mmm cupcakes so that is how they taste

Well finally, I have been waiting two years to write this thread when Novak got the cupcake draw in a slam. This year he got the much easier draw than either Murray or Federer. Murray is in Fed's half and the early rounds for Novak are about as routine as he could hope for in a slam. However out of some weird type of luck the first cupcaker he has had for a while occurs while in my mind he is going some sort of turmoil and simply is not playing well enough to win a slam. So in one of life's cruel serbian ironies Novak's sweetest grandslam draw comes at his worst level of play in the last 2 nearly 2 years. Well the USO in 2010 when he reached his first final in nearly 3 years was where he put it back together in 2010 fighting back from the brink of what would have been his worst slam defeat in history in the second round to Vik Troicki. Down 2 sets to one and a break in the decider if my memory serves me right. There are still plenty of dangerous player lurking for Novak in the quarters and semi parts of his draw but he should be able to rebuild momentum, at this point is not playing well enough to win a slam unless upsets happen among the other top two guys. At this point he is very beatable for both Murray and Fed and maybe a Del Po or Ferrer in form?

That does not mean that I am counting out the man. He can win this thing and I feel that at this stage of his career he is the best player in the world on an outdoor hardcourt having won 3 slams on the surface and the last two. But to do that he will have to raise his level, so far we have seen B djokovic or B plus at times, to win the USO despite and easy draw he will need to play at least low A standard, which he really has not hit very often this year.

He could literally win the whole thing at 80%, if Murray-Federer both make their semi and then are put on 2nd and have a gruelling match.

I'm amazed you're so downbeat about his chances socal. Apart from the first set against Fed in Cincy he's been playing well enough to win the open for sure. If his draw plays out as easy as it looks on paper then i'd make him favourite.

Then again, a fan always fears the worst and I guess everyone is the same.

Was the draw rigged/fixed for Djokovic this time, SoCal?

Adam, I have seen Novak when he looks in full flow even before his magical run of 2011 and this isn't it. Yes he won toronto and got to the finals of cincy, but this is nothing like A game djoko in terms of form. He can win it don't get me wrong but the way he is playing lately isn't grandslam winning tennis right now. The switch in tennis can be flipped quickly especially from a player of Djokovic's pedigree and talent.

laverfan wrote:Was the draw rigged/fixed for Djokovic this time, SoCal?

Laverfan I am happy to finally eat a federesque cupcake. Unfortunately the way Novak is playing he could choke even on this cupcake. Although I do think he will come through to the final with this draw I don't know if he is playing well enough to win against fed or Murray in the final right now.

socal1976 wrote:I feel that at this stage of his career he is the best player in the world on an outdoor hardcourt having won 3 slams on the surface and the last two.

It's actually 4 slams and the last 3!

Socal, I think you may actually be more pessimistic than me about this tournament and that's saying something!

I do pretty much agree with you though. My concern is that Novak could quite conceivably have a very comfortable ride all the way through to the final. He then not only faces the pressure of a slam final but also the pressure of having to face his first top level opponent who demands his very best tennis. The recent trend is that this spells mental meltdown.

The conclusion I draw from this is that I am never happy! I'm annoyed when the draws are hard and nervous when the draws are kind!

Watching any sport for me seems to be about nine parts agony and one part elation. If only I could kick the habit!

HM Murdoch wrote:If only I could kick the habit!

I have been trying very hard for last 40+ years. Have you heard What were once vices are habits now? - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Were_Once_Vices_Are_Now_Habits

socal1976 wrote:

laverfan wrote:Was the draw rigged/fixed for Djokovic this time, SoCal?

Laverfan I am happy to finally eat a federesque cupcake. Unfortunately the way Novak is playing he could choke even on this cupcake. Although I do think he will come through to the final with this draw I don't know if he is playing well enough to win against fed or Murray in the final right now.

Judging by yesterday, Federer and Murray are luke-warm right now.

Yes, Murdoch those of us like you and I who have watched alot of his matches know that something is not right with Djokovic right now. People argue that this is Novak returning to his real level I don't buy that for a second, this is far from his normal level. People have to remember when they say his normal level this is a guy who for 2 straight years finished in the top 3 with a serve that for much of that time was the worst performing serve of anyone in the top 50. Now it isn't like that period of time where you could look and say, hey his serve is off or he is having major breathing and fitness issues. When he does play for short bursts he is frightening, I actually think his serve has been pretty good and getting better. But there just seems to be a bit of focus missing. He strikes me from what I have seen with his body language and play that he is part annoyed and part distracted almost all the time. And that is odd because that is not his nature. If it was murray I would say that you can't read anything from that because that is his personality. Last year you could see that hitting every ball was fun for him and that he was dialed in and all there, that is why people saw the shots and the consistently brutal high quality hitting. That is his natural level people will see he has a lot more quality to display, but yet he is maddeningly start and stop with his progress.

So with Djoko well below par, Rafa out of action and Murray...welll, being Murray, can we conclude that the Golden Age is over?

I'd probably agree that something is missing socal but could it be that after an extraordinary 2011 he's come back to earth? I just saw him close out a crushing 6-1, 6-0, 6-1 victory which is more emphatic than Murray's or Federer's wins yesterday. HM Murdoch is probably correct when he said recently that the way he's playing against the other big 3 isn't upto scratch whereas against everyone else it is. Seems like a mental issue but if that's the case, then he's got time to sort it out prior to the final.

Of course he hasn't so far (for most of) this year so the chances are he probably won't but we're back on hardcourt and his record isn't bad. I actually been impressed with how he managed to successfully defend all his points in Canada and Cinci, which as you probably remember, I thought would be highly unlikely. The only reason he didn't close in and take the No.1 spot was because of the Olympics (played on grass) and otherwise he'd have got it back (briefly). In essence he's only seen the gulf in points widen because Fed did well in a tournament he typically does well in (5/5 in Cinci finals). I hope Djokovic finds his mojo because a routine loss to Federer or Murray in the final in the manner he did against Fed in the Wimbledon semi would be disappointing. Strangely, I like a close competitive match between Fed and Djokovic, whereas the French and Wimbledon semis, were, if we put our loyalties to one side, rather tepid -uncharacteristically noncompetitive, as far as matches between these two go. In the last two years, Fed and Djokovic matches @ the USO have gone to 5 sets, so there's still a good chance it will!

I don't get how he has been bad against other top 3 this year! He beat Murray and nadal at Australian open. He beat Murray in final of Miami, he beat federer in Rome and french open and nearly took nadal to 5 at the French. He has beaten all of his rivals this year while losing a few matches to them too. I would say he is 2-2 with federer 2-2 with Murray and 1-3 vs nadal and 3 of them were clay. I would hardly call that a shocking record or one to worry about.

luciusmann, I agree with every single word of that!

That's a good point about the last two encounters. A no-show from Fed at RG and a no-show from Novak at Wimbledon gave us two very underwhelming matches. Which is odd because their recent slam meetings prior to that were often particularly good.

Just to underline how I'm never totally happy though, even after the drubbing Novak handed out last night, I'm still slightly worried that he got broken in the first game! The slow start has been a bit of an issue for Novak this year and, although it didn't matter last night, if he does that against Murray or Fed, it will be more costly.

Still, can't complain too much about 6-1, 6-0, 6-1!

slashermcguirk wrote:I don't get how he has been bad against other top 3 this year! He beat Murray and nadal at Australian open. He beat Murray in final of Miami, he beat federer in Rome and french open and nearly took nadal to 5 at the French. He has beaten all of his rivals this year while losing a few matches to them too. I would say he is 2-2 with federer 2-2 with Murray and 1-3 vs nadal and 3 of them were clay. I would hardly call that a shocking record or one to worry about.

Slasher, the year overall has been pretty good. What is worrying in some of us is the nature of the defeats since the Fed match at RG:
- a double fault-ridden nerve fest v Nadal at RG
- a strangely listless performance v Fed at Wimbledon
- a defeat to Murray at the Olympics in which he collapsed in the final service game of each set.
- a first set bagel en route to losing to Fed at Cincy.

So the defeats themselves aren't the issue, it's the fact that Novak has been so below his best for them. Particularly when, generally speaking, his form has been pretty good against other players.

http://www.tennishead.net/news/on-tour/2012/07/17/djokovic-schedules-matter-a-lot

I said before I think he is mentally fried after that gruelling final with Rafa at AO - he just doesn't have the stomach for another 6 hour battle and that is why, I believe, he is slightly holding back or lacking the commitment of last year.

I don't think you can overestimate what it cost him physically and mentally, and it is a relief that he escaped without injury.

It is interesting the bit about smaller balls in 2014 as a proposal and how Djokovic thinks the game cannot go on being so physical:

" [Rafa Nadal and I] played for almost six hours in Australia. We can’t say that is where tennis is going, that we will always play for that long, but we have longer rallies, less serve-and-volley. Maybe some variety would be better so there is less time spent on the court.”

He added: “There has been a lot of talk about where tennis will go from here. It’s become so physical, so many rallies. Technology has advanced so much, what is the next step? It’s interesting to talk about it. We don’t know what to predict, but there are talks about making the tennis balls smaller so there can be shorter points, which will release the pressure from a physical point of view.”"

HM Murdoch, I see where you are coming from. I suppose he has been a bit lacklustre in those particular matches. He probably just needs another big win against the top 3 to get the confidence back. Could well do it at us open with more of the limelight going in particular to federer.

Thanks for that TP. Doesnt this mirror exactly what we've been saying on here about technology in the game needing to be heeded to reduce wear on the players and bring in more variety?

I agree, I think the ralley-fests with Nadal actually look a huge amount out of Djokovic mentally, and Nadal physically. Federer has been a clear beneficiary of those guys cancelling themselves out. Indeed those matches were not good for the game and the ATP need to now act and show it really cares about the future of the game, and the players within it. No-one wants to watch 6 hour matches of continual ralleying anyway. I also wonder how Djokovic feels about Nadal being out of the game...and their dual role in that.

BUT...he didnt do too badly in his first match though! Mental fatigue doesnt have to last forever...he can recover from 2011/AO2012 at some point, maybe USO12 is where he gets it back on track again.

lydian wrote:I agree, I think the ralley-fests with Nadal actually look a huge amount out of Djokovic mentally, and Nadal physically. Federer has been a clear beneficiary of those guys cancelling themselves out. Indeed those matches were not good for the game and the ATP need to now act and show it really cares about the future of the game, and the players within it. No-one wants to watch 6 hour matches of continual ralleying anyway. I also wonder how Djokovic feels about Nadal being out of the game...and their dual role in that.

I didn't believe that Federer would win another slam, and I must admit I thought his chances of either a gold or a silver Olympic medal in the singles had probably passed him by, but I must admit I did think after the AO final that another one or two meetings like that and Nadal and Djokovic would probably kill each other and that would open the door for Fed and for Murray.

It happened a little sooner than I thought, and I agree with you lydian that it is perfectly reversible........however, recovery time is going to become longer after another of those marathons as both Nadal and Djokovic age.

It is in nobody's interests that a slugfest like that become the norm, least of all the players involved.

Yep agree with all that. I dont believe Federer would have won another slam or medal had Nadal or Djokovic been present on their usual form.

If you look at Federer's success it has pretty much come post-USO11 - the time when Nadal and Djokovic ran each other into the ground effectively ending both their 2011 seasons. AO2012 then reinforced that further. But of course things always happen, and none of what happened was Federer's fault, and clearly he was well placed to take advantage of Djokovic's and Nadal's dips.

lydian wrote:Thanks for that TP. Doesnt this mirror exactly what we've been saying on here about technology in the game needing to be heeded to reduce wear on the players and bring in more variety?

It mirrors what some people here have been saying. Others disagree with Djokovic's viewpoint and don't want changes.

lydian wrote:Federer has been a clear beneficiary of those guys cancelling themselves out

Typical Federer, wins lots of slams when there's no real competition, doesn't win any when a couple of players better than him come along, then waits until they go downhill before winning slams and getting back to No. 1 again.

Why not just extend it and just say that the only reason anyone won any slams ever was because there was no 'on form' Djokovic or Nadal. In case you forgot, Fed won Wimbledon beating Novak along the way. Of course he wouldn't have won if Nadal wasn't injured (only way Rosol could beat him) as Nadal's best is the best.

lol...very drole.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Why not just extend it and just say that the only reason anyone won any slams ever was because there was no 'on form' Djokovic or Nadal.

There are probably some people who would like to do that. I don't agree, of course. I was pointing out, in a gently sarcastic way, that lydian's statements could be interpreted in that way. (I don't think they were meant that way though.)

There's nothing like a good bit of sarcasm...

lydian wrote:There's nothing like a good bit of sarcasm...

I know, I know, and what I wrote was nothing like a good bit of sarcasm

lydian wrote:Yep agree with all that. I dont believe Federer would have won another slam or medal had Nadal or Djokovic been present on their usual form.

If you look at Federer's success it has pretty much come post-USO11 - the time when Nadal and Djokovic ran each other into the ground effectively ending both their 2011 seasons. AO2012 then reinforced that further. But of course things always happen, and none of what happened was Federer's fault, and clearly he was well placed to take advantage of Djokovic's and Nadal's dips.

Oh steady on, poor TMF I must protest!!!!

No, I do know what you mean, but for me Federer is still the best when conditions are favourable - well isn't everyone I suppose? I just mean thank god for his brand of magic and it would be nice if conditions didn't conspire to blunt some of that variety at every slam.

Dont get me wrong, if the conditions are faster then we know Federer is the king, if conditions are slower I still believe Nadal is likewise...Djokovic is great on medium pace hardcourts, as is Murray.

But they cant all be king, all the time...and Federer has been tweaking his game to become even more aggressive - which is great indoors and on faster surfaces (e.g. blue clay!) but I wouldnt have expected him to win Wimb given he hadnt even got to the final before since 2009 and gone as deep in other places. But thats kind of stating the obvious really. On the other hand, hats off to Federer for keeping strong. injury free and progressing his game.

It will be interesting to see how he gets on the next couple of weeks if Djokovic is in any kind of mental shape given he was sooooo close last year to getting into the final.

lydian wrote: hats off to Federer for keeping strong. injury free and progressing his game.

Quite - as I have said elsewhere there has only been 1 of his 9 tournament wins in the last 12 months when neither Nadal nor Djokovic was in the draw (Rotterdam 2012). All they needed to do was to capture what you describe as their "usual form" and beat the 30+ opponent.......

Djokovic needs a miracle to make the semi's i think. Wimbledon showed the real him.

JuliusHMarx wrote:So with Djoko well below par, Rafa out of action and Murray...welll, being Murray, can we conclude that the Golden Age is over?

No because it is a temporary dip in form for some of the top guys, Roger is playing better than he played in 2008 frankly and no worse than 2010 and better than 2011. Murray is better, Novak and Nadal will both be back and I think both will still grow as champions; and by the way both guys are much better players than they were 4 or 5 years ago when they when this group's dominance started (federer and Nadal, later Djoko). Only a fool would sleep on those two Julius and despite the fact that you play a fool occassionally I know that you are no fool. When those two are done we will see an era where three double digit slam champions who played each other relatively close to each others prime's. That alone is something completely unprecedented in the history of tennis. Albeit Novak will have to win a buttload in the next 3 years to get there but it is highly doable, whether it will or won't happen we have to see. Now if we do end up with 3 double digit slammers in this period do you really believe that fans and historians won't look back on this era fondly? Even if we don't this period so far has been special and could still get more special.

HM Murdoch wrote:luciusmann, I agree with every single word of that!

That's a good point about the last two encounters. A no-show from Fed at RG and a no-show from Novak at Wimbledon gave us two very underwhelming matches. Which is odd because their recent slam meetings prior to that were often particularly good.

Just to underline how I'm never totally happy though, even after the drubbing Novak handed out last night, I'm still slightly worried that he got broken in the first game! The slow start has been a bit of an issue for Novak this year and, although it didn't matter last night, if he does that against Murray or Fed, it will be more costly.

Still, can't complain too much about 6-1, 6-0, 6-1!

Exactly, that was another typically bizarre service game we have seen this year from Novak where he is up 30-0 love to a guy who is struggling to win points against him and he is up in the rally in every single rally and some how finds the exact bonehead miss hit shot sequence required for a game to give Lorenzi a break. I understand he beat this man O, 1, and 1 but against a good player you play that sloppy behind your serve for a game when you are in front in every single rally and find the exact sequence of boneheaded shot selection required to get broken your first game and you lose that set. A person who has watched Novak looks at this victory as a warning sign in my mind for the negative. Now Novak can win this tournament no question, but against 75 percent of the tour he loses that first set precisely because he turned in a completely unfocused first service game. Now poor Lorenzi had about as much chance of being elected the next pontiff of actually winning the set from there on, but do you think Murray or Federer would have a problem capitalizing on a first set free break? I don't think so, and that is precisely what Fed has done to Djoko for a long time, he jumps on his slow start and mental lapses early and puts him in a whole and then makes him play. Sometimes Novak is good enough to dig out sometimes he isn't.