Federer Heads Stockholm; ATP Preview, Tennis-X Notes

Must win for Fed. All or nothing!

October 17th, 2010 at 10:06 pm

HELLO??

No one even mentions the umpire in the Murray match??? Federer serving at 1-2 in the second set, a break point down, he wins the point to deuce but the umpire overruled a forehand on the line from Federer. They had to replay the point.

The linesman didn’t call it out!!! That’s what they said on CCTV5, Chinese television, two games later. The umpire overuled while being so far away from the baseline there. It’s an absolute disgrace and Federer was actually starting to play better in the second set up to that point. Now he lost the game to go 3-1 down and everything became even more a struggle.

I guess most people outside China thought the linesman called it ‘out’, well, he did not.

October 17th, 2010 at 10:14 pm

great win for ana ivanovic. very happy for her. Hope this is the beginning of better things to happen…

October 17th, 2010 at 10:37 pm

Zou,

I just watched that point and you are right. That was too critical of a point and perhaps Cedric should have given it to Fed so that they could play the Duece. Fed did not play the next point well at all and it cost him the break. But all in all Murray did not win because of that one point. He played really well.

Fed actually played a decent match but Murray won because he played better .

October 18th, 2010 at 1:28 am

I saw that point also, and was amazed at what happened. I kept rewinding to make sure it went down the way it did. I don’t understand the umpires at all with their over-rules. I feel there is a lot of inconsistency among the umpires when they need to over-rule and how they decide when a point should be replayed. I’ve seen many players lose a match because of the ineptness of these umpires. ATP needs to ensure that they are all united in their decison m aking.

October 18th, 2010 at 1:38 am

Zou and Zola

Linesman Did call it out. Go check the highlights on youtube. Even Federer said in his interview that linesman call was late and low so it led to confusions.

October 18th, 2010 at 2:32 am

Funk?trunk: only in the harsh and unforgiving territory of professional sport could 29 be called “old.”
Fed loses bcos of a dodgy line call…hmm…

October 18th, 2010 at 2:35 am

montecarlo,

I just watched the match. The linesman did call it out but it was late and wrong and fed had won that point. It was up to the umpire to either give it to federer or replay the point and he chose the latter.

margot,

Murray won because he played a magnificent match. he broke Federer 4 times. That call could have been better but it did not determine the outcome of the match. fed was not able to convert one break point against Andy who was really dominating with his serve. Most of the long rallies ended in Andy’s favor and with a winner, many tines from impossible spots. It was a very convincing win.

October 18th, 2010 at 3:13 am

@zola
No it wasn’t up to the umpire. The call came and Murray stopped right there and pointed to the umpire about the call. The point was still alive. Who knows if Murray kept on moving Federer could have missed the Overhead like he did one game ago. You know the rules don’t you?

October 18th, 2010 at 3:44 am

Infact as Murray pointed out later in his interview, that it was good for Federer that hawk eye was there (which showed that ball barely touched the last part of line) or else Federer wouldn’t even get the second chance to save the break point.

October 18th, 2010 at 3:46 am

Fed was simply robbed.

Fed complained about the soft spoken line calls. While I have heard the Asians are very polite it is important to yell your call not whisper it.

I watched the match and was surprised how many times there was a call nobody could hear. Even Fed asked the Ump to talk louder.

So one week ago Murray loses to a 30 year old Lubby and the next week he wins and suddenly it is end times for Fed. Not!

October 18th, 2010 at 8:10 am

Margot,

Fed would have lost that match if he was 22 or 29. It was Murrays day and he simply played better. Don’t let the excuses get to you. Feds age and or decline thing has nothing to do with Murrays abilities. Murray did not get the the finals by chance.

October 18th, 2010 at 9:27 am

TGiT,

Fed may have very well been robbed but one point doesn’t make the match. It could have been a determining factor and the match could have swung, but it’s not like Fed had match point and that happened.

October 18th, 2010 at 9:32 am

montecarlo,

sorry, but I am not sure what we are discussing here.

Murray played a great match. I wrote that the outcome of the match did not depend on that one point as Murray broke Fed’s serve 4 times and had more chances to do so.

I thought it was unfortunate that at break point the call was late and wrong and they had to replay the point. If the call was correct Fed would have saved that one break point. So if it was me, I would have given him the point if I had the option . But perhaps the rules say differently ( I do not know the exact rules on hawk-eye calls).

October 18th, 2010 at 9:34 am

TGiT

Shanghai hosted the YEC for three years and no one complained about the calls. Besides no one complained about the soft calls this week. Murray was playing the same match and he did not complain either!

Federer did not lose because of the line calls. He lost to a better player on the day.

October 18th, 2010 at 9:39 am

madmax

on the other thread, you suggested my perspective on Federer (as a supporter) was “harsh”, and I daresay that is right. I have always belonged to what you might call the awkward squad, and that has some good points, some bad. However, thinking recently about what a poster – can’t recall who – said about Andy Murray has led me to think up a possibly optimistic scenario for Federer. Don’t blink! Only “possibly” remember.

This poster suggested that the format of grand slams was injurious to Murray’s prospects, because the day off between matches gave a player already too much inclined to introspection further opporunity to worry and over-analyze. How valid this idea is, I don’t know.

But from Federer’s point of view, the opposite could well be the case. The rest he has between difficult matches could be invaluable in recharging his batteries. In this event, Federer will have a better chance in the next two years (let’s assume that’ll be it) to win a grand slam than to win a Masters tournament. Don’t forget his win in Cincinnati was, with the pull outs and what not, an oddity, so that can’t be cited as contrary evidence.

So I think Fed may well pull a surprise (or two?) over the next couple of years, who knows, there’s lots of variables, and that the most likely venue for this will be a grand slam.

October 18th, 2010 at 10:07 am

Too many double standards at this web site.

Murray did not just become great this week. Last week he stank the joint (and I won’t even mention the US Open) up and know he is suddnenly a killer tennis player. He is still pissy self loathing same Murray. He had a cake draw that worked in his favor in Shanghai. He would never have made it through Fed’s side of the draw.

But…suddenly Fed loses and he is the worst Tennis player who will never win another tourny for two years. We are getting punk’d, right?

October 18th, 2010 at 10:13 am

happy for ivanovic’s title.

why isn’t sharapova playing at all? Is she finished for the year?

I guess neither Williams can be bothered to show up at Doha. Very disappointing. Looks like Doha will be
Wozniaki
Zvonereva
Clijsters (if she can be bothered)
Schiavone
Stosur
Jankovic
Dementieva
Azarenka

still a great field but not as good as if we had williams matches. and no sharapova or ivanovic. maybe next year they will qualify.

Looks like the spanish have a shot of having three players in London.

October 18th, 2010 at 10:15 am

” He [Murray]would never have made it through Fed’s side of the draw.”

????????????????????????????????????????????????

October 18th, 2010 at 10:28 am

Top 10 players, duh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

October 18th, 2010 at 10:33 am

TGit–tennis is a “what have for me lately sport.”

October 18th, 2010 at 10:42 am

sorry, on two phone calls, what have you done for me lately.

October 18th, 2010 at 10:45 am

So Fed was an easy match up for Murray?

October 18th, 2010 at 10:47 am

Kimberly-

Agree, especially on this site.

Grendel-

Please pay attention. Last week Murray lost to a 30 year old tomato can. He gets a non-top ten draw this week and meets Federer after Fed plays four strong players and two who are top ten. There is no way mental case Murry would have made it to the finals if he had Isner, Seppi, Sod, Djoko and then Fed. Why, I don’t think Murray has had that kind of draw in the Grand Slams.

Got it? Good!

October 18th, 2010 at 10:54 am

grendel @ 10:07 – it was Daniel who proposed that idea about Murray and slams, which I found quite interesting. I hope Murray overcomes the slam-block soon.

October 18th, 2010 at 10:55 am

Oh, and to continue your education Fed is the second player to reach four consecutive Master Finals. The first player to do so was also freaking Fed.

Wow, all this learning for free.

October 18th, 2010 at 10:56 am

TGiT – Just to play devil’s advocate, or Murray’s anyhow, let’s recall Murray’d draw in Canada. where he won the title too: Malisse, Monfils, Nalbandian, Nadal, Federer. Both Malisse and Nalbandian were in purple patches then too. Players can play only who is across the net, whether it’s a top ten or a top forty player. I agree with you that it’s ridiculous to say that Fed is suddenly washed up because he lost a final! But isn’t it equally silly to say Murray is not a great player, when the guy has been in 2 slam finals and has been in the top 4 for going on 3 years?

October 18th, 2010 at 11:00 am

I agree that Murray is a very good player. I can’t say great until he wins at least one Slam. You and I are in agreement with the rest of your statement. Murray is not Superman this week and wasn’t a Wimpy Kid last week. He is a very consistent good player at this point in his career. Hey, he is the one who said last year his goal was to be number one and look how that turned out.

October 18th, 2010 at 11:07 am

Very good or great – I won’t quibble with you over that TGiT. : ) Actually I don’t know if he ever said the number 1 thing or if it got twisted a little; you know how vile the press can be. If I recall, Murray said something about his serve, that if he could serve as well as he had at a particular moment, in a particular match, then he “could” reach number 1. I may be mistaken but I do recall something along those lines. Anyhow, I think we are in agreement in general. I just wanted to point out Murray’s merits, and that he certainly has no control over his draw, and nor does any player! And that shouldn’t downgrade his win. He did beat Fed for the title after all!

October 18th, 2010 at 11:14 am

hmmmm. Someone’s sounding cross. Was the tomato can who beat Murray the same one as beat Nadal earlier this year?

“Murray did not just become great this week” -agreed. Federer, Nadal, many exalted people, and then you and me as well agree. Murray has been a great player for quite some time now. “pissy self-loathing”, “mental case”. I’m never quite sure when people on tennis sites make these remarkable character judgements if they really mean them, or if it’s a sort of convention to be as rude as you possibly can about players you don’t like. Then it’s a kind of game, isn’t it, but before you can play it properly, you need to know the rules, and I am not sure that I do.

For the record, Murray of course is not a mental case or anything remotely resembling that. Like many very, very talented people – and Murray’s gifts are awesome – he has yet to come to terms with them, and to understand how properly to apply them consistently. He may never do – tragedies like that are not uncommon. I hope he does, tennis’ loss if he doesn’t, that’s for sure.

Meanwhile, the idea that Murray couldn’t, by definition, have handled Fed’s opponents is simply bizzare. There is no other possible word for it. Djokovic might have beaten him, just as he might have beaten Federer (who remarked it could have gone either way). Who knows?

Federer has often had easy draws, and I have found myself defending him – as is so often said, all you can do is play who is in front of you. meanwhile, of course Fed is not washed up.There has been quite a debate going on recently – is he declining, or is he not? I belong to the latter camp. It is a reasonable position, I think.

October 18th, 2010 at 11:27 am

grendel-

I can agree with almost everything you mentioned but Murray is a mental case. It is not personal attack against Murray. Pick any match and watch how nutty he gets. I mean last year the guy loses to Fed at a masters event and hits his hand so hard on his raquet string so hard it starts bleeding. That is mental. It just is.

As for the ups and downs of our beloved sport this site trivializes and taunts too much. I guess their site hits must be up.

October 18th, 2010 at 11:43 am

Always enjoyed Shanghai’s tournament, and this year ws no exception :-)).

Very deserving win for Murray. Keep going, kiddo.

Breath-taking tennis btw Djok and Fed again (for a set). No big deal surrounding no.2 spot for a while for Djok. Get the DC!

I take it a big compliment for Fed still being locked to the Trunk on Tennis-X, after 4 beautiful matches following a 4 week break and got back to no.2. LOL.

No, nothing is a must win for Fed. It drives me nuts that he even surpassed me in Shanghai dialect!

Have fun.

October 18th, 2010 at 12:18 pm

Sorry skeeze but folk like IGIT just make me want to join Fedend’s gang. In fact Fedend baby can I come and play with you?… in a manner of speaking of course….;)
jane: re Ken Loach. He is adored in France but alas in the UK he is “a prophet without honour..” too left wing I guess. Another great film is “My name is Joe.” Joe isn’t a particularly likeable character but in 5 minutes Loach makes us care what happens to him. That’s his genius. I can watch some films for hours and at the end, if the protagonists fell into a giant mincer, I would not care!
skeeze: love that early Illusionist film u referred to. I love magic….. and that’s why I love Andy’s play ;)

October 18th, 2010 at 12:25 pm

hello tennis people-

missed watching shanghai semi and was hijacked outta town and missed the final too but want to give a big congrats to margot, #1 murray fan and all murray fans! and i thought he’s do it …

i didn’t go back and read all the posts just scanned some on another thread. the reason i thought murray would win is because federer had a tough draw and i couldn’t really see him winning if he managed to get through isner, soderling, and djokovic. ( tho soda turned out to be a relative easy win ) from a murray perspective his draw looked tough too, as i guessed he’d have to beat nadal to get to the final. murray plays well in hc masters, in general and he was due, imo. basically i imagined he’d be over whatever was ailing physically more ready than those who went deeper in the previous tournaments like nadal and djoko and fresher than federer if they met.

also agreed with Von’s assessment of federer:

“I think the problem for Federer was not enough recovery time. He seems to need more as time goes by. He’s right that it does take a lot to win a master’s tourney, as there is such a short recovery time between matches.”

so true. it is in no way diminishing murray’s win or any other players win over federer. fed is #2 again in the world and cannot be considered an easy win. but he is not at his peak. that’s not to say he’s on a slippery slope to the bottom at all. i’m not counting him out but this is not the federer of 2004 – 2007.

there is no such denial of late twenties being relatively “old” in tennis years when thinking of hewitt, roddick, nalbandian and others. age is a factor and it applies to federer. it’s not an excuse for federer losing. to me, it’s more about admiring him for continuing to be near top in the world after all he’s done and having so many tennis miles in his body. he can still hang with the younger guys at their peak and those coming into their peak.it’s great. i certainly miss him when he’s not in a draw.

moving on to stokholm and kremlin cup…

i wouldn’t pick federer to win stokholm – looking at draw and not sure who atm. but i would be expecting davy’s form to come around in moscow. last year i remember how tired he was and lost first round to safin.

gulbis will be playing in vienna next week. then he plays basel and paris. just saying. what a relief! no need to worry about him getting jailed in stokholm, kimberly ; )

October 18th, 2010 at 12:32 pm

Margot,

:( to the first part of your post

:) to the last part

Appreciate you being here, through the ups and downs of everyone elses fav, you are a constant poster, and I appreciate your posts.

October 18th, 2010 at 12:37 pm

skeeze: 0 -BTW that’s a hug :)
cheers conty: u r star gambler!

October 18th, 2010 at 12:45 pm

margot- your man won! must be feeling great, right…

i’m not quitting my day job or moving to vegas!

but i might pick muzza to defend his title in valencia. there will be some spaniards in that draw with other ideas, no doubt.

October 18th, 2010 at 12:58 pm

conty: at the mo. I might even pick him myself ;)

October 18th, 2010 at 2:09 pm

Contador Says: gulbis will be playing in vienna next week. then he plays basel and paris. just saying. what a relief! no need to worry about him getting jailed in stokholm, kimberly ; )

Contador–I was quite concerned about this so I checked the draw in stockholm and was quite relieved to see Ernest absent. Don’t know if it was by his own volition or whether he was banned from the country and or tournament due to last years, uh behavior.Either way, hope he plays great in his remianing three tourneys and has that breakthrough year in 2011, although not holding my breath.

October 18th, 2010 at 2:30 pm

“That is mental. It just is”
So there! I dare say young TGiT stamped his little foot when he typed that.
There is indeed a mental case on the loose, and it’s not Murray…

October 18th, 2010 at 5:28 pm

From a Chinese friend:

There was an editorial column in the sports section of China’s state newspaper on Fed. The title reads:

“Do not let elegance fade into nostalgic memories”

Many many Fedtards in China. No doubt.

October 18th, 2010 at 6:46 pm

What impressed me the most about Murray’s win was his powewr ground strokes. His balls were just faster, even the forehand topspin. He was not passive as in the past. He was in a good day, and when those happens, the ball doesn’t touch the net, everything went in, aces flying by, you name it. Even luck in bad calls.

I played Sunday and I was in one of these days. Everything worked my way, and my partner was just getting frustrated. At one point I hit 2 passing shots in the lines and a slice backhand lobby, which droped my jaw (my partner is 6’3″)!

That’s one of the beauties in tennis, no matter how talented you are somedays even a John Doe’s can beat you! Not implying that Murray is one, to me he is the second more raw talented player on tour.:)

October 18th, 2010 at 6:52 pm

Daniel:
“to me he is the second more raw talented player on tour.:)”
Agreed. I didn’t think Federer was hitting the ball too bad, I mean some days, everything is aweful, everything is terrific. This was a middling performance. But when Fed was hitting good, unless it was an outright winner, Murray was generally getting it back with ease. So there were a lot of quite long rallies, often of high quality (this doesn’t seem to have been much commented on) from both men – and the vast majority won by Murray.

Yes, it was one of those days for him – but it’s up to Murray to have them a bit more often if he’s going to do himself full justice. There are always enigmas in sport, not least tennis. Safin, Nalbandian, Gasquet. Will Murray join this merry (if disparate)band? Or will he be a Lendl, battling with his demons and eventually overcoming them (more or less)?

I see Murray is entered for the Hopman Cup, again partnered by Laura Robson. Another pair will be Serena Williams and John Isner. Robson is barely more than a little girl. Imagine having to face the Isner serve! Altogether, a great experience for her, though. What I like about Laura Robson, apart from her wonderful serve, is that she’s still around. She’s done nothing spectacular since winning junior Wimbledon, but you get the feeling that she is slowly, steadily feeling her way forward. That suggests there may lie a decent tennis career ahead of her.

October 18th, 2010 at 7:14 pm

No big deal surrounding no.2 spot for a while for Djok. Get the DC!

Twocents, yesssss that’s the only thing that matters to him now.

October 19th, 2010 at 1:02 am

grendel: Laura is at least 5’8″ and growing, so in one sense she is not a little girl” at all! Female sports stars seem to have little childhood, Maria 17 when she won, Tracy even younger, I believe.
Andy = Lendl :)

October 19th, 2010 at 1:39 am

grendel,

sorry. not been ignoring you. trying to find you this morning on three threads is no mean feat! here you are.

“Don’t forget his win in Cincinnati was, with the pull outs and what not, an oddity, so that can’t be cited as contrary evidence”.

the point I find is that one could raise an argument for all players – really – too many to mention and i would not take away possibly the element of surprise (?)that murray beat fed in shanghai, nor the joy away from margot in particular, a staunch murray fan. I can see why you would mention cinny in the way that you have -however, to counter, it is a foregone conclusion that federer has not played as many matches, had a harder draw than murray at shanghai, murray having zero top ten players, in fact, who was the highest seeded player there?

The way I see it, things balance themselves out over the year – you know that with your wealth of tennis knowledge.

You also know that tennis is a matter of inches, millimetres even when hawkeye is involved. Going off at a tangent slightly, hawkeye is not a precise science, always being a ‘best fit’ position within 4 millimetres on the huge tennis screen. points can go either way.

Fact is. Murray had it easier, played more tournaments, didn’t play any top tenners, played much better than federer on the day.

We’ll see what happens over the next few tournaments.

Ultimately 2011 is proving to be as exciting as ever.

Glad that Federer is still here. What on earth would people write about if he wasn’t?

October 19th, 2010 at 5:02 am

I had told you guys that, Federer would get his arse kicked in Shanghai. Gosh! Anyone could be a writer here.

October 19th, 2010 at 6:12 am

from what i saw the line call was like this.
the umpire called it out but only murray heard. so he stopped.
the umpire then confirmed the call.
it was very close and not a terrible mistake.these calls happen a lot when the ball is a few mill in.
fed wins challenge.
you have to replay point because murray did get the ball back even though fed would have probably won point, but if it’s not 100% they replay.
fed bitched about it for a couple of games afterwards when he knew the rules full well.
the point is, it wasn’t a glaring error.
if you hit the ball barely in,you’ve essentially missed the shot and you have to accept that people will call it out much of the time.

October 19th, 2010 at 8:57 am

Fed will likely finish the year #2 as he does not have much else to defend. He is still talking about getting back to number 1.

If Djoko has to defend Paris and Basil so unless he does something else at YEC he will likely finish #3. I don’t think he cares as long as he is in top 4. Doesn’t make much of a difference, top 4 is all so tough does it matter who plays who in semis etc. At AO when Murray was 5 Nadal got him in the quarters.

Is Delpo out for rest of year or is he playing in Vienna, Paris etc?

October 19th, 2010 at 9:19 am

Kimberley:”He is still talking about getting back to number 1.” On the face of it, nothing could be more reasonable than for the #2 to voice aspirations to regaining #1 spot. And yet, everybody knows (surely?) that this is not a remotely realistic prospect – assuming Nadal retains health etc. Still, good that the old fella’s still gunning for it…

October 19th, 2010 at 9:31 am

“fed bitched about it for a couple of games afterwards when he knew the rules full well.”

True. Ah, the frailties of human nature! Aren’t they pathetic? I wonder how we bloggers manage to rise above them. Are we on something special or something?

October 19th, 2010 at 9:40 am

Colin,

I dare say you are still wrong.

Murray is a headcase all evidence cofirms. (stamping foot)

October 19th, 2010 at 9:41 am

Kimberly, I believe Delpo is out for the rest of the year.

Also, agree that number 2 or even 3 is probably not Nole’s high priority right now – DC is.

October 19th, 2010 at 10:05 am

Jane–Obviously Novak has a HUGE priority in Davis Cup. As long as he’s in the top 4 I don’t think ranking really matters. For any of them. Of course they want to be as high as possible but each of the top 4 players is a difficult match for any of the others.

October 19th, 2010 at 10:18 am

Fed booked 11:30pm Fly Emrates flight to Dubai. The final started at 4:30pm Sunday afternoon Shanghai time. After the award ceremony, he got back to Ritz Portman in downtown (>1 hour roundtrip), got back to Qizhong to do his press, left for Pudong airport at 10:00pm, with one extra suitcase filled with presents for his twins from Chinese fans.

Full FEDEX speed! It’s good to be Roger Federer.

October 19th, 2010 at 10:48 am

“Full FEDEX speed! ” LOL Twocents – indeed, he is a jet-setter. Great that he brings surprises home for the wee gals. : )

Kimberly you make a valid case re: top 4. In some ways it doesn’t affect them too much; one could argue the other way though. If either Murray or Djoko could get to number 2 it would mean that they wouldn’t have to go through both “grand slam men” (and you know who I mean :)) to win a slam, and that might make it easier for them. Mind you, there have been upsets of both Fed and Nadal in the past 2 years, and neither Murray nor Djoko capitalized, so I suppose it’s “six and one half dozen of the other.” :)

October 19th, 2010 at 10:54 am

Jane,

A broken record I am and will be: Djok and Murray are due for breakthru, big time. Djok better get a DC before he’s too busy — like Fed :-))((.

BTW, Fed clarified that he aslo received books about his career from Shanghai fans — happy camper he is one. And fans told me that Fed always asked where’s he’s gift when receiving gifts for his twins. Greedy or not, that dad?

October 19th, 2010 at 11:13 am

STAFF: re: funk/trunk – thanks a lot! Now I can’t get that dumb Go-Go’s song out of my head, two days running “Vacation all I ever wanted … ” Ugh!

Twocents, well, can you blame him? We all like gifts. :)

October 19th, 2010 at 12:53 pm

Bellucci blake are playing. Interesting to see who wins that.

October 19th, 2010 at 1:35 pm

Interesting, Federer still remains the best HC player this year. For the moment he is more than 1000 points ahead of Nadal (I mean on HC only, starting from Jan), not saying of ND and AM. Whether it changes in the time remaining, we’ll see. But it is very much possible that Federer will gain more than Nadal in Oct-Nov. Not only because the latter subconsciously believes his task is already overfulfilled for 2010 but simply because his HC skill is not dominating yet.

“And yet, everybody knows (surely?) that this is not a remotely realistic prospect – assuming Nadal retains health etc. Still, good that the old fella’s still gunning for it…”

Suppose the gap between them will be about 3,500 this season. It’s not, say, about 8000 (the gap Roger had after 2006). And if one slam only, W or RG, goes wrong for Rafael – it may happen, even irrespective of his legendary health issues, one bad day at office… Then Roger’s chances to be #1 again will not look such unrealistic. And he does not see himself old. Things are going harder for him, that’s for sure, but he is far from giving up.

On that bad call…Cedrik could judge the point both ways within the rules. Just as it sometimes happens when the valid ace is called out. Then the umpire may prescribe a replay or a point, depending on the possibility of the receiver to return that given serve. In the case under consideration, Murray’s return, obviously inaffected by the call, was a gimme, and the final Federer’s overhead was impossible to return, be Murray ready or not. I don’t blame Cedrik, it was his choice, and I wonder what would be Andy’s reaction, should the point be given to Roger! But no doubt the episode was a turning point. Murray played excellent but also made quite a lot of errors, he was not that invincible. Roger was in position just as in the first set with Novak a day before – being not able to gain from opponent’s errors at once, he was patiently waiting the next chance, and Andy was visibly uncertain. Hard to say what would happen, but we have seen many times, even recently, how Roger’s UEs numbers drop drastically should he be able to shift the momentum. But this time he was so irritated (similarly to that Del Potro challenge at USO_09 – and mind, he takes Juan Martin much easier than Andy!) that he was not able to overcome this bad luck and the match was practically over.
But overall, all should be happy (except maybe Novak. Murray deservedly won, kudos to him; Federer is #2 again and has some perspectives, and Nadal may rest on his laurels till AO at least). So all their fans.

October 19th, 2010 at 7:16 pm

Fed on his Facebook page;

“I Practiced in Stockholm this evening. The practice was opened to the fans and there were over 4’000 people watching. It made for an exciting and interesting practice! Lots of fun and I even hit with some young kids at the end”

October 19th, 2010 at 7:36 pm

Rick Says:
I had told you guys that, Federer would get his arse kicked in Shanghai. Gosh! Anyone could be a writer here.

October 19th, 2010 at 6:12 am

…apart from you rick.

October 20th, 2010 at 12:33 am