Day 13- French Open Men's semifinals

First topic message reminder :

Friends, v2ans, countrymen lend me your ears.
I have come to preview this semifinal fixture not to curse it;
The memory of the matches that these men play often live after them;
The unforced errors are often interred with their bones;
So let it be with Roger. The noble Novak
Hath told you Roger is ambitious;
If it were so, it was a grievous fault;
And grievously Roger might answer it;
Roger was my friend, faithful and just to me;
But Novak says he was ambitious;
And Novak is an honourable man;
He had brought many Grand Slams home to Switzerland;
Whose gleam did fill the trophy cabinets;
Did this in Roger seem ambitious?
When his twins have cried, Roger has stayed up;
Ambition should be made out of sterner stuff;
You did see in Paris many times now;
Thrice the 'Grand Slam' was presented;
Which he did thrice refuse; was this ambition?
Yet Novak says he was ambitious;
And Novak is an honourable man
You did all love him once, not without cause;
What reason withholds you to cheer for him?
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts;
Bear with me, for now I must pause to do this preview

http://www.presentationmagazine.com/famous-speeches-friends-romans-countrymen-11673.htm


Mens semifinals:

Nadal(2) vs Ferrer (6)
Head to Head Record: Nadal 15-4 Ferrer
Last meeting: Rome Semis Nadal 7-6 6-0 Ferrer
Head to Head in Grand Slams: Ferrer 2-1 Nadal
Clay Head to Head: Nadal 12-1 Ferrer

Djokovic (1) vs Federer (3)
Head to Head Record: Federer 14-11 Djokovic
Last meeting: Rome Semis Djokovic 6-2 7-6 Federer
Head to Head in Grand Slams: Federer 5-4 Djokovic
Clay Head to Head: Federer 3-2 Djokovic

Predictions so far:
Ferrer- Invisible Coolers
Nadal- Lydian, Jahu, Haddie Nuff, Bogbrush, Social, Barrystar, Legendkiller, Mangamuri, Tom, Summer, SFP

Federer- Jahu, Lydian, Invisible Coolers, Haddie Nuff, Legendkiller, Tom
Djokovic- Barrystar, Bogbrush, Social, Mangamuri, Summer, SFP

CaledonianCraig wrote: I'd agree with that. In these matches against Nadal and Djokovic it is most important that Federer wins the first set more than say it is to Nadal and Djokovic. No big deal though as Federer is more at home on the other surfaces.

Even winning the first two sets on other surfaces isn't enough as the USO last year proves. Two sets up and it should have been match over but it wasn't. Three sets later with two match points on his own serve it should have been match over but it wasn't. It's painfully clear that the younger Fed would have fought tooth and nail and closed these matches out not necessarily in str8 sets but in 4, allowing such matches to go to 5 sets makes them sudden death and no room for error and with Fed's sort of game, there will be errors and that's the difference for me from the Fed of now with the Fed of old.

It's worth bearing in mind that Nadal (26) is a year older than Djokovic (25) and probably has a few years of being able to win multiple slams so it's not going to be something that lasts 3 or 4 years necessarily. For Djokovic it will be a year longer. Fed was just about to turn 28 when he finally fell to the young pretender Nadal (Wimby '08) and this is also around the age (27/28) when players dramatically win less slams. It was true for Fed and there's little reason to suppose it won't be true for Djokovic or Nadal.

CAS wrote:I do wonder sometimes how Federers peers see him at the moment, especially the Roddicks, Hewitts, Safins, Davydenkos who were comfortably beaten by him more often than not. Do they look on at these matches, and the loss at the AUS open and think, 'maybe he wasn't as good as we thought?' or 'he's getting older, Rafa and Novak should count themselves lucky' or 'man we were average players'

Come on, the guys almost 31, it's clay and very slow conditions at that. I think making the semi at this stage when his game is all about attacking it good.

Those guys would probably reflect on their own decline and consider Fed more of a miracle than they used to!

Thats all I wanted to know Bogbrush! It must be odd to see him being routined when he seemed so untouchable when they played him

We can't deny that in tennis, Mother Nature affects all players....but let's hope Fed can win one more slam, which I still think is possible, even if 2 (as I'd hoped) is increasingly unlikely! Other great players have, so Im still hopeful Fed can. We all knew it wouldn't be @ RG so for that reason us Fed fans shouldn't be too bothered by today.

I am convinced Federer will have a Sampras moment, I did predict in 09 after he smashed his racket he would have a last hurrah to seal his place in history and wouldn't it be perfect to equal the Sampras record with a French Open, and then breaking it at Wimbledon where it all began! Unfortunately when he does that you expect him to carry on, he can't keep having a swan song! So maybe he should win Wimbledon the bow out and stop giving us hope!

Congrats to Roger fans, he didn't have it today and the conditions weren't in his favor. Neither was the opponent frankly. This does put a dent in the talk of Fed as number 1. As I have been saying he needs to prove he can beat his two rivals on a somewhat regular basis to get back to number 1.

I have no idea what affect age has on each specific tennis player but I would say this. Roger Federer has now been waiting over two years since his last slam win and is not getting any younger. Now he won his last slam at the age of 28 and although he is always at the business end of slams it is clear others are now ahead of him in the pecking order in the form of Nadal and Djokovic. They also have youth and form on their side as well as being renowned as the fittest players on the circuit. Those facts paint a gloomy picture for Federer for those wanting more slam wins from him. However, bear in mind he has won more than anyone else in history so it is not like he hasn't had more than his share of glory and success so if it is to be that he wins no more slams is it really so calamitous? I don't think so.

CAS wrote:I am convinced Federer will have a Sampras moment, I did predict in 09 after he smashed his racket he would have a last hurrah to seal his place in history and wouldn't it be perfect to equal the Sampras record with a French Open, and then breaking it at Wimbledon where it all began! Unfortunately when he does that you expect him to carry on, he can't keep having a swan song! So maybe he should win Wimbledon the bow out and stop giving us hope!

Fed is done winning slams.

Wake up.

Jersey, when you have an original opinion of your own come back to me

bogbrush wrote:

CAS wrote:I do wonder sometimes how Federers peers see him at the moment, especially the Roddicks, Hewitts, Safins, Davydenkos who were comfortably beaten by him more often than not. Do they look on at these matches, and the loss at the AUS open and think, 'maybe he wasn't as good as we thought?' or 'he's getting older, Rafa and Novak should count themselves lucky' or 'man we were average players'

Come on, the guys almost 31, it's clay and very slow conditions at that. I think making the semi at this stage when his game is all about attacking it good.

Those guys would probably reflect on their own decline and consider Fed more of a miracle than they used to!

I agree, to a degree with BB's comments. The fact remains that ever since Nadal become established in the Top 3, Fed's had his first decent challenger and hence his past peers (Roddick etc) really can't have any regrets - they were never in the same stratosphere as him. His two main rivals and occassionally Murray, simpley are

Eventually that takes it's toll. I mean I've never seen a player dominate Slams (I mean he caned everybody every time) as much as Roger did from 2004-2006. He then develops an aurora which in some respects, gives him a false sense of security as for me he's never had a 'Plan B' - he never needed it for his first 10 slam wins!!

But I actually admire him not having a Plan B, for keeping to his principles that make him the most exciting player ever to watch. Even in Dubai, earlier this year - even though he was caning my current favourite, you just had to admire the unique skills

My worry now is that he as a turgid time at Wimbledon and The Olympics and is kind of forced to realise that he can no longer compete for the major stuff.

Banbrotam do you think Roger is in denial? That he is just waiting to to find his old form or do you think he knows he isn't as good as he used to be? Or maybe just that he is of the thought that the surfaces are too slow?

CAS wrote:Jersey, when you have an original opinion of your own come back to me

I think his opinion is 'original'. You might not like it though - but given that Roger can't stop making around 60 UE's every time he meets Nole or Rafa and is getting older, what conclusion is there?

I said earlier, there's a chance if the forecast good weather gets to SW19 - but I wouldn't be betting

Remember it's nearly 2 and a half years since he last won a Slam. I don't remember Sampras going that long. Pistol Pete also had enourmous luck with his last Slam as there simply was not the equivalent of Nole, Nadal or even Murray around then.

Remember 2002 is the time when Roddick and Hewitt and Agassi (who could barely walk due to his back problems) were the challengers and the likes of Tommy Haas was the world No.2!!

Anyone trying to defend that time against this is asking for trouble

that comment was in reference to all his threads, he predicted Federer would win the French Open and then comes at that at me

CAS wrote:Banbrotam do you think Roger is in denial? That he is just waiting to to find his old form or do you think he knows he isn't as good as he used to be? Or maybe just that he is of the thought that the surfaces are too slow?

I think wrongly, he still believes he's one match away from conquering

The reality is that Fed should be more worried about Murray finally getting his game together than thinking that both of the Top 2 are suddenly going to implode

I stated ages ago (I think it was when he had that dodgy, for him late 2008/early 2009 form) that what he needs to do, is like Agassi did accept that he is no longer the best and stop putting pressure on himself

But it could be as I said earlier, he couldn't give a flying fig - he knows his legacy will always be intact, as any proper fan of Tennis knows that the play he gave us 2004/5 will never be matched. I hope it is this

CAS wrote:that comment was in reference to all his threads, he predicted Federer would win the French Open and then comes at that at me

Sorry. I don't always follow every thread

What I do find interesting is he always seems to want Rafa to win. He said at the US Open 2010 that he hoped Rafa would get the career slam, and he's picked Rafa to win Sunday. And he stuck up for Rafa after Novak kept beating him. Its strange when Rafa could take over his slam record, which tells me he isn't as wrapped up in titles as we are made to believe. He seems to get annoyed at losses to Novak and Andy but losses to Rafa he seems to be quite content

CAS wrote:What I do find interesting is he always seems to want Rafa to win. He said at the US Open 2010 that he hoped Rafa would get the career slam, and he's picked Rafa to win Sunday. And he stuck up for Rafa after Novak kept beating him. Its strange when Rafa could take over his slam record, which tells me he isn't as wrapped up in titles as we are made to believe. He seems to get annoyed at losses to Novak and Andy but losses to Rafa he seems to be quite content

The bad blood between Novak and Federer is well documents so it's not surprising Fed supports Rafa to win. Although maybe it has to do with the fact that Rafa has a winning record with Fed in the slams whereas with Djokovic it's evens stevens so Federer perhaps thinks Rafa is tougher (whereas for Djokovic, Rafa is an easier prospect). Even personality wise, Djokovic and Federer are far apart whereas Federer and Nadal are closer (although still different) so it's not surprising Fed endorses Nadal to win.

CC, it's certainly true that Fed has achieved a lot and he has got a lot of slams under his belt already and many more records. From that perspective, another slam isn't so vital. However, me and many Fed fans still think he's got another one in him and I had thought he has perhaps another two but the longer he goes on without one, the less likely it seems. In many ways Djokovic winning RG would be good because the only way Fed would become No.1 is by winning a slam and that's really how it should be. However, if Djokovic doesn't win, there is still the distinctly strong possibility that if Fed reaches the final @ Wimbledon and wins Cinci and does well in Canada plus the Olympics, he can realistically overtake Djokovic, whereas he can't if Djokovic wins RG.

I don't think it's quite sensible to read so much into a particular loss at his weakest slam. It may be more concerning who the loss was to and what that may suggest although last year @ the USO semi, it was a close run thing so when the surface is faster, Fed's got opportunities. That low first serve today certainly killed off Fed's chances so we'll see if that continues in his key matches against Djokovic and Nadal. Hopefully it won't in Wimbledon and the USO but what we can be under no illusions about is that Fed's days of winning the Aussie Open or challenging hard @ RG are definitively over.

CAS wrote:What I do find interesting is he always seems to want Rafa to win. He said at the US Open 2010 that he hoped Rafa would get the career slam, and he's picked Rafa to win Sunday. And he stuck up for Rafa after Novak kept beating him. Its strange when Rafa could take over his slam record, which tells me he isn't as wrapped up in titles as we are made to believe. He seems to get annoyed at losses to Novak and Andy but losses to Rafa he seems to be quite content

Roger really hates to lose to Novak in particular. The two don't like each other they will never be chummy, I mean they are pretty civil with one another in public but that is about it. Roger remember after the shot last year in the US open where Novak hit a winner on match point against him came off as a jerk to the point of some people in the USO stands booing his comments after the match and people criticizing him for saying it. That is part of this rivalry, Roger does not like to lose to Novak and usually isn't very kind towards his comments about Novak. He isn't kind when in the past asked about Novak's injuries, he wasn't particularly nice to Novak's parents yelling them at one point. I mean it is basically a pattern with Roger and Novak and his camp.

That is why I like it so much when Roger loses to Novak. I mean Novak is playing Nadal tomorrow in the title game and feel that with Novak doing better and getting to his first final and beating Fed that in many ways it has already been a good tournament even if he loses. I wouldn't feel that way without that crucial victory against federer. It is a grandslam and big rivalry match so it does feel good when Novak wins.

I do not think Socal Djokovic is innocent in this, I have seen Djokovic sarcastically clap his frame when Federer shanks a winner many times, and there was that whole fiasco from his mother saying 'the king is dead'.

It is clear Roger is not too fond of Novak but I do not think he is the only one, Andy Roddick was extremely unhappy with Djokovic at the US Open. I personally found his impressions funny, and it was nice to see in a sport that was coming quite robotic but there is certainly a side of Novak that creeps out of him that I dont like, but then again I think Roger and Rafa have that side to them as well, a mean streak of champions.

Yeah Socal I think Roger is just telling it like it is when it comes to Novak. I think Djokovic's parents were shouting out during a point or something at Monte Carlo and Federer was right to tell them to pipe down. Djoko's mum was incredibly disrespectful about Roger with the 'King is Dead' comment. Egg on her face though as it was Rafa that broke out that year and Djoko ended up losing to Fed the other times they played in 2008.

Roger has form here too. I think he was so used to the other players playing "homage to the king" (I mean Roddick used to give him so much praise before the start of their matches it was pointless him going on court) that he was too quickly to take offence at Nole and of course Murray - who basically were, admittedly rather cockily, saying "we couldn't give a flying fig about your records, we're only interested in beating you"

Nole's family particualry went OTT about this, which resulted in Fed understandably having a go back. That's not going to endear him to Nole (we can have a go at our family - but outsiders can't !!) and the relationship deteriorates further. Then you get incidents in Miami 2009, when Roger can't even bring himself to praise Nole and the best he could do is "his worst was better than mine"!!

Personally, I think it's being the biggest weakness of Roger in the last 3-4 years. I mentioned before he should have simply did what Agassi did and become a complimentary assassin and kill his opponents with praise - not motivate the likes of Nole, who you see in the eyes would like nothing better than giving Roger a triple bagel

Mind you - it makes the game more entertaining!!