

Keep calm and shamon!


scalmdownplease Says:

`My goodness what a flapdrol…`

Am I SUPPOSED to be insulted by THAT?!

ROFL


calmdownplease Says:

`My goodness what a flapdrol…`

Am I SUPPOSED to be insulted by THAT?!

ROFL


elina Says:

Well that Cilic played some flapdrol tennis to beat Roger last year so it can’t all be bad cdp.

Watching youtube videos of a few slam draws only further served to convinced me that the draw is anything but random.


Margot Says:

Dunno what a “flapdrol” is. Suppose it must be insulting, given whose slinging it around.
Is it like a mudrol?…..;)


jalep Says:

Margot here ye go
http://www.dwotd.nl/2009/02/560-flapdrol.html

:D gonna keep it in mind.


calmdownplease Says:

Or a `mugwump` perhaps?
there’s a lot of those grazing around here, when the sun shines
hehehe


calmdownplease Says:

Is that all?

An Idiot?
oooh devasting!
Crying into my cornflakes with that one.
Although not as devastating as what will befall this Sienna slapper soon enough
lol


Margot Says:

Ta jalep, in my repertoire now and the really good thing is nobody in the UK will actually know I’m insulting them….;)
Glad you’re goons set up the bracket challenge btw. I really enjoy doing it, even tho I’m a “flapdrol” at it……


Margot Says:

“going to” not “goons” lol. WTH did that come from? Daniel’s phone I expect….;)


calmdownplease Says:

flapdrol sounds like a dutch toilet cleaner
So it’s in mine too
hahaha


jalep Says:

Me too. flapdroll. utter flapdroll at it.

Great. Will post a link later today.

See if you can drum up some other flapdroll tennis-xer’s for the game. cdp, sienna, elina, KatH, Okie, skeezer, daniel…ect, ect. ect… lets go.
Time for my nap before the…DRAW.

Thanks for your post Wilifred – thought provoking.


jalep Says:

^^ Margot


jalep Says:

hahaha…. goons – i knew zactly wat yer meent.


Wog Boy Says:

Does anyone really pay attention on miserable, stoned person that spent (wasted) her life in the shop window of De Wallen.


calmdownplease Says:

@WOGBOY

Oh!
hahahahahahaha!
`wasted` because no one would ever go in more like!
And I don’t even know where you’re talking about either…


Wog Boy Says:

I retract what I said, that is an insult for ladies from De Wallen, my apologies to them.


Wog Boy Says:

CDP,
:))


madmax Says:

Just love Jon Wertheim’s Mailbag this week. A lot, still,about Kyrgios, *yawn*.

http://www.si.com/tennis/2015/08/26/wertheim-mailbag-us-open-roger-federer-nick-kyrgios

​I think one stat we need to include when discussing stats is how many times did Nadal or Federer lose before they were scheduled to meet in a tourney. Of the times that they did not meet, how many were losses from Nadal and how many were from Federer. I think when Nadal was at his peak Roger was almost always there but in the early days and now, Nadal loses more and doesn’t end up meeting Roger. So Roger’s stats look worse in the head to head. I feel Roger would have beaten Nadal in Cincinnati but Nadal already lost and hence Roger cant get his head to head count better.
—Baapi

Wertheim’s reply:
• Right. This a valid point. The head-to-head record may favor Nadal. But what about those instances of Nadal failing to get to the appointed round? (See: Cincinnati for a recent example.) All part of the stew.

It’s such an interesting discussion this week. I really hope that we do get another match between Roger and Rafa. It’s been too long.


Jock-KatH Says:

“Flapdrol”!!!!!! Isn’t that interesting – I’ve been warned on TX on several occasions when “turds” were being launched -


Margot Says:

@Kat
We must maintain vigilance at all times…;)
Do have a go at the bracket challenge, is great fun.


Jock-KatH Says:

Great Margot – you evidently had the instinct.
Well done Macduff.

Am in the middle of having my downstairs “family” room painted. Given that it’s 20 ft. high and involves 3 elements I’m playing a Grand Slam without a racquet. The painter likes doors etc. open (he’s sweating a lot) – and we are now host to families of flies – in pursuit of which I’ve damaged my computer with a Bathroom Cleaner spray.
(has penetrated the screen)!!!!
Can’t think beyond my next cocktail.


elina Says:

madmax, to be fair, head to head missed opportunities is a two way street statistically speaking.

Roger bowed out before he would have met Nadal many times on the big stage as well including French Opens in 2010, 2012 and 2013 , Wimbledon in 2010 and 2011, US Open in 2010, 2011 and 2013.

Not to mention the numerous times this happened in Masters events including Monte Carlo in 2005, 2009-13, Miami in 2008 and 2014, Rome in 2005, 2007-12, Madrid 2013 and 2015, Canada 2005, 2008 and 2013, Cincy 2008, Shanghai 2005 and 2009, and Paris in 2007,

So no less than 32 times to be exact!

Interesting hey? :)


Markus Says:

That Murray-Kyrgios first round match is worrisome.


andrea Says:

that match in cincinnati was very interesting. lots of forehand chip shots….fex really mixed it up. i don’t recall seeing novak so wrong footed all the time. of course, novak wasn’t at his blistering best but still, roger took advantage and played a unique match.


b3anz Says:

comparing Federer-Djokovic fitness wise is pointless… obviously Djokovic being 6 yrs younger can outlast Federer… but a 28-yr old Federer would give prime Novak the good business (ala Stan in French Open final)

Top story: Halep, Wozniacki Lead Loaded Wuhan Field; Kerber v Keys, Svitolina v Sabalenka Tues.