Wimbledon Draw

First topic message reminder :

Hi,

The D-Day has come. Wimbledon Draw is only couple of hours away!!

Big question is: Whom does Djokovic draw in his half? The six time Wimbledon Champion or The Great Scot? Who is more preferred and Why?

Being from eastern part of the Globe (viz. India) I am waiting eagerly since today morning for the Wimbledon Draw to be announced. Please update this thread once anyone gets info about it.

BTW, when is the draw scheduled. Any idea?

CaledonianCraig wrote:End of the day though socal Djoko will be far happier with his draw than say.....Andy Murray. Also over the last year he has done very well no matter what the draw. I would understand your angst if you were a Murray fan who is still searching for his first slam but Djoko is the world No.1 and well positioned to win a fair few more slams in the future (regardless of draw) so is it really worth making such a major issue of draws??

Yes it is craig it has already cost him at least a slam or two in my mind. Why is it that Nadal as the number 2 seed gets to avoid Fed in every slam till the final. For whatever reason Djokovic is required to beat two top three players to win a slam (AO 2012 excluded) and Nadal only required to beat one. That is a huge structural advantage. No question it has already cost novak a slam or two. I am making a big deal out of it because it is a huge deal structurally making it much harder to win a slam. For whatever reason Nadal again gets the most favorable draw imaginable, just like he got at RG this year. And just like he has 8 of the last 9 slams.

But think about it socal. If I were a Djoko fan I'd sooner be playing Federer just now than Nadal (sorry for all you fans of those respective players). Federer is more vulnerable now than Nadal and if you'd sooner face Murray I understand but I believe that is not such a good match up in my opinion.

socal, we all agree its an anomaly to normally get a run of draws as Novak/Fed have had. Or even Nadal/Murray of course.

But that is not proof in itself that a pre-determined outcome is being engineered by draw committees. The Federer/Nadal "dream" final is not what it used to be and often Federer isnt making the final anyway...only made a slam final once since AO10. And hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009.

We have also discussed that from a revenue perspective these events are sellouts long before the draws are made. The final is just the icing on the cake...not the cake itself.

The best chance of getting interest would be to engineer a Federer/Nadal semi in all reality given that Federer isnt reaching consistent finals since 2009. Infact Federer is probably the easiest top 4 opponent for Djokovic right now!

So none of this supports the need to get a Djokovic/Federer match-up. Its an anomaly - yes - but the logic behind the need for it doesnt stack up to real-world commonsense.

Murray took Djoko to 5 in Aus and beat him in Dubai.
Meanwhile Fed didn't even take a set of him in FO.

As for Nadal, Murray has beaten him in a slam at 2008 and 2010. The last time fed beat Nadal in a slam was 2007.

Also Nadal got the hardest quarter IMHO.

Good points CC.

Getting to World Number One is a direct reflection of just how well & how consistently you have performed over a lengthy period and against all manner of opposition..

Staying at Number One requires the additional factor of being fearless in front of any & all challengers to your crown.

Djokovic knows this as well, if not better, than anyone. He's as tough as they come, and to socal I say this : I bet Djokovic loses rather less sleep over these draw scenarios than you do.

CaledonianCraig wrote:But think about it socal. If I were a Djoko fan I'd sooner be playing Federer just now than Nadal (sorry for all you fans of those respective players). Federer is more vulnerable now than Nadal and if you'd sooner face Murray I understand but I believe that is not such a good match up in my opinion.

No I would prefer Murray in the semi over federer in a slam and especially at wimbeldon. No offense to Murray but if I had to pick the easier semi in a slam over the last few years I would take Andy as the easier semi. How fortunate for Nadal, his team, and fans that they get the easier of the two semi 8 out of the last 9. Seriously the slams are starting to lose some credibilty in my mind, this is getting to the point where their selections are just slightly more beleivable than pro-wrestling. What next does Djokovic have to beat federer and survive the camel clutch and the pile driver? How long before Tennis players are forced to wear tights and take on fake names. Like Djoko could be captain serbia the master of the up the line. (the above statement is solely the opinion of the poster and does not represent the views of the site, and it was meant as a joke. )

Another shockingly bad day for the credibility of the sport in my mind. But since no one is outraged it will keep happening.

lydian wrote:socal, we all agree its an anomaly to normally get a run of draws as Novak/Fed have had. Or even Nadal/Murray of course.

But that is not proof in itself that a pre-determined outcome is being engineered by draw committees. The Federer/Nadal "dream" final is not what it used to be and often Federer isnt making the final anyway...only made a slam final once since AO10. And hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009.

We have also discussed that from a revenue perspective these events are sellouts long before the draws are made. The final is just the icing on the cake...not the cake itself.

The best chance of getting interest would be to engineer a Federer/Nadal semi in all reality given that Federer isnt reaching consistent finals since 2009. Infact Federer is probably the easiest top 4 opponent for Djokovic right now!

So none of this supports the need to get a Djokovic/Federer match-up. Its an anomaly - yes - but the logic behind the need for it doesnt stack up to real-world commonsense.

Well I would love to argue with you as I think you are wrong, but unfortunately I have been shackled by the draconian task masters of moderation. So I won't waste my time writting a lengthy response that only will get deleted because I am not allowed to voice my opinion on the matter.

However the Naysayers have collective egg on your faces tell me how many standard deviations 8 out of 9 is? I know to be fair in your numbers you need a thousand or two thousand sample size, too bad tennis players careers don't last 200 years so you guys could complete your calculations. 8 out of 9 heads sounds real fishy to me, but that is just my opinion.

Well if we are going on Wimbledon form of the last two years you'd be wrong as Federer has fallen at the quarter-final stage whilst Murray has reached the semis. Plus bear in mind that Murray pushed Djokovic to the brink in Australian Open semi whilst Djokovic had a far easier time against Federer in the recent French Open semi.

socal1976 wrote: But since no one is outraged it will keep happening.

Interesting comment you make there...could it be no-one is outraged because they dont think it makes a huge amount of difference?

As a Nadal fan, I dont fear Federer any more than Murray...past results show this. I repeat - Federer has not beaten Nadal in a slam since 2007, so why would I fear him meeting Federer any more than Murray who has beaten him in 2 slams since the last time Federer beat him in a slam?
This is where the argument doesnt hold water for me - it assumes Federer is the king-pin - but he hasnt been the kingpin for a long time.
He hasnt won a slam for 2.5 years...has only got to one slam final since then...and hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009. Nadal has more to fear for Murray who can improve year on year than Federer, who cant...and isnt.

Socal which slam apart from FO 2011 (which is not certain) would djoko have won with a different draw?

Name me one

lydian wrote:

socal1976 wrote: But since no one is outraged it will keep happening.

Interesting comment you make there...could it be no-one is outraged because they dont think it makes a huge amount of difference?

As a Nadal fan, I dont fear Federer any more than Murray...past results show this. I repeat - Federer has not beaten Nadal in a slam since 2007, so why would I fear him meeting Federer any more than Murray who has beaten him in 2 slams since the last time Federer beat him in a slam?
This is where the argument doesnt hold water for me - it assumes Federer is the king-pin - but he hasnt been the kingpin for a long time.
He hasnt won a slam for 2.5 years...has only got to one slam final since then...and hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009. Nadal has more to fear for Murray who can improve year on year than Federer, who cant...and isnt.

Absolutely spot on.

We will never know will we IMBL because for whatever reason Nadal only has to beat one top 3 player to win a slam and Novak has to beat both. That has been the established pattern for years now. So how can I tell you for sure, I can't. All I know is that the slams have lost a lot of credibility in my eyes the last 14 months. I mean as a Nadal fan you can deny it but the numbers are there. The credibility of the whole sport in my mind has taken a giant crap on the head with this fed-djoko anomaly.

I hate to do it but from the outset I feel the enitre wimbeldon is tainted, I mean Nadal will probably win now and so why watch the event to watch your favorite player get the short straw over and over again. Frankly I doubt I will even watch wimby. That is how disillusioned I am by this. And you might find it hard to believe but i don't care who wins. If in my mind I feel like an event isn't legitimate I could care less who the supposed winner is.

Nadal advantaged?
He has the hardest QF by a mile- Tsonga is a massive threat on grass and that is a really tough quarterfinal (you said Tsonga was tough for Djoko in RG but he is MUCH better at Wimby).

Out of his two semis opponent he either has Federer, who he has a 8-2 record against slams and hasn't beaten him in slams since 2007 or Murray who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 in a Slam and will have the crowd on his side.

In my eyes he has the hardest SF and QF possible.

socal1976 wrote:
I hate to do it but from the outset I feel the enitre wimbeldon is tainted, I mean Nadal will probably win now

???
What do you mean now. You think the draw has enabled Nadal to win??
So you think if he had Federer in his side of the draw Federer would have beaten him in the SF? Or do you think Djoko would have easily beaten Murray if they had played in the SF. The last time they played in a SF Murray took him to 5 sets.

I'm disappointed if you think this way.

What needs to happen is alternating draw... simple. Each slam alternates seeds from the last (assuming seeds stay same like 1,2,3,4 have this year) and at the start of the year a random draw. It shouldnt be allowed that the same players keep meeting each other in every slam.

Anybody making the case that having Fed in their half isnt a disadvantage is talking utter Poopie.

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal advantaged?
He has the hardest QF by a mile- Tsonga is a massive threat on grass and that is a really tough quarterfinal (you said Tsonga was tough for Djoko in RG but he is MUCH better at Wimby).

Out of his two semis opponent he either has Federer, who he has a 8-2 record against slams and hasn't beaten him in slams since 2007 or Murray who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 in a Slam and will have the crowd on his side.

In my eyes he has the hardest SF and QF possible.

Murray harder than fed at wimby, really is that why Rafa has a losing record against fed on grass. He has the easiest possible SF he could have had like he has 8 of the 9 last slams.

Calder106 wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:It was more than expected Fed would be drawn in Djoko's draw, its not a surprise to me.

Sponsors obiviously want Fed-Nadal finals and they made sure its such a way.

Two finals since the beginning of 2009. The plan is not working very well.

Yup poor sponsors plan spoiled everytime by baddie careless man in RF.

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:
I hate to do it but from the outset I feel the enitre wimbeldon is tainted, I mean Nadal will probably win now

???
What do you mean now. You think the draw has enabled Nadal to win??
So you think if he had Federer in his side of the draw Federer would have beaten him in the SF? Or do you think Djoko would have easily beaten Murray if they had played in the SF. The last time they played in a SF Murray took him to 5 sets.

I'm disappointed if you think this way.

Yes it seems that Nadal has been ordained by god or whatever of playing the easier semi in virtually every slam. That is a major advantage therefore the whole process in my mind is called into question.

Seifer makes an excellent point they should just do what other sports do. 1 v. 4 period, and 2 v. 3 end of story. No discretion that can be abused. Wimbedlon has turned itself into a joke into my opinion similar to RG, if I don't have confidence in the integrity of the process how can I have confidence in the result? In short tainted slam at the outset, that is my opinion.

socal1976 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal advantaged?
He has the hardest QF by a mile- Tsonga is a massive threat on grass and that is a really tough quarterfinal (you said Tsonga was tough for Djoko in RG but he is MUCH better at Wimby).

Out of his two semis opponent he either has Federer, who he has a 8-2 record against slams and hasn't beaten him in slams since 2007 or Murray who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 in a Slam and will have the crowd on his side.

In my eyes he has the hardest SF and QF possible.

Murray harder than fed at wimby, really is that why Rafa has a losing record against fed on grass.

That was ages ago.

Anyway as this is now, do you honestly, honestly believe that Nadal will now win just because he has avoided Federer in the SF. Do you really think that?

If Nadal wins he would have deserved it. If he wins he would probably have to beat Djokovic in the final. If he is playing well enough to beat Djoko then do you think he would lost to Federer the round before???

Think about it Socal, think about it.

No the player required to beat two of the top 3 in every slam, if he wins he deserves it. If the player who gets the easier semi in every single grandslam for the last 5 years for the most part wins he is getting the benefit of well lets just call it "good luck". I hate to say it, RG last year in 2011 is tainted and if Nadal wins wimby this year it will be tainted. That is what happens when the process is called into question unfortunately that is why I have a zero tolerance policy and would hunt down an suspicious activity if I had any enforcement capacity in the game. Like gambling the suspicions of this type of stuff basically taints the enitre integrity of the sport. That is what I keep trying to tell people on this site who just want to pretend like it doesn't happen. One day I am convinced that this story will come to light and it will set back the sport for years.

I agree IMBL.

Djokovic won't be fussed facing Federer (check out Fed's Wimbledon record over last two years) and as we know Fed is not getting any younger plus has not won a slam for two and a half years. Now the option is Murray and yes I know he has never won a slam but has a better record at Wimbledon compared to Federer in the last two years and in the last two slams who has given Djokovic more of a fight in the semis - Murray or Federer?

socal1976 wrote:AHHHHHHHHH FEd in Djoko's half again that is now 8 of the last 9 slams drawn in the same half. Please tell us how many standard deviations and formulas we need to figure out if that is fishy or not? But I am sure it is all very above board. Novak gets the tougher semi again and Nadal doesn't, this becoming a joke it is so funny. Egg on the naysayers collective faces again.

I invite all of you to flip a coin 9 times and see if you get heads 8 times out of 9. Lets see how many of you actually manage that very easy feat.

Just did. on a US Government (Pennsylvania mint) on a Liberty 2012 nickel - In God We Trust

http://www.usmint.gov/mint_programs/info/?action=02

Why just focus on the top 3 when Murray has a 5-5 H2H record against Djokovic since 2008. And we saw how hard Djokovic had to fight against Murray at AO12.

socal, you seem to be blind to opening your eyes to whats happening with results between the top 4...and the irrelevance of Djokovic vs Federer, a guy he has a 4-2 slam record over since 2008. Federer hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009 anyway...and Murray has been at SF since then. Nadla has Tsonga QF...Djokovic maybe Berdych. And that's tough for Djokovic?

You seem fixated on Federer. That he's the biggest risk to Djokovic. He isnt anymore and hasnt been for a while. Murray is now a bigger risk IMO and a bad match-up for Djokovic...the 5-5 H2H since 2008 says that. Open your eyes to the wider picture and reasons to why fixing vs Federer makes no sense whatsoever.

lydian wrote:

socal1976 wrote: But since no one is outraged it will keep happening.

Interesting comment you make there...could it be no-one is outraged because they dont think it makes a huge amount of difference?

As a Nadal fan, I dont fear Federer any more than Murray...past results show this. I repeat - Federer has not beaten Nadal in a slam since 2007, so why would I fear him meeting Federer any more than Murray who has beaten him in 2 slams since the last time Federer beat him in a slam?
This is where the argument doesnt hold water for me - it assumes Federer is the king-pin - but he hasnt been the kingpin for a long time.
He hasnt won a slam for 2.5 years...has only got to one slam final since then...and hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009. Nadal has more to fear for Murray who can improve year on year than Federer, who cant...and isnt.

No Nadal doesn't fear fed in slams, but Fed has put Djoko out of a slam as recently as last year and put him at Death's door at the USO open as well. So that kind of shoots your Nadal theory down. It is an obvious disadvantage to play Federer in every slam semi than Murray over the last 5 years. Who has the better track record in slams in the last few years FEd or Murray? I am talking 4-5 year period that this sort of trend has been going on. Do you think Nadal would prefer to play federer or ferrer in a semi, which head to head is worse?

Socal check your inbox

socal1976 wrote:

lydian wrote:

socal1976 wrote: But since no one is outraged it will keep happening.

Interesting comment you make there...could it be no-one is outraged because they dont think it makes a huge amount of difference?

As a Nadal fan, I dont fear Federer any more than Murray...past results show this. I repeat - Federer has not beaten Nadal in a slam since 2007, so why would I fear him meeting Federer any more than Murray who has beaten him in 2 slams since the last time Federer beat him in a slam?
This is where the argument doesnt hold water for me - it assumes Federer is the king-pin - but he hasnt been the kingpin for a long time.
He hasnt won a slam for 2.5 years...has only got to one slam final since then...and hasnt got past QF at Wimb since 2009. Nadal has more to fear for Murray who can improve year on year than Federer, who cant...and isnt.

No Nadal doesn't fear fed in slams, but Fed has put Djoko out of a slam as recently as last year and put him at Death's door at the USO open as well. So that kind of shoots your Nadal theory down. It is an obvious disadvantage to play Federer in every slam semi than Murray over the last 5 years. Who has the better track record in slams in the last few years FEd or Murray? I am talking 4-5 year period that this sort of trend has been going on. Do you think Nadal would prefer to play federer or ferrer in a semi, which head to head is worse?

Why the last four or five years though? Surely, form of four or five years ago is utterly irrelevant. Four or five years ago Federer was dominant in slams but in the last two and a half years he has won no slams - big difference in form there. If we look at Federer and Murray's slam record in the past year and a half or so it is pretty much identical (if memory serves) but more importantly look at the last semi meetings between Djokovic and Federer and Murray and Djokovic and tell me who has given Djoko the harder match. The here and now form is what matters not that of four or five years ago.

Anyway this is a bit off-topic. We are meant to be discussing the Wimbledon draw (there are a few cracking 1st round ties!) not whether Djokovic has or has not benefited from his draws in the last 5 years.

Perhaps I can create an article to discuss and debate these 'off-topic' matters fully instead of diverting this thread

socal1976 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal advantaged?
He has the hardest QF by a mile- Tsonga is a massive threat on grass and that is a really tough quarterfinal (you said Tsonga was tough for Djoko in RG but he is MUCH better at Wimby).

Out of his two semis opponent he either has Federer, who he has a 8-2 record against slams and hasn't beaten him in slams since 2007 or Murray who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 in a Slam and will have the crowd on his side.

In my eyes he has the hardest SF and QF possible.

Murray harder than fed at wimby, really is that why Rafa has a losing record against fed on grass. He has the easiest possible SF he could have had like he has 8 of the 9 last slams.

Just leave it there. You are right and that's the end of it. Don't argue with people who have no intention of accepting a fact.

Seifer Almasy wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:Nadal advantaged?
He has the hardest QF by a mile- Tsonga is a massive threat on grass and that is a really tough quarterfinal (you said Tsonga was tough for Djoko in RG but he is MUCH better at Wimby).

Out of his two semis opponent he either has Federer, who he has a 8-2 record against slams and hasn't beaten him in slams since 2007 or Murray who beat Nadal in 2008 and 2010 in a Slam and will have the crowd on his side.

In my eyes he has the hardest SF and QF possible.

Murray harder than fed at wimby, really is that why Rafa has a losing record against fed on grass. He has the easiest possible SF he could have had like he has 8 of the 9 last slams.

Just leave it there. You are right and that's the end of it. Don't argue with people who have no intention of accepting a fact.

Seifer, thanks for your post it is hard to argue when people refuse to see the obvious. Who would argue that fed even at this age is a more dangerous slam semi opponent, and especially when you look at it over the last few years when this anomaly has arisen? But I give IMBL more credit. A passionate Nadal fan he is but I have found him more amenable than most to change a position if presented with the proper facts. Lets just say I think he is being blinded on this one issue by admiration for a certain spaniard.

In the past I admit that Federer is a harder SF opponent than Murray.
Now as a Nadal fan I feel that for Nadal both players are of equal difficulty.

Anyway I am currently writing an article on this
This thread is to discuss the Wimbledon draw.
After I have submitted my evidence in my article we can discuss this further. Would Djokovic really have won more slams with a different set of draws?

Who cares what side of the draw is Djoko (apart from social)? He ain't going to the Final, thats what the tennis financiers and the world want.

Nobody cares for him.

Federer on grass is well capable of beating Nadal. Even now at 30. Murray isnt. He capitulates like a little girl.

He would have in 2011 RG in my opinion but since it hasn't happened it is all hypothetical. What i can tell you is that in an era dominated by the top 3 players that having to beat both in pretty much every slam is a big disadvantage as opposed to having to beat one. And I never said Nadal feared fed in slams. If you want to simplify my statement here it is. Nadal fears Djoko at slams and Djoko fears Fed, Djoko always gets fed and over the last few years that has been a plus for Nadal. Really not much to start a whole new thread on it is as clear as bohemian crystal.

socal1976 wrote:He would have in 2011 RG in my opinion but since it hasn't happened it is all hypothetical. What i can tell you is that in an era dominated by the top 3 players that having to beat both in pretty much every slam is a big disadvantage as opposed to having to beat one. And I never said Nadal feared fed in slams. If you want to simplify my statement here it is. Nadal fears Djoko at slams and Djoko fears Fed, Djoko always gets fed and over the last few years that has been a plus for Nadal. Really not much to start a whole new thread on it is as clear as bohemian crystal.

No it's not.
Djoko would have won 1 more slam max if he had different draws IMHO.

You'll see, just wait a bit.

socal1976 wrote:He would have in 2011 RG in my opinion but since it hasn't happened it is all hypothetical. What i can tell you is that in an era dominated by the top 3 players that having to beat both in pretty much every slam is a big disadvantage as opposed to having to beat one. And I never said Nadal feared fed in slams. If you want to simplify my statement here it is. Nadal fears Djoko at slams and Djoko fears Fed, Djoko always gets fed and over the last few years that has been a plus for Nadal. Really not much to start a whole new thread on it is as clear as bohemian crystal.

So one slam isn't enough? I mean it only pays out nearly 2million dollars and gives you 2000 ranking points. Why Djoko should be happy to cede slams over so that the grandslams can protect the prospects of Fedal finals? How selfish of him.

By the way IMBL you do realize that one slam in question would have made Novak a calendar year slam winner. The first in 40 some odd years. Now do you still think it isn't a big deal? So you concede now that Novak failed to complete the calendar grandslam because of the fed anomaly. A rather shocking admission.

If we go through the majority of the top tennis players we could deduce 1 slam win or loss here and there if he/she had different draws.
Anyway wait for my article.

Unless IMBL goes into a different angle let's agree to keep the Fed/Djo draw discussion to one thread hey?
I agree this thread is about Wimb 2012.

lydian wrote:Unless IMBL goes into a different angle... keep the Fed/Djo draw discussion

I have looked at it in a different angle. Plus it's not Fed/Djoko draw discussion- its looking at a general claim Socal made earlier.

lydian wrote:
I agree this thread is about Wimb 2012.

Agreed
What's your most exciting 1st round match. I think Tipsy vs Nalby could be a thriller.

Yep IMBL, that's one heck of an opener as is Murray/Davydenko but that will not be that competitive IMO.
Goffin/Tomic also looks interesting but I think that will also be one way traffic. Goffin lost meekly in R1 to Benoit Paire (that great grass player...) at the UNICEF ATP event this week in Holland.

There are a couple of other standouts though in terms of competitive matches.

1. Berdych vs Gulbis. One day Ernests is going to find some form again...But maybe not this event, should be a good match though.
2. Hewitt vs Tsonga. Now this one could be very interesting.

I don't see Hewitt challenging Tsonga really, unless Jo is injured.

Hewitt was crushed by Karlovic IIRC.

Another interesting match-up:-

Djokovic V Ferrero (No doubts Djoko will win but it is a meeting of the world No.1 and an ex-world No.1)

On grass I don't see Ferrero having a chance. That'll be 3 easy sets for Djoko.

Yes but IMBL that was Queens grass, a world away from Wimbledon grass. On that surface Karlovic is lethal.
I'm not saying Hewitt will win but he's a big match player...just look at his 5 set DC record...and paying Tsonga will fire him up...after all he won't play beyond AO 2013 in my opinion, reckon he'll retire at his home slam.

Well Tsonga is a funny player who can blow hot or cold as well. Now if Hewitt gets his teeth into the match as in wins the first or second set it could be very interesting.

lydian - suspect you're right that Hewitt will call it a day at next year's AO.

I don't imagine he would want to end his career in a series of R1 exits to 'little-knowns' - as has been happening......

Apart from that tussle when Roddick just edged him at Wimbledon a while back, I really can't remember the last time he made even a QF at any of the Slams

I'd have thought that both Djoko and Nadal would prefer to play Murray rather than Federer at Wimbledon.

Not sure that Nadal's slam record over Fed on the slower / higher bouncing courts at Aus / RG counts too much. He's played him 3 times at Wimby, losing two and winning one after a monumental match when Nadal was possibly playing his best ever grass tennis and had the confidence of destroying Federer one month earlier at RG. Whereas he's played Murray 3 times and only dropped one set. I'd give Nadal a 60% chance of beating Federer and an 80-90% chance of beating Murray on grass.

Djokovic probably knows that his RG straight sets win on clay in slow conditions against a misfiring federer won't be too relevant at W. I'd give him a 50% chance v federer and a 70% chance against Murray who's probably not in the same form as he was at the Aus Open.

Altho people may rightly say Federer isnt the same player as he was in the past I think he probably has a bit of an aura about him at wimbledon in the minds of other players - they know that if he plays well then it's on his racquet so they're not quite in control of things, in a way that Murray hasn't yet got to.

Things can change quickly though depending on how Federer and Murray play in the earlier rounds ...

yellowgoatboy wrote:I'd have thought that both Djoko and Nadal would prefer to play Murray rather than Federer at Wimbledon.

Welcome to 606v2, YGb. . The more posters, the merrier 606v2 is.

Welcome YGB

Yes lags, Hewitt is largely a spent force...and oddly enough has been for quite some time now, surgery aside. You feel the "modern" brand of tennis >2004 kind of passed him by. But he can still turn in the odd great performance though and he does have fight inside him. As mentioned if Tsonga has a slight dip Hewitt will respond...and if he gets those "come on"s going then anything is possible, lol.