Matchday: Canada

Murray down 4-1 and a break to big server anderson early on. This is it what we have been waiting for the last 5 weeks. The big 4 are set to take the stage for the last grandslam run of the season. Novak again has a super brutal draw, unsuprisingly, Davy in round one and JMDP in round 3. JMDP looked imperious in set 2 tossing a bagel onto poor Jarko. And Andy looks up against it right now against Anderson. Nadal got a good draw and should have pretty clear sailing to the semi as does Andy. Fed could be playing Tsonga in his quarter that would make for another great match.

(Luckily) I am right now on holiday and can't follow the match but I am under the impression Murray is having a tough time out there in Montreal. Ono to watch: Delpo - Cilic: hope Delboy cat make it but it aint gonna be easy

Andy goes out meekly 6-3 and 6-1, Anderson looked great but Andy was just terrible. Double faulting at crucial points in the match.

This is pretty woeful, this a tournament he's done very well in over the last 3 years (before today), winning it in the previous two years, I had a feeling he was going to lose it but going out in the second round?

If he hadn't won this tournament before, I'd say it doesn't amount to much, but I can't really see how he can be considered a contender for the USO if he puts in a similar performance @ Cinni next week, where his record is also good.

What on earth happened with Murray? Forgot the match was even on and only just noticed the scoreline...

Anderson just flat mauled him. This was the reason I made such a big deal of Novak getting anderson in the second round of his wimbeldon run. Anderson is one of the best servers in the business and he was also dictating with his groundies. Andy played very poorly. He had no penetration or stick on his shots and spent the whole match running around 3 meters behind the baseline. His serve was awful double faulting on crucial points and not getting many free points.

Murray just didn't have the answers today. Credit to Anderson, he played an absolutely solid game. Well played that man.

Think a 250/500 after Wimbledon may have given him the match practice he was sadly lacking.

Looked rusty to say the least but Anderson never let him into the game so kudos to him on a good result.

He has done well here in this tournament in the past only to go on to an unimpressive USO.

Maybe a reversal in fortune this time round!

Anyone know Andy's first serve percentage? Seemed like it was close to zero for lots of the match when I saw the replay.

His double handed backhand was also weak and lots of unforced errors.

I can't recall ever seeing him play so badly.

Yeah, teassoc, andy looked awful his serve was not working and he seemed to miss a lot of firsts although I haven't seen the numbers yet. Definetly, had to be some rust factor.

OMG - so pleased I couldn't see this match (though I was desperately disappointed to miss at the time) - what on earth happened to Andy - shocker of a scoreline. Perhaps the new diet has left him a little weary?

It does rather look like whoever of the top 2 that doesn't have Federer in his half has a gigantic advantage over the other two of the top 3, especially at the USO with Stupid Saturday.

bogbrush wrote:It does rather look like whoever of the top 2 that doesn't have Federer in his half has a gigantic advantage over the other two of the top 3, especially at the USO with Stupid Saturday.

And it seems that the tournament directors continually throw Roger in Novak's half especially in the slams. Stupid Saturday especially magnifies the importance of drawing Roger in your half. God when will they end that awful tradition.

You live in America socal, you tell us!

NOle's gonna roll 'em all....watch and enjoy

Lucius watched the first set of the Andy match. He looked awful, Anderson did play well. Andy wasn't even threatening to break Anderson in the first set, not getting consistently into his service games. He double faulted on break point in the first set in his first service game and never threatened to get back in the match. Busy couldn't watch the second set, but I am sure it was more of the same. His serve was awful as well. And he spent most of the match chasing the ball from 8 or ten feet behind the baseline. It was one of those matches that he was real passive and defensive. I will say this the courts and conditions in Canada look like they are playing pretty fast. Andy really got beaten to the punch, Anderson on the other hand was playing aggressive, attacking, first punch tennis and Andy couldn't successfully counterpunch the big server.

It's always nice when an attacking player can actually hand Murray the spanking he deserves when he goes into ultra defensive mode. He's won a lot of matches he really should have lost when his opponent just self destructs and beats themself.

Or is it 'themselves'? Not often I'm stumped grammatically...

Chazz, it really was an awful performance. Maybe you just chalk it up to rust and hope he does better next week. Anderson has been playing well this year, I always thought this guy could be a talent, he is a little better of a mover than Isner and Karlovic and has the same kind of serve.

Anderson played a really good match tactically. He didn't beat Murray with his big serve. He did it by exposing Murrays weakness.

He went for winners off Murrays relatively weak 2nd serve. This not only won him a few cheap points on return but affected Murrays whole service game. He started going for too much on his first (to save himself from hitting a second) and too much on his 2nd (to protect himself from the winners). His first serve percentage therefore went right down and he hit quite a few double faults.

Anderson was also able to beat Murray off the ground. He hit to his forehand and it began to break down. With important parts of his game producing errors no wonder he felt a step slow. Credit to Anderson and maybe his coach for doing their homework. I'm often surprised at how many players skimp on this task.

Murray should learn from this match and other similar ones that he really needs to improve his 2nd serve and his forehand.

hawkeye wrote:Anderson played a really good match tactically. He didn't beat Murray with his big serve. He did it by exposing Murrays weakness.

He went for winners off Murrays relatively weak 2nd serve. This not only won him a few cheap points on return but affected Murrays whole service game. He started going for too much on his first (to save himself from hitting a second) and too much on his 2nd (to protect himself from the winners). His first serve percentage therefore went right down and he hit quite a few double faults.

Anderson was also able to beat Murray off the ground. He hit to his forehand and it began to break down. With important parts of his game producing errors no wonder he felt a step slow. Credit to Anderson and maybe his coach for doing their homework. I'm often surprised at how many players skimp on this task.

Murray should learn from this match and other similar ones that he really needs to improve his 2nd serve and his forehand.

Interesting perspective. Murray wasn't his usual self in any area. Not sure he was putting more pressure on himself with that first serve - just think that like every other aspect he didn't have it with him for that match. Usually he can expect to win 75% or more on that serve, but what could he do when he had one at most in most of his service games. Of course his second serve was then going to get exposed. He has very little chance of winning if he is so pathetic on his own serve, especially against strong servers such as Anderson.

I don't know hawkeye, in the first 4 service games of Anderson Murray won just 1 point. I only watched the first set and I can't even remember a service game that murray got to deuce in. You are right Anderson did go after the murray second serve and he also came into net quite a few times, which i found surprising. He really went out there and tried to shorten the points. Andy made a great deal of errors with the forehand as you have mentioned. But it is very rare for returner of Andy's ability not even have a real look at the guys serve.

Good attacking player that Anderson is, to me it is unimaginable that any of the 3 men above Murray in the rankings would have surrendered so tamely. Murray's attitude and demeanour in adverse situations continues to be a source of concern and, unless he can do something about it, Men's tennis will remain in the grip of the Top 3 and not the Top 4.

Michael get what you are saying about his demeanor. He just doesn't seem to get it yet that the attitude is costing him matches, you would think by now he would. Not that he is a bad guy he just doesn't control himself well in a tennis match. His forehand in particular was very attrocious. To me more so even the second serve his forehand is the biggest technical glitch right now, when he is hitting that shot well he is usually winning against anyone. But when he tightens up the serve and the forehand both go away and he has no chance.

Anyone seen how they've drawn the seeds @ the Canadian?! Fed/Djokovic on the same side again!!! Why does Djokovic's half look that much harder too?! Scandalous.

Is Andy going backwards? Reading the match reports from you guys that got to see the match, it all sounds dismal.

Still it all began dismally in Indian Wells and Miami earlier this year and then he has had a very good season since, so hopefully it is onwards and upwards from here!

Davy, all over the new world #1, Novak down double break wow! Davy playing out of his mind!

Novak gets a break back and finally holds serve 4-3, this could be a barn burner.

I think Novak is just rusty, he stormed ahead in the second set and wins in straight sets in the end.

Davy isn't the player he used to be. Pity he got injured not long after his relatively late-in-career peak. At his age he was never going to get it back again.

lucius, good thing you are the one mentioning the Djokovic draw and not me. If I had pointed out again how his quarter is the most difficult and how for the umpteenth time in a row he gets fed instead of Murray in his half; the federettes would be in here howling for my blood. Novak was really rusty, his first serve percentage was in the toilet, it was a really windy day that played havoc with his serve. Davy played well though don't want to take anything away from him, he was just sizzling the ball off the ground in the first 5 games.

luciusmann wrote:Anyone seen how they've drawn the seeds @ the Canadian?! Fed/Djokovic on the same side again!!! Why does Djokovic's half look that much harder too?! Scandalous.

Not this again. What about Miami, Madrid and Rome? Federer was in Nadal's half for all of these.

Positively 4th Street wrote:

luciusmann wrote:Anyone seen how they've drawn the seeds @ the Canadian?! Fed/Djokovic on the same side again!!! Why does Djokovic's half look that much harder too?! Scandalous.

Not this again. What about Miami, Madrid and Rome? Federer was in Nadal's half for all of these.

Blimey, it's almost as if the draw is random!

socal1976 wrote:lucius, good thing you are the one mentioning the Djokovic draw and not me. If I had pointed out again how his quarter is the most difficult and how for the umpteenth time in a row he gets fed instead of Murray in his half; the federettes would be in here howling for my blood. Novak was really rusty, his first serve percentage was in the toilet, it was a really windy day that played havoc with his serve. Davy played well though don't want to take anything away from him, he was just sizzling the ball off the ground in the first 5 games.

Come on Socal.....Nole played super.....the first set was just clearing cobwebs.....

Novak would have lost that first set to anyobdy else not named Davydenko.....or Nadal

luciusmann wrote:Anyone seen how they've drawn the seeds @ the Canadian?! Fed/Djokovic on the same side again!!! Why does Djokovic's half look that much harder too?! Scandalous.

I think this kind of pattern in the draw is beginning to look a little weird. I am going by memory, but seems to recall at least in AO,MC, IW, RG, Wimby and now in Montreal with the same draw regarding the top 4: overall that makes 3 out 3 slams with same SF pattern and 6 out 9 in important events. What strikes me is the fact that normally the number 3 and number 2 should be in the same part of the draw, as it happend last year when Djokovic and Federer met most of the time in the semis.....Does anybody now if proper transparecy is ensured in the procedure of drawing the top 4 seeds?

Actually, Jeremy Novak and Roger have been in the same half now for I think 5 or 6 slams in a row although we are told that they should only have a 50 percent chance of being drawn in the same half. There is no transparency in the system and it is funny how Roger and Rafa always end up on opposite sides of draw even when not ranked #1 and #2. But becareful what you say if you possibly hint like I have at how its funny that these mathemetical longshots keep happening to the disadvantage of the less marketable Djokovic and to the advantage of the pocket books of the tournament and tv broadcasters, then you we will be labeled a conspiracy theorist and attacked en masse by people who are terrified of talking about anything that is remotely controversial. If interested, I did a lengthy write up on the subject prior to wimbeldon. Yes that is right 5 straight times novak and Roger in the same half at a grandslam, and we should not question a system that has no transparency and is turning out draws that favor the pocket books of the tournament directors. I am sure it was just such a fortunate coincidence for the tournament to have Isner and mahut drawn up against each other this year as well. NITB started the thread and I ran with it! https://www.606v2.com/t7407-are-draws-rigged

Nitb, I think the wind and the rust played havoc with novak in the first set. But he did much better than Wozi and Murray who clearly were suffering from their long breaks and the conditions.

What an incredible match. Dodig pulls out his best Pete Sampras impersonation and just bombs Nadal off the court from the service line. Stunning, upset, absolutely floored by his performance. It was less Nadal playing poorly than Dodig just destroying him from the service line.

Socal, if there has been any kind of manipulation for tv audiences at the slams, it will be interesting to see what effect Novak's headlining year and two well-received appearances on American chat shows will have at the US Open.
I think Roger is probably still the crowd favourite but there's a good case that the English-speaking, witty, two-grand-slam-holding new number one may now be a strong draw for an American audience.
How popular is Novak in the US?

socal1976 wrote:But becareful what you say if you possibly hint like I have at how its funny that these mathemetical longshots keep happening to the disadvantage of the less marketable Djokovic

au contraire socal - I think Novak is extremely marketable - a funny extrovert and someone who is obviously, for now, really enjoying the other demands on the No 1.

If you throw a coin 5 or 6 times in a row you may well have a string of heads, or vice versa.

HM Murdoch wrote:Socal, if there has been any kind of manipulation for tv audiences at the slams, it will be interesting to see what effect Novak's headlining year and two well-received appearances on American chat shows will have at the US Open.
I think Roger is probably still the crowd favourite but there's a good case that the English-speaking, witty, two-grand-slam-holding new number one may now be a strong draw for an American audience.
How popular is Novak in the US?

Murdoch, he is virtually unknown before this year by American audiences. He is just starting to get some notoriety. It really took Roger till the USO final of 2005 to build the kind of appeal he has in America. Tennis in general has a very low visibility, I think as others have pointed out nothing breeds affection like continued winning.

time please wrote:

socal1976 wrote:But becareful what you say if you possibly hint like I have at how its funny that these mathemetical longshots keep happening to the disadvantage of the less marketable Djokovic

au contraire socal - I think Novak is extremely marketable - a funny extrovert and someone who is obviously, for now, really enjoying the other demands on the No 1.

If you throw a coin 5 or 6 times in a row you may well have a string of heads, or vice versa.

Yes and it is just fortunate I suppose for the tournament directors that a string of heads that comes up is the one that preserves their chance at the rating bonanza of Rafa/Roger final. I am a cynical individual, when lucky mathematical coincidences benefit the financial interests of those who control the process and the process lacks complete transparency, I automatically assume monkey business, comes from my legal training.

Given how infrequently Rafa and Roger both get to the final of the same hard court tournament, and how much less likely it is now, with Fed not playing as well as he used to, surely the organisers' would realize the best bet of a Rafa/Fed match would be in a semi-final.

Julius my friend, great minds think alike. That is why I have predicted that for the first time in a long time we may see Fed and Nadal at the USO in the same half. Think about the ratings bonanza that Stupid Saturday would enjoy with a late afternoon early evening Fed/Nadal match? If interested pleaz check this amazing thread of analysis in the socal's greatest hits threads:

https://www.606v2.com/t9098-socal-s-conspiracy-corner-stupid-saturday-and-the-uso-seedings-for-the-top-4

Aren't the draws for the seeds done in public for Grand Slams? I.e. 32 spots left open for the seeds after the initial draw, then the seeds pulled out in some way, with a public audience?

How comes Monfils is seeded as high as 5?

Julius, they announce it publically that is all we know really. There is a whole public ceremony but no type of security or oversight to prevent hanky panky from going on. I am very interested to see how the draw looks in the USO.

Ally, welcome, I think there are few players like Sod and Ferrer ranked ahead of monfils who pulled out due to injury.

What an amazing turn of events, Roger Federer joins the list of top seeds sent out of the touranament Tsonga just blitzes him in the final set. Well the draw has opened up for Novak nicely now. Tsonga is about the only player left in the draw that I would really be concerned about if I was Novak. And novak showed that when he needs to he can beat Tsonga like he did in wimbeldon. Although Tsonga is in Novak's half and has a better career head to head record against Novak. I think it 6-4 Tsonga. Still in the biggest matches they have ever played Novak has won. Including twice in 5 setters. I think new Novak actually matches up pretty well with Tsonga and will win but, have to say Tsonga is the only danger man left.

Fed but,

Jo-Wilfrid, good to see carrying on the Wimbledon form

socal1976 wrote:Julius my friend, great minds think alike. That is why I have predicted that for the first time in a long time we may see Fed and Nadal at the USO in the same half. Think about the ratings bonanza that Stupid Saturday would enjoy with a late afternoon early evening Fed/Nadal match?

Are you saying this so that when the random draw does not fan the flames of your fix fantasy further, you can claim that this is a whole new fix and subject us to more 'grassy knoll' ramblings? Furthermore, this will rubber-stamp your previous fix fixation. And if Federer and Nadal are kept apart then you can revert to type. All conspiracy bases covered - hats off!