Wimbledon - Crystal Ball Time

First topic message reminder :

I have to say I am rather looking forward to it.

Who will the grass gods favour for 2013? Well I think it is interesting.

Nadal. His last visit should be one his supporters would like to forget and one his detractors do not stop mentioning. Given his recent run of form I see a player who could actually win it. Ever since his comeback many have predicted a decline. Without question he is a step slower. Even on the Clay many of his opponents were able to find winners except Nishikori and Ferrer who just were a bad match up. He won Indian Wells. Lost in Monte Carlo, but won Madrid and Rome and then topped it off winning his 8th French Open crown. I believe Nadal hits harder now on the FH especially because of the overwhelming weakness on his BH due to his knees. I think like Federer he needs a good draw. Players like Del Potro, Berdych and even Tsonga become a greater threat because of the contrast in surface. He isn't playing Halle and maybe lack of practice could count against him. Also will he begin to tire after having played so much Clay tennis this year?

Defending champion and 7 time winner Federer. Downed by Murray at the AO and Tsonga at the FO. It is a question now of how fit is he. 32 this year and you have to wonder how much his Slam hopes rest on his physical prowess much rather than a favourable draw. Could this be his last year to win a Slam? Last year the back was hurting and he was facing defeat against Benneteau and he summoned every effort and genius to come back and win the tournament. Does he have that type of inspiration left in his tank? He will hope that the British Summer becomes a wash out so he can take advantage of the roof. I am sure he will be doing rain dances leading up to the event.

Novak Djokovic. World No.1. LAst year he won Miami and had to wait 5 months to taste another tournament win. He suffered a very bitter defeat to Rafael Nadal. The weather gods intervened just as he was ready to drop the hammer on Nadal. Oddly enough his performances were below par, but he was winning. At Wimbledon the wheels slipped off even more. He was defeated by Federer. He picked up again in Toronto and on the eve of the US Open was dismantled by Federer again. However this year has seen Djokovic become the aggressor. Who could forget the AO where he outlasted Wawrinka and then destroyed Ferrer in straight sets? He went on and downed Murray despite dropping the first set. He went to IW and Miami where he was defeated by Del Potro and Haas respectively. He then went to Monte Carlo and de-throned the king. He then came agonisingly close to beating Nadal again at RG to fall short again. Up and down like last year a bit. I think however he is made of sterner stuff and will look to win another Wimbledon title. If the mindset is right and conditions heavy, we could see the Serb strike back.

Great Britain. Always a tormentous time to be British. Murray fresh off the back of lay off from Roland Garros. Has been practicing on the grass since last week. Is he due to win his 2nd Slam at Wimbledon? 3 semi's back to back and runner up last year. He broke his Slam duck at New York last year. However, this year has been up and down. Out-grinded by Djokovic in Australia but then outlasted Ferrer in a painstaking gruelling match in Miami. Clay was a miss for him. You have to wonder with the results he has grinded out since Wimbledon last year if that brand of tennis is enough to win the Wimbledon title on top of the expectation of the tennis public. He must show more aggression if he is to end the Wimbledon hoodoo.

It will be a cracker.

Who is your money on?

Banbro- comparing Murray's displays at Wim and US 11 is like trying to decide whether to be buried alive or dropped from a plane wthout a parachute. They were both fundamentally awful. Wimbledon was worse for me because he allowed one routine forehand miss to turn a probable win into a crushing loss.

As for post US, his results have been ok but the performances have by and large been unspectacular. He lost the mental edge against Novak in Shanghai and hasn't recovered it since. Hopefully, a return to the grass will bring back mid 2012 Andy!

If Murray can play Wimbledon 2013 like he did in the Olympics last year- he'll be very very tough to beat.

I think people are underestimating him.

It's really a tough call this year -

Federer has the Wimbledon pedigree and is defending champ, but his form is definitely in decline as he approaches 32. Could be inspired by the venue and the tournament again, but that's more hope than expectation.

Djokovic isn't at the level he was in 2011, and grass is his least effective surface. Also, there appears to be an exploitable weakness in keeping the ball low to his forehand, so expect his opponents to be playing a lot of heavy slices to that side.

Nadal has the second best Wimbledon pedigree and has come back with a bang after his injury, but is out of practice on the grass and may be fatigued from his run of success. Also, despite the results there is a suggestion he is a fraction slower, which may be the key difference between being aggressive and defensive on the grass.

Murray had excellent grass form last year and seems now to have come to terms mentally with being a serious GS challenger (last 3 GS finals have at least been competitive, unlike his earlier efforts). I think would start favourite in a match v Federer and perhaps Djokovic (given the effectiveness of Andy's slice backhand), but I still think Nadal poses something of a mental block for him. 

So, dependent on the draw, I think Andy and Rafa are pretty much joint favourites with Djoko a fraction behind and Federer 4th. Of the 4, I think Fed is most vulnerable to the likes of Berdy or Tsonga, but I'd be surprised if we don't see at least 3 of them in the semi-final (obviously, there is the question of whose quarter Rafa gets drawn in - anyone want to offer odds that he gets Ferrer at the QF stage? )

I like Nadal as first favorite and Murray as second favorite. Novak's form has been patchy since the AO where he played pretty well. Roger is always a threat on grass and is the defending champion. Yet for my money Nadal is just on fire lately so he is first favorite, and Murray did reach the final last year and win the Olympics.

Nadal is nowhere near favourite.  He hasn't even had a warm up on grass before this, and if his past is to be believed, he is firmly 4th or 5th favourite.  Djokovic is the favourite, followed by Murray and Federer.  Nadal also had his second worst performance at his favourite slam this year, despite winning it.  Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Federer has a good chance of winning, and I think he will be fired up to beat the Sampras record, and become the king of Wimbledon.  Seeing Nadal do the same with the French may well motivate him.

If I had to shove 1000 on it though, I'd have to go with Djokovic all the way.

_homogenised_ wrote:Nadal is nowhere near favourite.  

I have to agree with you on that one actually. 
When was the last time a player lost in R2 and then won the next year?

_homogenised_ wrote: Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Absolutely. I think the key thing is, when it suits to bash Nadal- we have to make it seem like the surfaces are all exactly the same, but when it doesn't we have to quickly confirm that grass is a totally different proposition. 
That's the only way we'll match the flawless bulletproof logical heights that only you have scaled so far.

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote:Nadal is nowhere near favourite.  

I have to agree with you on that one actually. 
When was the last time a player lost in R2 and then won the next year?

I don't know but I think the fella who won in 2003 had a first round exit in 2002....

Didn't Fed lose in round 1 in 2002?

Nadal is the favourite here not only for Wimbledon but for everything until the end of the year. His best is the best and cannot be beaten. As long as the other player is pushed out so far by his cross court forehand, there is no recovering from that position as they are too far out and the ball is too heavy for them to do much more with than give a weak shot for an easy put away. This play is effective on every court so he just has to play one type of point to win anywhere.

I just hope that when Nadal reclaims the no1 position after winning the 3 remaining slams this year, his fans show enough mercy to not go on about how lucky he is to still be able to play.

barrystar wrote:don't know but I think the fella who won in 2003 had a first round exit in 2002....

Sorry, I only started watching tennis from this February, so I'm not quite sure who you're talking about.

Rafa is the most susceptible to an early upset. The lack of practise and the slippery, slick conditions would make for tricky games in the first week. If he can get to the second week as the court cover wears off, he'll be fancying his chances. I'm going for Nole as favourite.

Red wrote:

barrystar wrote:don't know but I think the fella who won in 2003 had a first round exit in 2002....

Sorry, I only started watching tennis from this February, so I'm not quite sure who you're talking about.

 
 
I am afraid I am too wary to give you the benefit of the doubt at the moment - but even if you are the ingénue you claim,  I nonetheless suggest that you have a guess or look it up or keep an eye out for any mention in the media of whose first Wimbledon/slam win has its 10th anniversary this year next over the three weeks.

I agree with others that the Champion will realistically be one of only four names, although I personally see them in two tiers : Novak and Rafa as more or less joint favourites, and then a gap to the next two to being Andy and Roger as 'second joint favourites' with Andy's age giving him the edge over Roger's experience at SW19.

Amused as ever by Red's predictions, which have latterly entered an almost surreal world. Rafa's virtual invincibility since his comeback has failed to promote him beyond 5th favourite at Wimbledon in Red's steely assessment ; although the great man and double Wimby Champ will surely be encouraged with his elevation from 7th favourite, which was of course Red's prediction for his RG prospects ........

barrystar wrote:

Red wrote:

barrystar wrote:don't know but I think the fella who won in 2003 had a first round exit in 2002....

Sorry, I only started watching tennis from this February, so I'm not quite sure who you're talking about.

 
 
I am afraid I am too wary to give you the benefit of the doubt at the moment - but even if you are the ingénue you claim,  I nonetheless suggest that you have a guess or look it up or keep an eye out for any mention in the media of whose first Wimbledon/slam win has its 10th anniversary this year next over the three weeks.

I think I've remembered.
Stan Wawrinka?

Red's been contributing since last November - so his February 2013 first introduction to Tennis, might not quite be the truth!!

lags72 wrote:Amused as ever by Red's predictions, which have latterly entered an almost surreal world. Rafa's virtual invincibility since his comeback has failed to promote him beyond 5th favourite at Wimbledon in Red's steely assessment ; although the great man and double Wimby Champ will surely be encouraged with his elevation from 7th favourite, which was of course Red's prediction for his RG prospects ........

One of the few, I suspect, who are amused, given it's repetitiveness. I should imagine any newbies would find it confusing and off-putting.

I was just agreeing with homogenised...
ah well.

barrystar - you surely must be aware that Red has been enthusiastically posting on tennis forums for a good few years now - albeit under a plethora of assumed identities .....

In fairness some very good stuff now on the sticky section, using the IMBL name I think for the 'weekly series edition'

banbrotam wrote:Red's been contributing since last November - so his February 2013 first introduction to Tennis, might not quite be the truth!!

Dammit you got me 

I do like the new v2 functions, nice technical change. Also you can put Utube videos directly which is nice.

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote: Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Absolutely. I think the key thing is, when it suits to bash Nadal- we have to make it seem like the surfaces are all exactly the same, but when it doesn't we have to quickly confirm that grass is a totally different proposition. 
That's the only way we'll match the flawless bulletproof logical heights that only you have scaled so far.

It stlll is a different proposition for Nadal, but nothing like it would have been had they not changed the surface in the early 00s. Then he would be really screwed, and as I said before, it is doubtful he would have won Wimbledon in those conditions.  Also, your smarmy come backs don;t make you look clever.

_homogenised_ wrote:

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote: Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Absolutely. I think the key thing is, when it suits to bash Nadal- we have to make it seem like the surfaces are all exactly the same, but when it doesn't we have to quickly confirm that grass is a totally different proposition. 
That's the only way we'll match the flawless bulletproof logical heights that only you have scaled so far.

It stlll is a different proposition for Nadal, but nothing like it would have been had they not changed the surface in the early 00s. Then he would be really screwed.

A bit like how Sampras would have struggled playing on it now?

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote:

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote: Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Absolutely. I think the key thing is, when it suits to bash Nadal- we have to make it seem like the surfaces are all exactly the same, but when it doesn't we have to quickly confirm that grass is a totally different proposition. 
That's the only way we'll match the flawless bulletproof logical heights that only you have scaled so far.

It stlll is a different proposition for Nadal, but nothing like it would have been had they not changed the surface in the early 00s. Then he would be really screwed.

A bit like how Sampras would have struggled playing on it now?

What kind of argument is that lol?

JHM - my use of the word 'amused' was indeed ill-chosen, not to say woefully inaccurate.....

lags72 wrote:JHM - my use of the word 'amused' was indeed ill-chosen, not to say woefully inaccurate.....

Enlightened?

_homogenised_ wrote:

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote:

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote: Grass is a different proposition.  I predict another early exit.

Absolutely. I think the key thing is, when it suits to bash Nadal- we have to make it seem like the surfaces are all exactly the same, but when it doesn't we have to quickly confirm that grass is a totally different proposition. 
That's the only way we'll match the flawless bulletproof logical heights that only you have scaled so far.

It stlll is a different proposition for Nadal, but nothing like it would have been had they not changed the surface in the early 00s. Then he would be really screwed.

A bit like how Sampras would have struggled playing on it now?

What kind of argument is that lol?

A pretty good one?

lags72 wrote:I agree with others that the Champion will realistically be one of only four names, although I personally see them in two tiers : Novak and Rafa as more or less joint favourites, and then a gap to the next two to being Andy and Roger as 'second joint favourites' with Andy's age giving him the edge over Roger's experience at SW19.

Amused as ever by Red's predictions, which have latterly entered an almost surreal world. Rafa's virtual invincibility since his comeback has failed to promote him beyond 5th favourite at Wimbledon in Red's steely assessment ; although the great man and double Wimby Champ will surely be encouraged with his elevation from 7th favourite, which was of course Red's prediction for his RG prospects ........

I think it's more astonishing that you have Rafa as joint favourite when he's hardly bursting with good health and hardly won anything away from clay in the last couple of years than Red ranking him 5th favourite

Let's remember that Rafa's "virtual invincibility" has been almost exclusively on clay and a slow IW event - where he beat a player who lost in straight sets to Tsonga who then lost in straight sets to Ferrer 

If Rafa had actually beaten the new Murray (i.e. the version that started with a bagel of Rafa in November 2011) or Novak away from clay in the past year or so, then I'd be with you on the joint favourite

Of course they are very close and either of the four winning will be no surprise - but it's naive to think that Rafa's can resume where he left off in 2011

Well banbro.... as astonishing as you seem to think it is, I can put hand on heart and say that if I was given £100 right now to split amongst four names, then I would happily stake as much on Rafa as I would on anyone else.

Looking at anyone beyond the traditional Big Four, I would say it's pretty much a lottery. Nothing would please me more than to see a brand new Slam winner who could finally shake things up a little .....

lags72 wrote:Well banbro.... as astonishing as you seem to think it is, I can put hand on heart and say that if I was given £100 right now to split amongst four names, then I would happily stake as much on Rafa as I would on anyone else.

And I might join you!! My point is Rafa being 5th favourite - isn't that outlandish. I'd wager more of Rafa not reaching the SF's than winning it

Oh and I meant to add ...... a W/L ratio of 43-2 for the year to date strikes me as pretty much as convincing a definition of current good health as anyone could wish for ........

banbrotam wrote:

lags72 wrote:I agree with others that the Champion will realistically be one of only four names, although I personally see them in two tiers : Novak and Rafa as more or less joint favourites, and then a gap to the next two to being Andy and Roger as 'second joint favourites' with Andy's age giving him the edge over Roger's experience at SW19.

Amused as ever by Red's predictions, which have latterly entered an almost surreal world. Rafa's virtual invincibility since his comeback has failed to promote him beyond 5th favourite at Wimbledon in Red's steely assessment ; although the great man and double Wimby Champ will surely be encouraged with his elevation from 7th favourite, which was of course Red's prediction for his RG prospects ........

I think it's more astonishing that you have Rafa as joint favourite when he's hardly bursting with good health and hardly won anything away from clay in the last couple of years than Red ranking him 5th favourite

Let's remember that Rafa's "virtual invincibility" has been almost exclusively on clay and a slow IW event - where he beat a player who lost in straight sets to Tsonga who then lost in straight sets to Ferrer 

If Rafa had actually beaten the new Murray (i.e. the version that started with a bagel of Rafa in November 2011) or Novak away from clay in the past year or so, then I'd be with you on the joint favourite

Of course they are very close and either of the four winning will be no surprise - but it's naive to think that Rafa's can resume where he left off in 2011

Why would you call his prediction naive? It's called an opinion - and a very valid one with justifiable reasons. Many wouldn't put Murray's chances above Nadal's because he's won nothing of note this year, he's coming off an injury, he has a poor losing record over Rafa and hasn't beaten him at Wimbledon is several attempts. You could make a case for Murray too based on his grass performance last year but it's absurd to then call it naive to fancy Rafa's chances over Murray's.

mthierry wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

lags72 wrote:I agree with others that the Champion will realistically be one of only four names, although I personally see them in two tiers : Novak and Rafa as more or less joint favourites, and then a gap to the next two to being Andy and Roger as 'second joint favourites' with Andy's age giving him the edge over Roger's experience at SW19.

Amused as ever by Red's predictions, which have latterly entered an almost surreal world. Rafa's virtual invincibility since his comeback has failed to promote him beyond 5th favourite at Wimbledon in Red's steely assessment ; although the great man and double Wimby Champ will surely be encouraged with his elevation from 7th favourite, which was of course Red's prediction for his RG prospects ........

I think it's more astonishing that you have Rafa as joint favourite when he's hardly bursting with good health and hardly won anything away from clay in the last couple of years than Red ranking him 5th favourite

Let's remember that Rafa's "virtual invincibility" has been almost exclusively on clay and a slow IW event - where he beat a player who lost in straight sets to Tsonga who then lost in straight sets to Ferrer 

If Rafa had actually beaten the new Murray (i.e. the version that started with a bagel of Rafa in November 2011) or Novak away from clay in the past year or so, then I'd be with you on the joint favourite

Of course they are very close and either of the four winning will be no surprise - but it's naive to think that Rafa's can resume where he left off in 2011

Why would you call his prediction naive? It's called an opinion - and a very valid one with justifiable reasons. Many wouldn't put Murray's chances above Nadal's because he's won nothing of note this year, he's coming off an injury, he has a poor losing record over Rafa and hasn't beaten him at Wimbledon is several attempts. You could make a case for Murray too based on his grass performance last year but it's absurd to then call it naive to fancy Rafa's chances over Murray's.

You misunderstand. It's naive to base confidence on Nadal's comeback games, when he's won one event away from Clay since November 2010. It's also naive not take into account this fact and Murray's improvement. Or that Rafa is still having to nurse his knee. I use the word 'naive' because, IMHO, it's an innocent / romantic opinion. On these boards we tend to have a more experienced view - study the facts and then come to a conclusion.

Like I did, when I said that Del Potro would beat Murray at IW

banbrotam wrote:You misunderstand. It's naive to base confidence on Nadal's comeback games, when he's won one event away from Clay since November 2010. It's also naive not take into account this fact and Murray's improvement. Or that Rafa is still having to nurse his knee. I use the word 'naive' because, IMHO, it's an innocent / romantic opinion. On these boards we tend to have a more experienced view - study the facts and then come to a conclusion.

Like I did, when I said that Del Potro would beat Murray at IW

It's not a naive opinion. It's a valid, rational contrary one. It's not naive to pick Nadal because all those ahead of him have evident vulnerabilities just like him. It's very tight indeed to pick one winner, so no choice among those 4 is naive. Picking Murray is probably the most naive cos he hasn't had the best of years and no one has an inkling of the sort of form he'll be bringing to Wimbledon after his recent injury and previous struggle for form.

And I can only imagine that the comment that "On these boards we tend to have a more experienced view" is by way of admonishment, the intention being to put me firmly in my place !


The prediction was first made by one of the current World Number One's most avid supporters and regular posters (any guesses ...?!) but was very swiftly aided & abetted by the member with quite possibly the worst record for both pre-match and in-play predictions on the board.   

I myself was pretty much ridiculed at the time by the two posters concerned for taking an alternative view (and for which there was, subsequently, a somewhat grudging apology) 

Hmm ..... 

Kyle Edmund has gotten a Wimbledon wildcard. I was hoping Golding would too. Shame how injury has blighted his start to his pro career.

I want to see Andys form this week at Queens before I judge if he's the favourite or not. Despite his pedigree on grass he was in some poor form leading up to this, back problems aside I don't think he was great after Aus Open (where he was phenomenal). He was quite poor at Indian Wells and even though he won Miami (says a lot about his quality) the draw did open up for him, and probably should have lost the final. 

The clay season was a bit of a disaster, so I'm curious of his confidence levels, hopefully he gets flashbacks of last year and is bang on form again as the guy many were predicting to be Number 1 this year!

banbrotam wrote:

summerblues wrote:I am a bit puzzled why people rate Andy so high.

I dunno. Maybe it's his last two performances at Wimbledon held events  

That does not strike me as enough to rate him as #1 favorite.  I suppose it will depend to some extent on how you look at those results.  If you think that those two performances should be viewed as a very good predictor of current grass form, then you may perhaps give Andy a very good chance (though still not quite clear to me whether #1 favorite).  But I tend to view them as more of a reflection of his generally very good form last summer - he went on to win his only slam so far at the USO.  I would not necessarily view them as the indicator of where I would expect him to be in any given year - more an indicator of where he can be in a year when things go his way - i.e., a better than average year.  But why should this year be like that again?

Don't get me wrong, I quite like Andy.  He has mostly been my second favorite among the big four after Federer and I would be happy for him to win, just I do not see him as better than the third favorite.

banbrotam wrote:I also think he deliberately decided not to enter RG - i.e. if it had been Wimbledon he'd have been there

I tend to agree with that.  I am probably more cynical than most, but I tend to be fairly skeptical of various player injuries.  Sure, I imagine he did have some trouble with his back, but not at all convinced it would have been anywhere near enough to keep him out of any of the other three slams.

Henman Bill wrote:

I am tipping Murray to win it. ....

He certainly has a chance and it is not as clear cut as say the RG favorite, so it is not an unreasonable view, but I still cannot bring myself to quite agree - you can see my arguments against in my response to banbro.  But I agree that - as you say - a decent argument can be made for any of the big four.

lags72 wrote:Nothing would please me more than to see a brand new Slam winner who could finally shake things up a little .....

Go Ferrer!

summerblues wrote:

banbrotam wrote:I also think he deliberately decided not to enter RG - i.e. if it had been Wimbledon he'd have been there

I tend to agree with that.  I am probably more cynical than most, but I tend to be fairly skeptical of various player injuries.  Sure, I imagine he did have some trouble with his back, but not at all convinced it would have been anywhere near enough to keep him out of any of the other three slams.

I've no doubt that he'd strive much harder against injury to play at Wimbledon, Aus, or US than at RG - but I'd expect nothing less.  RG in particular is the only slam with another one following it in 3 weeks - misjudge it there and you kill two slams with one bad decision - coupled with the fact that Wimbledon happens to be the most important slam in Murray's calendar.  If there had been anything there he'd have been an absolute fool to jeopardise being in top physical shape for Wimbledon by committing himself whole-heartedly to RG; and committing himself half-heartedly to RG would be just as bad.

I'm delighted if he's shown a bit of hard-nosed judgment in his self interest, it shows maturity and an understanding of how best to look after himself and his more important career aims.  My worry is not skepticism about the nature of his decision, but that what caused it remains sufficiently serious to be affecting him now - I hope he was being canny myself.

For me the key to Wimbledon is Nadal, and it's a funny slam for him.  He's very vulnerable in the early tournament to someone who knows his way around a grass Court and has perhaps played a few matches on grass this season when the grass is more slippery, but he's a horrible opponent for the top players as the tournament goes on.  He's probably one of the most at risk of losing in the first week of the top 8; if he gets going well into the second week history shows that he's a horrible opponent for Federer and Murray, but I think Djoko would have him given how close Djoko was to him at RG.

barrystar : yes, Nadal can be vulnerable in the early part of Wimbledon and yes, he can also get much stronger & troublesome as the tourney goes on. But I happen to think that pretty much everyone (with the sole exception of Federer in his glory years) can find the grass very tricky in the first week.

And Wimbledon is certainly not Nadal's 'weakest' Slam. His record there is significantly better than say the USO ......

Wimbledon : 2 titles from 5 Finals from 8 appearances (overall match record 36-6)
US Open :    1 title from 2 Finals from 9 appearances  (       - do-              34-8)

lags72 wrote:barrystar : yes, Nadal can be vulnerable in the early part of Wimbledon and yes, he can also get much stronger & troublesome as the tourney goes on. But I happen to think that pretty much everyone (with the sole exception of Federer in his glory years) can find the grass very tricky in the first week.

And Wimbledon is certainly not Nadal's 'weakest' Slam. His record there is significantly better than say the USO ......

Wimbledon : 2 titles from 5 Finals from 8 appearances (overall match record 36-6)
US Open :    1 title from 2 Finals from 9 appearances  (       - do-              34-8)

Quite so - in recent years Nadal has been remarkably consistent at all the non RG slams with the sole exception of "that" match.  I'd merely say that I would be more surprised if he got knocked out prior to the QF at Aus or US than at Wimbledon (I'd be pretty dame surprised at every event, frankly), but if he makes the QF at all three tournaments I'd expect him to do best at Wimbledon.  Grass is tough for top players because everything can happen quickly and turn it into a crap shoot - even so I think Nadal is under more danger in the early rounds than the other members of the "big 4".  The margins are small, I fully expect Nadal to get into the latter half of the tournament, where I think Djoko has the best chance of beating him of the other big names, but I'd agree that Nadal's showing at Wimbledon demonstrates what a good player he is there.

summerblues wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

summerblues wrote:I am a bit puzzled why people rate Andy so high.

I dunno. Maybe it's his last two performances at Wimbledon held events  

That does not strike me as enough to rate him as #1 favorite.  I suppose it will depend to some extent on how you look at those results.  If you think that those two performances should be viewed as a very good predictor of current grass form, then you may perhaps give Andy a very good chance (though still not quite clear to me whether #1 favorite).  But I tend to view them as more of a reflection of his generally very good form last summer - he went on to win his only slam so far at the USO.  I would not necessarily view them as the indicator of where I would expect him to be in any given year - more an indicator of where he can be in a year when things go his way - i.e., a better than average year.  But why should this year be like that again?

Don't get me wrong, I quite like Andy.  He has mostly been my second favorite among the big four after Federer and I would be happy for him to win, just I do not see him as better than the third favorite.

My defense of Andy is not that he should be the front runner, it's more that the days of him getting metioned as having a chance if the Big 3 don't turn up are now invalid.

Andy sorted that with both his play in the Wimby final and of course then The Olympics. What that did was endear him to the British fans, something that he's always, obviosuly crave.

This has now resulted in an astonshing metomorphosis. Andy, after a layoff, strutting around on the grass as though  he was born to rule

There was a swagger about him, I'd never seen before or since at the Olympic final (those who made out that Fed played bad were been particualrly mean spirited) this swagger is continuing

And it should do - Andy's all round game with it's wicked slice, deceptive drop shots and great return of serve was made for grass

But he has three rivals, who have done far more than him - hence he can never be more than a slight favourite

If your head was in a guillotine and you had to guess the winning player this year, who would not say Djokovic?  Admit it, we all would.

Red wrote:

_homogenised_ wrote:Nadal is nowhere near favourite.  

I have to agree with you on that one actually. 
When was the last time a player lost in R2 and then won the next year?

Stefan Edberg @USO ...

1991 - W       Jim Courier (USA)        5      W 6-2, 6-4, 6-0 

1990 - R128    Alexander Volkov (RUS)   52     L 3-6, 6-7, 2-6

I can dig up other examples if you need.

Federer 2002 & 2003 Wimbledon

Born Slippy wrote:Federer 2002 & 2003 Wimbledon

Agassi @RG 

1999 - W       Andrei Medvedev (UKR)    100    W 1-6, 2-6, 6-4, 6-3, 6-4

1998 - R128    Marat Safin (RUS)        116    L 7-5, 5-7, 2-6, 6-3, 2-6

_homogenised_ wrote:If your head was in a guillotine and you had to guess the winning player this year, who would not say Djokovic?  Admit it, we all would.

I think I'd say Rafa personally. But the four of them are so congested in this slam you could find reasonable arguments for any order of likelihood between those 4. 

Compare that to clay where Rafa has only lost one match, and Novak was seen as his only challenge... And Murray - had he played - is so far behind the other 3 a QF would have been a result. 

That's why this years Wimbledon excites me. It's genuinely the most difficult slam to predict in years.

laverfan wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:Federer 2002 & 2003 Wimbledon

Agassi @RG 

1999 - W       Andrei Medvedev (UKR)    100    W 1-6, 2-6, 6-4, 6-3, 6-4

1998 - R128    Marat Safin (RUS)        116    L 7-5, 5-7, 2-6, 6-3, 2-6

Mark Edmondson @AO...

Dec 1975 - W       John Newcombe (AUS)      N/A    W 6-7, 6-3, 7-6, 6-1

Dec 1974 - R32     John Alexander (AUS)     N/A    L 3-6, 4-6, 6-4, 1-6

Perhaps this sub-topic deserves it's own thread.

_homogenised_ wrote:If your head was in a guillotine and you had to guess the winning player this year, who would not say Djokovic?  Admit it, we all would.

Actually, he's the least favourite of the four for me. Again, as, for me, there's no more than a fag paper between them, this shouldn't come as a surprise - just a feeling. 

I dunno, I just feel he needs to get the wind back in his sails and could have another awesome autumn, but this time stating in August