Gilles Simon - call yourself a profesional?! (unless you are injured- in which case, well done for playing!)

Let me get this straight.

28 year old Gilles Simon played a tough 5 setter. It was long but, at 4 and 3/4 hours, not without precedent. It went to 8-6 in the fifth but the fourth set only had 7 games.

This leaves him utterly exhausted and almost unable to play in a match 36 hours later?! For goodness sake man, you're a professional athlete! That's a disgraceful state of affairs.

And I can't believe the level of mollycoddling this lightweight is getting!

Rafa has a marathon v Verdasco in 09 and comes back 36 hours later to beat Roger. Novak has 5 hour match v Andy and comes back to beat Rafa in a 6 hours match. Novak goes to 12-10 in the 5th v Stan and everyone, including him, thinks he will be fine for Berdych. Not to mention all the people who have had to play second on Stupid Saturday at USO.

But for poor old Gillles, oh it's inhuman, how can anyone be expected to play again after a 5 setter? It's a miracle the poor little lamb is able to walk, let alone play tennis. There is no way he could possibly prepare for this. How could anyone envisage that during a slam you may have to play 5 sets and then come back a couple of days later?

Simon's lack of fight and fitness is a disgrace. Granted, Andy would probably have beaten even a rested Simon. But I expect better from professional sportsman. Shocking.

Grrrrr.

Put that way, it's bad. But matches with Monfils are special in their unique brand of pointless exhaustion.

Well he is known in France as "Chicken Legs" and as you can see by his build he doesn't carry much muscle!

As for his fitness he has well known problems with his knees and this has hampered his career somewhat.

However as far as the match up, had he been fully fit Murray would have no doubt won the match with the possible loss of a set.

After all he has beaten him on the last nine occasions.

As for Andys route being described as a bit of a cupcake, he didn't make the draw, but I'm sure he would have preferred stronger opponents, as there is a danger of him getting undercooked towards the end.

|HMH are you a qualified doctor or sports physio or something?

The guy (for whatever reason) had 3 hours treatment after his previous match and doesn't (not to my knowledge anyway) have a history of being a prima donna. The reality is even if he'd been 100% fit he wouldn't have had a realistic chance of beating Murray over a 5 set match and he know it rightly or wrongly.

Sorry but you are wrong in my opinion HM. His match was close on five hours long which involved rallies that were long even by Rafa and Novak's circumstances with one at 71 shots and two at 47 shots. He was getting spasms in his arm but soldiered on through that and a knee injury and at the end he was in such poor nick that he had to give the press conference a miss and head to hospital for three hours of treatment. Bearing in mind his match finished after midnight then going to hospital he probably never got to bed until around 4am perhaps later so not only did he have injuries but his sleep patterns were shot. Now to his credit he stuck with it (didn't do a Fognini and pull out) and even though he was clearly struggling and from the point Murray won the first set it was clear he wasn't going to win he could have pulled out a la Tipsarevic but he battled on through the pain to the bitter end. I credit him for that as I guarantee there are many other pros who wouldn't have done so.

I suppose the only thing you can criticise him for is not being in the same top notch condition as Novak or Rafa but who is in men's tennis today?

newballs wrote:|HMH are you a qualified doctor or sports physio or something?

The guy (for whatever reason) had 3 hours treatment after his previous match and doesn't (not to my knowledge anyway) have a history of being a prima donna. The reality is even if he'd been 100% fit he wouldn't have had a realistic chance of beating Murray over a 5 set match and he know it rightly or wrongly.

He was treated for cramp. Nothing extraordinary (apart from the fact that playing 5 sets gives a pro tennis player such bad cramp it requires 3 hours to treat).

This is what he said on Sunday:

"It is not easy to win 6-2 6-3 6-2 against Andy and I’m not sure if we play longer than that I will be able to make it to the end"

He'd virtually given up already.

Maybe there are one or two players on tour that can give him a number of a reliable 'doctor' who can aid him with endurance and recovery.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I suppose the only thing you can criticise him for is not being in the same top notch condition as Novak or Rafa but who is in men's tennis today?

I don't expect him to be at that level. Just a level that is adequate for a professional player.

I also don't like players saying before matches how little chance they have, just because they played a tough 5 setter in the last round.

Like I said I can point to examples where other players have not even bothered to turn up to play. Others than pull out halfway through a match when they realise they have lost but Simon saw it through to the end.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Like I said I can point to examples where other players have not even bothered to turn up to play. Others than pull out halfway through a match when they realise they have lost but Simon saw it through to the end.

I'll give him credit for seeing the match through. Not a lot of credit because "he could have been worse" isn't a great compliment but he at least showed respect to Andy and a paying crowd.

Just as a sidenote CC, he wasn't taken to hospital, that was just a rumour that seemed to gain some traction. Simon denied that was the case and said all his treatment was at the arena.

Well still had three hours of treatment afterwards which tells me he was in a bad way. Kukushkin was similiar I believe last year but quit in the second set in AO V Murray.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well still had three hours of treatment afterwards which tells me he was in a bad way.

And also that his fitness levels are way below what is required for a professional athlete!

His fitness levels managed to net him over $100k in prize-money this week, so they don't do him too badly it terms of him being a professional athlete.

djlovesyou wrote:Maybe there are one or two players on tour that can give him a number of a reliable 'doctor' who can aid him with endurance and recovery.

Simon did miss 2 drugs tests a few years ago. Missing three would have meant a ban. After missing 2 he plunged down hte rankings. But maybe an unfortunate conincidence.

Henman Bill wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:Maybe there are one or two players on tour that can give him a number of a reliable 'doctor' who can aid him with endurance and recovery.

Simon did miss 2 drugs tests a few years ago. Missing three would have meant a ban. After missing 2 he plunged down hte rankings. But maybe an unfortunate conincidence.

A lot of people missed tests when the 'whereabouts' rule was first brought in (in a lot of sports).

A lot of the time it was more to do with the person themselves not taking the system seriously enough, and this would be doubled in a sport like tennis where the players are incredibly entitled and self-centred.

Sorry this thread is nothing more than an attempt to take cheap shots at a player who actually doesn't have a habit of calling the trainer.

Looking at his playing record it strikes me that here is a counter-puncher who had probably maximised his tennis skills and actually had to recover from quite a serious knee injury over the last couple of years

Some on this forum make it out as if Nadal is some kind of superhero in his attempts to recover from his knee injuries whilst Simon is obviously an easy target to criticise probably more due to the fact that he isn't a household name and it's all too easy to throw pretty childish "accusations" at him.

Newballs, who said Nadal is heroic for coming back from an injury?
I certainly didn't.

As for Simon, I don't think we should criticise him so much. He had a draining match vs Monfils.

IMBL the point I am trying to make is that it's very easy to criticise a player who gave his best against Murray when not 100% fit. That seemingly gets twisted into "well.. he couldn't have been very fit in the first place" or words to that effect..

newballs wrote:IMBL the point I am trying to make is that it's very easy to criticise a player who gave his best against Murray when not 100% fit. That seemingly gets twisted into "well.. he couldn't have been very fit in the first place" or words to that effect..

Was he "not 100% fit" in the true sense of the expression i.e. he had an injury or ailment? I've seen no suggestion that he was. If I'm wrong, I'll retract my criticism.

If his reason for incapacity is merely that he played a tough 5 sets a day and half previously, then I think that is a very poor showing from a top level tennis player. He's hardly the first person to face this situation and he wasn't just below par, he was the walking dead.

The one thing I do recall about Simon's match with Monfils was that at one stage the average rallly length was 10. something shots which was extraordinarily high. Monfils has a habit of playing long easy rallies before looking for an opening and Simon being a counter-puncher found it hard to wear him down and kill off the points.

Whether or not Simon should have been able to cope with such an opponent in his evening match without becoming totally exhausted is an interesting question but (assuming he really was as "knackered" as he says he was) not surprising that he little left to give against Andy.

Simon came into the tournament with injury worries (I think he had a neck problem). In his first round matches he was sometimes serving his first serves at 120 kph!! I think this article is an unnecessary pop at Simon TBH, players get physical ailments, it happens, and when you're well below your best and playing a guy who's beaten you on the previous nine occasions you're always going to struggle.

If he's carrying an injury, then I scale my criticism back. But this is what really got my goat about this:

Novak Djokovic
Plays 5 sets (1-6 7-5 6-4 6-7 (5-7) 12-10) over 5 hours. Finshes at 1:41 AM local time. Scheduled back on court 42 hours later.

I know I can recover. I know I have it in me.

Gilles Simon
Plays 5 sets (6-4, 6-4, 4-6, 1-6, 8-6) over 4 hours 43 mins. Finishes at 12:32 AM local time. Scheduled back on court 40 hours 30 mins later.

It is not easy to win 6-2 6-3 6-2 against Andy and I’m not sure if we play longer than that I will be able to make it to the end... It's difficult when you run a marathon two days before to go for one more two days after.

Come on Gilles, did you fight so hard against Monfils to just give up on the next round?!

I don't think there's all that much in this. Not sure it's just exhaustion, as Simon grinds out pretty much all of his matches and seems to have a pretty good engine most of the time. Presumably it's a combination of a few niggles - someone mentioned a knee problem - and a very draining match which pushed him over the edge.

As for the mental belief, maybe that's one of the big differences between someone who's ranked #1 and someone who's a little lower down. I understand what you mean HM and those comments were ill-advised coming from a pro, but I'd sooner give him credit for actually coming out and completing the match if he's actually carrying a minor injury to boot. If it's just outright tiredness, then...suck it up, Gilles!

OK, fair enough, I've adjusted the thread title somewhat!

You could be right though HM, we'll probably see in the coming days/weeks!