Predicting the slam finalists

OK here's a list of players who have been in two or more finals during Federer's era since his first Wimbledon final in 2003 :
Federer (24), Nadal (16), Djokovic (9), Murray (5), Roddick (5), then Soderling, Hewitt and Safin (2 each)

What is strikingly obvious is the high number of slams contested by Federer. He has appeared in 24 men's Grand Slam finals, with 10 in a row( both records), and appeared in 18 of 19 finals from the 2005 Wimbledon Championships through to the 2010 Australian Open. In fact the only final in that period he did not make was the first slam that Djokovic won (also the Australian Open in 2008). However since winning the Australian Open in 2010 he's only been in 2 finals so making another appearance at the Australian open this year might just be beyond him.

Djokovic has been in 9 finals and since making the final at the US Open in 2010 (losing to Nadal) he has made 7 of the last 9 finals before the start of this tournament. I would suggest that it was pretty safe to have predicted he would have made the final this time too regardless of his draw here from the outset of the tournament.

Murray has been in 5 finals and obviously both of the last two. The fact that he won his first slam at the US last time round might just make him slight favourite here too, although in three slam finals against his next opponent Federer so far he's only won one set.

Now here's the conumdrum. If a fully fit Rafa had played would he have made the final? Discounting the US Open last year (as he was injured) he had made 5 out of the last six finals and has been in 16 finals in total. Recent history seems then to be on his side but I think it is reasonable to suggest that his draw would have been crucial to his chances. If you accept my argument that Djokovic was always likely to reach the final then Rafa would have needed to be in the other half of the draw with Federer. Last year he beat Federer in the semis only to lose to Novak in the final. History would predict a similar outcome this time round too.

So there you have it. In the absence of Nadal and the recent decline of Federer the final is likely to be Djokovic vs. Murray. Novak obviously already made the inevitable happen now it's down to Andy to build on his recent record and finally overcome Federer in a slam.

If Nadal was in Murray's half in Flushing Meadows 2012 or Melbourne 2013, he would've made the final.

Nadal bosses Murray.

I'd back Federer to beat Murray as well, unfortunately Berdych took Federer out in the US Open.

No luck for Murray here. Federer has the edge.

Since the start of 2012 Murray has been a different player. He's shown it against Novak and against Roger but not had a chance to against Rafa. Had he kept playing the same way as 2011 against the big boys he'd never have broken through.

I look forward to Rafa being back to his best as it will be really interesting to see him against the 'new' Murray.

Predicting the final... Well, can Murray move Federer around enough and expose the fact that he's nowhere near as consistent on the run anymore? Can he serve at 65%+ the whole match? Can he destroy the Federer second serve like he did in Shanghai?

For Roger, can he serve well enough to minimise the effect of Murray's returns? Can he use short low slices to the forehand to expose what still is (in my opinion) a Murray weakness? Can he shorten the points enough?

There's not much between them in the here snd now. It really is about who executes better.

Danny I agree with much of that. The problem for Federer nowadays though is that he's lost that edge to his game and will find it difficult to live with the intensity Andy now brings into the proceedings.

I honestly believe that Andy went into each slam final against Roger (subconsciously) expecting to lose. The fact that he won the first set at Wimbledon last time round shows that he's been getting closer. Add that to the fact that this is a semi and the pressure is perhaps a little less than in the final itself. If he brings his A game and really believes he can win then there's no reason why he shouldn't.

So what you're basically saying is Murray had to wait until Federer has reached near retirement until he can get close to him?

If Federer lights it up, Murray gets hammered.
If Federer serves well, Murray gets hammered.

Murray only has a sniff if Federer has nappy duties during the night.

Yeah because the H2H shows Murray struggles

Gerry

What part of the world are you wumming from tonight!

newballs wrote:I honestly believe that Andy went into each slam final against Roger (subconsciously) expecting to lose. The fact that he won the first set at Wimbledon last time round shows that he's been getting closer. Add that to the fact that this is a semi and the pressure is perhaps a little less than in the final itself. If he brings his A game and really believes he can win then there's no reason why he shouldn't.

Don't mention that phrase!! There's a tear in my eye.

The way I see it these days is Djokovic is pretty much a certainty to reach the two hardcourt major finals and possibly the French Open final. If he comes up against Federer or Murray before the final at Wimbledon and either plays about 90%, they will beat Djokovic as grass is (IMO) his weakest surface (the guy's a Wimbledon champ and grass is his weakest surface!! What a player!).

A fully fit Nadal is a nailed on certainty for every French Open final if he's not injured. He also does very well at Wimbledon so you'd expect him to be there or thereabouts at SW19. The hardcourt majors... He's not played Murray II so it's hard to judge. He probably has the beating of Federer over BO5 on a hardcourt these days but against Djokovic it's turning into a no contest. Give Nadal a set or even 2 but Djokovic is by far the best hardcourt player these days and he'll make Nadal run and run and run until he breaks down.

Murray and Federer are difficult to judge. Both are definitely capable of beating Djokovic and Nadal on any day (except v Nadal on clay for both and on clay generally for Murray) but you'd have to say, if the players were ranked in order of Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray then Nadal and Djokovic would be the favourites each time to reach the final because of their pedigree. Fed's going to put in wonderful performances every now and again (FO 2011, Wimbledon last year) but he won't keep it up forever. When Nadal comes back, Federer may be hardpushed to get into another final unless it's at Wimbledon where anything can happen.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because the H2H shows Murray struggles

H2H shows that Murray leads 9-6 in best of 3 set matches.

Federer leads 3-1 in best of 5 set matches and 3-0 in Grand Slam matches.

Federer massive favourite.

sportslover wrote:Gerry

What part of the world are you wumming from tonight!

Wumming? Don't bet in on SL.

I'm clearly stating Federer is still better Murray.

Federer will definitely run the show at times during this match-up, the question is can he serve well and keep the errors few for at least 3 sets.

Purely on gut feeling however, I think Federer will win in 4.

Gerry SA wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because the H2H shows Murray struggles

H2H shows that Murray leads 9-6 in best of 3 set matches.

Federer leads 3-1 in best of 5 set matches and 3-0 in Grand Slam matches.

Federer massive favourite.

Gerry do I detect a certain South African bias here? Do the South Africans claim him as one of theirs? I can imagine Mirka and Roger out there on safari once his racket wielding days are over.

Your argument is valid but at the same time flawed. You're guilty (if you don't mind me saying so) of living in the past. In his (Federer's) prime Murray wouldn't indeed have stood much chance even with his improved game. Now though he's the one who has had an easy time of getting to the business end of the slam whilst Federer (tie-breaks apart) struggled against Tsonga.

Federer's best chance is if he starts strongly and holds off a concerted Murray challenge. Lose the first set (like at Wimbledon) and he might not be able to retrieve the situation. Murray in 4 or maybe 5 sets.

newballs wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because the H2H shows Murray struggles

H2H shows that Murray leads 9-6 in best of 3 set matches.

Federer leads 3-1 in best of 5 set matches and 3-0 in Grand Slam matches.

Federer massive favourite.

Gerry do I detect a certain South African bias here? Do the South Africans claim him as one of theirs? I can imagine Mirka and Roger out there on safari once his racket wielding days are over.

Your argument is valid but at the same time flawed. You're guilty (if you don't mind me saying so) of living in the past. In his (Federer's) prime Murray wouldn't indeed have stood much chance even with his improved game. Now though he's the one who has had an easy time of getting to the business end of the slam whilst Federer (tie-breaks apart) struggled against Tsonga.

Federer's best chance is if he starts strongly and holds off a concerted Murray challenge. Lose the first set (like at Wimbledon) and he might not be able to retrieve the situation. Murray in 4 or maybe 5 sets.

I'm convinced he's totally South African

Joking aside, yes I'm a little biased to the great man, but I still believe when's he's at his very best he can still beat anyone on tour be it Djokovic Nadal or Murray.

The serve is key to Roger's chances.

There is so much hype surrounding this match that I fear that it will be a total anti climax and possibly not the thriller many are expecting.

Either Federer will come and blow him away in 3 tight sets or Murray will demolish him as he did at the Olympics. Considering the odds are stacked against the 31 year old I expect Murray to come through. The only thing he has is the 3-0 at slams but that counts for nothing.

Agreed FF, the main thing being it doesn't go to five, because if Roger wins it and with Novak having an extra days rest, I doubt if he could win.

Anyway I hope Andy can come through.

FedsFan wrote:There is so much hype surrounding this match that I fear that it will be a total anti climax and possibly not the thriller many are expecting.

Either Federer will come and blow him away in 3 tight sets or Murray will demolish him as he did at the Olympics. Considering the odds are stacked against the 31 year old I expect Murray to come through. The only thing he has is the 3-0 at slams but that counts for nothing.

I agree it counts for nothing. Or at most, it counts very little. In a final maybe, but not in this situation.

One thing I'm pretty sure of is that Murray won't lose this because of self doubt or a mental collapse. He'll only lose if he doesn't play well, or if Roger plays too good. Knowing that there won't be a Murray mental meltdown is quite a nice position to be in as a Murray fan nowadays.

I should have added what I expect to happen is different to what I ACTUALLY WANT TO HAPPEN

Gerry SA wrote:

newballs wrote:

Gerry SA wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Yeah because the H2H shows Murray struggles

H2H shows that Murray leads 9-6 in best of 3 set matches.

Federer leads 3-1 in best of 5 set matches and 3-0 in Grand Slam matches.

Federer massive favourite.

Gerry do I detect a certain South African bias here? Do the South Africans claim him as one of theirs? I can imagine Mirka and Roger out there on safari once his racket wielding days are over.

Your argument is valid but at the same time flawed. You're guilty (if you don't mind me saying so) of living in the past. In his (Federer's) prime Murray wouldn't indeed have stood much chance even with his improved game. Now though he's the one who has had an easy time of getting to the business end of the slam whilst Federer (tie-breaks apart) struggled against Tsonga.

Federer's best chance is if he starts strongly and holds off a concerted Murray challenge. Lose the first set (like at Wimbledon) and he might not be able to retrieve the situation. Murray in 4 or maybe 5 sets.

I'm convinced he's totally South African

Joking aside, yes I'm a little biased to the great man, but I still believe when's he's at his very best he can still beat anyone on tour be it Djokovic Nadal or Murray.

The serve is key to Roger's chances.

Certainly if Roger keeps on holding serve he'll either win it or lose it in some marathon tie-breaks.

Let's look at this another way. How much does Federer really need this one? He's still motivated but maybe, just maybe Andy's desire might be a little stronger.