Federer v Tsonga - Who will prevail this time?

Once again its going to be a Fed v Tsonga QF, the third in almost as many months. Will Federer be able to turn the tables on Tsonga this time around or will it be a third consecutive defeat for Federer?

Tsonga is playing really well and I for one think it is enough to beat Federer. Fed on the other hand is up and down and I am just wondering whether he had what it takes to beat Tsonga. Tsonga's serve is brilliant as are his ground strokes which make it very hard to get into his service games.

I think Federer is really up against it in terms of the draw compared to the others in the top four. Murray has been spared JMDP, Novak has Tipsaravic which will be a straight sets win and Nadal has been fortunate again this year as he has no real threats except Murray should he reach the semis.

Fed's got his work cut out for him that't for sure!

Tsonga is a mood-type player and if in the mood he could prove a handful but I choose Federer to come through in either four or perhaps five sets. Federer has looked very good thus far in the US Open.

A Tsonga win is inevitable. Tsonga is a top 7 player who had to battle with injuries and now that it is behind him, he is a tough opponent.

I think Federer in 4 sets. He is hitting the ball to well not beat him. Showing the form he had at the FO. Even then the mighty Djokovic couldn't stop him.

If Feds serve % dips or the UEs rack up, then Tsonga has a chance. I fancy the Fed Express to roll on through.

It must be said of Tsonga's erratic and show- boating nature though. He might yet again be caught up in trying to please the crowd instead of winning the match. I suppose he is maturing. His 2nd consecutive slam quarter finals.

I too think if the ue and serve fail fed's had it. U hav to be able to keep up with JWT and take advantage of a dip in play. I agree that he has matured now and the showman has taken a back seat. Fed needs to be focussed. Time is running out now and if he wants to keep the slam record for the moment he needs to put as much distance btwn him and Nadal, who can catch fed in less than 2 yrs time.

The match is on Federers racquet.

FedsFan wrote:Time is running out now and if he wants to keep the slam record for the moment he needs to put as much distance btwn him and Nadal, who can catch fed in less than 2 yrs time.

Never gonna 'appen.

Nadal has already released his book. That's a sign he knows his best days are behind and tries to cash in while people still care.

All it takes to kill any hope of Nadal getting to 16 is for Djokovic to stay fit for another year. If another player (Murray?) joins the club then that just kills it.

His game demands incredible physical condition, and even at 98% he'll drop away. I think there are some signs of that already.

I'll say the match is on Tsonga's racquet. If he controls his excitement and he does get excited, he should have no problem winning.

Well, so far Djokovic has only prevented Nadal from winning 1 slam. More work to be done. Murray has actually prevented 2 as one can only have seen Nadal winning USO 08 and possibly AO 2010 had Murray not intervened.

Well Tsonga doesn't have many off days nowadays, and no SA you brainless child, it's not "on Tsonga's racquet", have you not watched Fed/Tsonga matches before Wimbledon?

What a suprise! josiah has embraced the thread with that single digit IQ

I'll go for Tsonga, I reckon.
Fed is too slow to the ball these days. Perhaps that's why he did so well at the FO, where he was hitting the ball beautifully.

Never gonna 'appen.

Nadal has already released his book. That's a sign he knows his best days are behind and tries to cash in while people still care. [/quote]

I like your cynical attitude! I think Nadal is just making hay while the sun shines and that goes for his new line of Armani jeans!

I think Fed may have peaked already and too early against Monaco. He was hitting the ball so hard and viciously it was a joy to watch. I find he alternates between a good/bad match. Round one he was sluggish, round two played well, third round was poor v cilic and last night again very good. That pattern suggests a shocker tomorrow ! I hope not though.

As for Nadal, i think he can win this uso. A wounded Nadal is more dangerous as he has to prove himself now he isnt a spent force.

Tsonga, has the requisite weapons, I like to see if he consistent enough to get fed three times in a row. Roger needs to return a lot better this time around if he wants to have a chance. But I am taking Roger in 4 or 5 sets, I think maybe its his time.

It's a really tight one - I still have Federer the very marginal favourite but this match is something of a bell weather of his ability to hold his position in the top 3.

As far as what Tenez said about Nadal chasing Fed's slam tally, agewise 2011 for Nadal is the equivalent of 2006 for Fed, who ended 2006 with 9 slams. Nadal already has 10, but Fed got another 3 in 2007 to finish that year on 12. If Nadal is going to catch up Fed I think he's got to have 12 in the bank by the end of 2012 so this slam is important from that point of view - after Djoko took Wimbledon 16 slams started looking like a very big ask for Nadal.

Otherwise, once again with the US Open the story is rotten scheduling - if they still want to finish on Sunday it's absurd that the finalist from the Murray/Nadal half of the draw faces four 5-setters in five days when the US Open even plays the middle Sunday. TV schedules are upsetting the integrity of the competition.

It could be worse: if they complete today then lost Thursday Murray/Nadal would play 3 in 3 while Fed/Nole would just face Stupid Weekend.

Interestingly, after last year where Fed/Nole had to do the 2nd shift i think they'd have the call to take the 1st match. Double ouch!

barrystar wrote:It's a really tight one - I still have Federer the very marginal favourite but this match is something of a bell weather of his ability to hold his position in the top 3.

As far as what Tenez said about Nadal chasing Fed's slam tally, agewise 2011 for Nadal is the equivalent of 2006 for Fed, who ended 2006 with 9 slams. Nadal already has 10, but Fed got another 3 in 2007 to finish that year on 12. If Nadal is going to catch up Fed I think he's got to have 12 in the bank by the end of 2012 so this slam is important from that point of view - after Djoko took Wimbledon 16 slams started looking like a very big ask for Nadal.

Otherwise, once again with the US Open the story is rotten scheduling - if they still want to finish on Sunday it's absurd that the finalist from the Murray/Nadal half of the draw faces four 5-setters in five days when the US Open even plays the middle Sunday. TV schedules are upsetting the integrity of the competition.

The scheduling is frustrating, more so because elements of it are avoidable. They draw out the first few rounds too much, players shouldn't be starting on Wednesday. The latter rounds are more likely to be tough so it seems absurd to pack the matches in. So the intended schedule is flawed, and then you add some rain...

Agree re Nadal and slam totals. I've always felt it is a tall order unless he could find a way to consistently win hard court slams, and, as you rightly say, Djokovic winning Wimbledon shrank Nadal's dominion to just RG really. Nadal has often (always?) been ahead on an age comparison but Federer picked up slams at a ludicrous rate from 2004-2007, I think Nadal will need another season winning 3 to have a chance - and that seems like a big ask.

barrystar wrote:Otherwise, once again with the US Open the story is rotten scheduling - if they still want to finish on Sunday it's absurd that the finalist from the Murray/Nadal half of the draw faces four 5-setters in five days when the US Open even plays the middle Sunday. TV schedules are upsetting the integrity of the competition.

Certainly but what will really gives a disadvantage to the finalist is who is going to play the second semi...and more so..who against. So Nadal and Murray may play a short match and the second semi could be long and toughbetween Djoko and whoever...and clearly the top half will have a clear disadvantage..regardless of playing 3 or 4 matches in 5 days. Especially considering that Nadal and Murray have easier 4th round and quarters than the bottom half.

Socal who has been complaining about Djko's draws for ever must be happy to have Djoko as the favoured one in that tournament.

You are right on that one Tenez, I hope it keeps raining and murray and Nadal play their qf matches on friday night and their semi on saturday, and then the winner gets Novak hopefully on sunday. About time novak got some breaks with the draw and scheduling.

But seriously speaking the USO really needs to address its ridiculous scheduling as it continually sacrifices the integrity of the competition in order to maximize TV ratings. It needs to be fair to all the players and stupid saturday certainly isn't particularly fair for the second men's semi. At least play the two men's matches first and then the women's final.

It won't change, and the players wouldn't like the change in prize money of TV was done down.

Of course they could have saved the prize money by not paying the girls for their shorter format sport, but that's another question.............

bogbrush wrote:It won't change, and the players wouldn't like the change in prize money of TV was done down.

Of course they could have saved the prize money by not paying the girls for their shorter format sport, but that's another question.............

Have to agree there BB, the women do not deserve equal money at the slams, they don't play as much, and don't attract the same interest and ratings. At Indian wells when the women's match goes on center court half the fans either leave for the outside courts or to get a drink or some food. I know that I time my runs to the bar based on when the women are playing on center court.

I don;t think it's a money issue. It's just the organisers dropping their pants too low when negotiating the broadcast rights. I am pretty sure other US channels woudl be very keen to take the USO on board with a proper schedule....especially if the likes of Harisson and Young pierce through.

As a man of impeccable wisdom it's time to stop the Tsonga bandwagon streaming on it's endless pursuit towards another win over the GOAT, losing to a player who made Mardy Fish look like a multi slam winner would be too much for the brain to fathom. Backhand slice will be needed for this match as Tsonga is a one paced bully.

Tenez wrote:I don;t think it's a money issue. It's just the organisers dropping their pants too low when negotiating the broadcast rights. I am pretty sure other US channels woudl be very keen to take the USO on board with a proper schedule....especially if the likes of Harisson and Young pierce through.

Yeah, but that is the issue tenez, without a big American star tennis has leverage against CBS and the broadcasters. It might not even be the tenth most watched sport in the USA right now, as sad as that is. There is a lot of viewing in the US sports market that trumps tennis ratings. I am not kidding that ESpn gave programming preference to little league baseball over the Cincy Masters while I was in the states and watching. Yes, 10 year olds playing baseball got better coverage than tennis. I hate that kind of parochialism about my country. Playing devil's advocate they started stupid saturday when Mac and Connors were around and they had the big US stars dominating the game, so who knows if anything could stand in the way of the broadcasters and the all mighty buck.

But even when they had the stars of McEnroe, Connors, Agassi, Pete (can they ask for more?)....the schedule was terrible due to poor negotiations.

Wimbledon has probably the most expensive broadcasting rights and were actually forced to play the final on Sundays recently but they never gave away the middle Sunday and other ridiculous windows.

In the US you feel that if CBS required the WTA players to play topless, the organisers would bend in.

Tenez wrote:But even when they had the stars of McEnroe, Connors, Agassi, Pete (can they ask for more?)....the schedule was terrible due to poor negotiations.

Wimbledon has probably the most expensive broadcasting rights and were actually forced to play the final on Sundays recently but they never gave away the middle Sunday and other ridiculous windows.

In the US you feel that if CBS required the WTA players to play topless, the organisers would bend in.

OK, now I'm taking interest (well, only in a few matches actually..... )

When Wimby first went to a Sunday final (1982) it brought in an extra £400,000 in TV revenue.
NBC for many years lost money on Wimby, with revenue generated from advertising not matching the money they paid for the TV rights - they broadcast it for the prestige. Although they did ask for a 2 minute change-over time for extra advertising and were told never to ask that again.

JuliusHMarx wrote:When Wimby first went to a Sunday final (1982) it brought in an extra £400,000 in TV revenue.
NBC for many years lost money on Wimby, with revenue generated from advertising not matching the money they paid for the TV rights - they broadcast it for the prestige. Although they did ask for a 2 minute change-over time for extra advertising and were told never to ask that again.

Good information! Thanks.

I guess £400k was some money at that time. Now, what is it? 5 or 10mn advertising? Probably less I am pretty sure depending on the channel.

According to Chris Dorringe's book 'Holding Court' worldwide TV rights provide Wimbledon with the bulk of its income. The overall profits handed to the LTA by Wimby in 2009 were £29 million. I don't the exact figure for how much of that £29 million was from TV rights - but presumably, the bulk of it.

I don't know how much the TV companies (not the BBC of course) get from advertising.

There are three problems with the scheduling - (i) stupid saturday (ii) the insistance on playing different halves of the draws on different days for R16 and the QF (iii) the USO's insistence on keeping R128 going until Wednesday.

Only USO is guilty of stupid saturday, but I think that the Aus and RG are each guilty of (ii) which means that there are different recovery times between QF and SF dependent on which half of the draw you are in. I don't know whether they also do (iii) as well like the USO. Aus are able to ameloriate (ii) to an extent because the roof means that they can be more confident that they'll stick to schedule for the latter part of the tournament and they (and RG) can also argue that the different recovery time between QF and SF should come out in the wash when each winning semi-finalist has Saturday off before the final.

USO invariably has a f*ck up because their schedule means they start R128 late for many players and combine with that the need to concertina the 4 matches from R16 to F for one half of the draw between Tuesday and Sunday so that they cannot afford any serious weather delay. All this in a tournament on the Eastern Seaboard at the tail end of the tornado season - and they have no roof to mitigate their huge self-inflicted scheduling risk. Even if it all goes perfectly the winner of the 2nd semi-final is at a substantial recovery time disadvantage anyway. With today's very physical game that disadvantage is becoming more significant every year for best-of-five set matches.

What will probably happen this year is that the SF from the Murray/Nadal side of the draw will go first to compensate for all the other scheduling farago's they have had to put up with so that finalist from the Djoko/Fed side will have the stupid saturday disadvantage for the 3rd year running. That strikes me as being Nadal's best chance of winning - and if he struggles into the final via the first SF he will have a very big advantage for sure (as would anyone in that position).

It's an absolute miracle that the list of USO winners is such a prestigious list and has so few one-hit wonders in comparison to all the other slams - maybe one reason why cream rises to the top is that they make it so damnably difficult, but it is nonetheless a shame that the amongst the most eagerly anticipated events is frequently the notification by the authorites (usually on Friday) of which men's SF will go first.

Agree but for the(ii) The Aus and the French have quite different shedule to one another.

The French have the 1/4F played by Wednesdays and both semis are played on Friday. So it's very similar to Wimbledon actually. Cause by the 1/4F they both have played the same number of matches over the 10 day period with having one day in between. The French are spreading the mens just a day more than Wimby but that is not affecting one player over the other bar rain conds of course.

The Aus are different cause they play the semis in 2 diffrent days (Thur and Fri) ...not great and very fair but woudl typically have less influence in the final.

And yes, no other slams start the first round matches on Weds. That is really stupid too. Should it rain on Weds and you may have to play 9 5 setters in 7 days!

Oh I forgot the Aus idiocy of SF's on different days, that's another nonsense IMHO, although still miles better than super saturday.

Wimbledon is so much better run schedule-wise, and they don't even have a middle sunday or three sundays (as in RG). Obviously 2007 was a mess because of the rain, but nobody could legislate for Haas (?) scratching against Fed which meant that he escaped much of the 2nd week chaos. The roof means that it won't happen again - and they are talking about a roof at No. 1 Court too.

Tenez wrote:Should it rain on Weds and you may have to play 9 5 setters in 7 days!

I think you meant 7 in 9. 9 in 7 really would be a challenge!!!!

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:Should it rain on Weds and you may have to play 9 5 setters in 7 days!

I think you meant 7 in 9. 9 in 7 really would be a challenge!!!!

But yeah, the US Open scheduling is really quite useless. The French is OK, as the two semis are played on the same day; Sure two of the guys have had an extra day recovery before then, but they're playing each other and IMO by the time the final arrives this makes little difference. AO is slightly less good, semis on different days isn't ideal, but again even the second semi players get a full day off, and because of the roof they're always on schedule. Finally Wimby is the best, especially now we have the roof there

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:Should it rain on Weds and you may have to play 9 5 setters in 7 days!

I think you meant 7 in 9. 9 in 7 really would be a challenge!!!!

Yeah but I am so annoyed I had to make it worse!

barrystar wrote: Obviously 2007 was a mess because of the rain....

Especially not allowing for middle Sunday play when they were pretty sure it was going to rain Monday.

The roof fixes some problems but makes it less fair for those lower ranked players.

Tenez wrote:

barrystar wrote: Obviously 2007 was a mess because of the rain....

Especially not allowing for middle Sunday play when they were pretty sure it was going to rain Monday.

The roof fixes some problems but makes it less fair for those lower ranked players.

Two fair points there - the CC roof does help the higher seeds and a roof on Court No. 1 would help re-adjust the balance. AELTCC can also be pretty bone-headed about refusing to play on middle sunday anticipating bad weather for the second week. However, last time I was there I got an understanding from some of the members of staff of what a logistical nightmare staging a middle Sunday can be - nobody working at Wimbledon wants it because it's their only break in a very full-on fortnight.

Also, Wimby are very mindful of the local community (it is in the middle of a London suburb, after all) with the churches etc being affected on a Sunday. It really is a last resort that would not be taken based on weather forecasts for upcoming days, only if they were already way behind schedule.

Tsonga has a good chance of winning if he can maintain his first serve percentages which he has been doing consistently since his renaisance period. This is Fed's match to lose similar to Wimby. Tsonga definitely have mental edge as he has beaten fed twice in past 3 months.

Fed to win!

It is unfortunate that the "US Television Open," runs things according to ratings, and corporate decisions, although one does appreciate that without that corporate side of things, prize money, and the ability to hold these "extravaganzas" would not be what it is.

That said, and whilst each Major wants to have some individual character, to separate it from the other three Majors, it's a travesty that there isn't the same conditions, i.e., time between matches, weather notwithstanding, for all players at each stage.

Main thread - Federer v Tsonga
My feeling is that Federer is going to come out and show Tsonga "what for!"

I see it as something like 6-4, 6-3, 6-3; I don't think Federer will lose a set, or be pushed to a TB in any of them.

Tsonga's last two matches, both won against Federer, were inspirational, but it's just a feeling I have, that this US Open is Federer's - and I don't see Tsonga getting in the way, this time round.

Federer strongly in 3 sets!!! Then watch out Djokovic...

yloponomo68, I really hope Fed gets an easy win over Tsonga, I really think the media have over hyped him and I actually think that both of his wins against Fed were lucky. I certainly don't think Fed was playing @ his best in either of them yet Tsonga certainly was and that proved to be enough. The USO is different that is true, Fed's record is excellent in recent years, better than his Wimby record! We'll see if Fed keeps it up but I really hope so if only because Tsonga hasn't got a prayer of a chance against Djokovic, that much I'm certain of. If Fed beats the Tsonga theatrics then Djokovic will be an interesting test, I have no idea who would win, my head says Djokovic will but my heart says Fed!

Yes all players wins against Federer is either lucky or he lost the match, the opponent didn't win, tell me more about how 17 times Nadal got that lucky

Have to say what's so hard about giving an opponent of your favourite who beat him credit? How did Tsonga possibly get lucky when he had to work hard and win one of those recent matches from 2 sets down in a slam? Some luck he has!

You're obsessed with Federer more than any Fed fan. Anyone who watched those matches (and I watched both of them) knows Fed wasn't playing @ his best and yet Tsonga had to go to the distance AND play his best. Speaks volumes about how much 'better' he is than Fed.

Nadal beat him 17 times and you can bet your house on it he'll end up with less slams than Federer, I thought Nadal was amazing? Clearly can't be that amazing if he can't outdo a player like Fed he's beaten so many times, surely?

luciusmann wrote:You're obsessed with Federer more than any Fed fan. Anyone who watched those matches (and I watched both of them) knows Fed wasn't playing @ his best and yet Tsonga had to go to the distance AND play his best. Speaks volumes about how much 'better' he is than Fed.

Nadal beat him 17 times and you can bet your house on it he'll end up with less slams than Federer, I thought Nadal was amazing? Clearly can't be that amazing if he can't outdo a player like Fed he's beaten so many times, surely?

I thought you missed part of the match at Wimbledon? I guess the time passed by has affected your memory. Federer played bad? Well he had the chance to correct it and mentally crumbled, no ones fault.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Have to say what's so hard about giving an opponent of your favourite who beat him credit? How did Tsonga possibly get lucky when he had to work hard and win one of those recent matches from 2 sets down in a slam? Some luck he has!

To be honest the second loss in Montreal was convincing in that he played a better match.

As for Wimbledon, Federer had never lost a slam match from that position so it was surprising he lost. McEnroe commented that for the first time he felt the fire had gone out of Fed in that match and there was a lack of desire to win. I think Federer, at 2 sets up, allowed his mind to stray probably to the next match (Djokovic), and lost focus by which time Tsonga got it together. That's the problem with Fed today. He has these bad lapses in concentration as seen in his first round match against Giraldo. Tsonga made his luck happen in that match. Let's hope the tables can be turned.

Federer at 30 is bound to be beaten by players in their prime. Fed at Tsonga's age playing Tsonga would hammer him off court as he did in AO 10 SF.

I missed the first 1/2 hour, since it was a long match, it doesn't change the fact I watched most of it. Again, can you address why Nadal hasn't and will never get more slams than Fed if he's so amazing? I'm waiting for your response to that one.

Fed played perfectly well in the first 2 sets, droning on about how Fed is mentally weak is amusing, what about Nadal's mental weakness to Djokovic? He was thoroughly demolished by Djokovic in a way Nadal has never done to Federer in Wimbledon. As long as Djokovic is around, I really don't see Nadal winning another Wimbledon title. Federer will always have 6.

Mental weakness isn't really to do with it, if you've read these forums, you might have noticed that most posters (maybe not you) agree that Fed's problem is consistency. If he can keep that up, then he will win another slam or two, if he doesn't, he gets beaten by the likes of Tsonga and Berdych. Just because I don't buy into the hype around Tsonga and you do speaks volumes about Nadal fans like you. I'll be laughing all day if Nadal ends up losing the French Open next year, especially if it's Djokovic he loses to.