Wilander: Fed and Murray favorites for W

https://lovesetmatch.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/mats-wilander-predicts-murray-or-federer-for-wimbledon/

In tennis, as much as in any sport, the past is prologue. Something wonderful often happens to a player returning to the scene of past success, something almost magical that can elevate their game and salvage a lackluster year.

That’s why—although as I set these thoughts down, the two players off to the best start in 2013 are Novak Djokovic and Rafael Nadal—I see Roger Federer and Andy Murray as the favorites to hoist the Wimbledon trophy.

That might seem an awfully bold prediction: In the first four months of the year, Djokovic won the Australian Open, Dubai and Monte Carlo, and led Serbia to two triumphant Davis Cup weekends, while Nadal returned from a seven-month injury layoff and picked up right where he left off last spring, making the finals of his first seven tournaments back and winning Indian Wells, Barcelona and Madrid.

In contrast, by the high standards of the Big Four, Federer and Murray have had disappointing starts. Yes, Murray reached the Australian Open final and won the Miami Masters, but he seems to be backsliding from, rather than building on, his Olympic and US Open titles last summer. And Federer has yet to reach a final in 2013, something that hasn’t been true at this point in the season for more than a decade.

Nevertheless, regardless of what happens at Roland Garros (in last month’s column, I picked Djokovic as the favorite), when all eyes turn to Wimbledon, you can throw all that recent history out the window. To my mind, Federer and Murray—who competed against each other last year in the finals of both Wimbledon and the Olympics, which was held at Wimbledon (Federer won the former; Murray the latter)—are the ones to watch for the following three reasons:

1) Both players can claim a home-court advantage. For Murray, the advantage is literal: As a Scot, he’s the great local hope who can be assured the cheering fans, both inside the Centre Court arena and outside on Henman Hill, as well as the lion’s share of London’s newspaper headlines. That pressure
There’s nothing like walking onto a court feeling as if it’s your own backyard, and Murray and Federer are the only two players who can lay claim to that sentiment.

would crush most mere mortals, but Murray insists that he thrives on it, and at this point we can take him at his word. He made the finals last year and the semifinals each of the three years prior to that. He also, significantly, beat Federer in the Olympic final on Centre Court in 2012, making him a sort of co-defending champion this summer. Federer—the seven-time and defending champion, not to mention Olympic runner-up—has the next-best thing to a home-court advantage: Wimbledon feels like home to him, just as it did to Pete Sampras before him and to Boris Becker before Sampras. And while the local fans have loyalty to Murray, they have a palpable level of affection for Federer, who has shown grit and class here for a generation. There’s nothing like walking onto a court feeling as if it’s your own backyard, and these are the only two players who can lay claim to that sentiment.

2) Their games are best suited to grass. Whereas Djokovic and Nadal power their way out of trouble, or use their movement to stay in points, Federer and Murray stay alive with finesse and guile, and that’s a key to success on grass. Both players have all-important slice backhands, and Murray in particular has the ability to deprive his opponents of an opportunity to attack by keeping the ball frustratingly out of their strike zone. Federer and Murray also have the textbook technique that enables them to react to bad bounces, even if it doesn’t let them tee off on ground strokes as big as certain other players can. In Federer’s case, his reliably huge serve, particularly at clutch moments, is another especially huge asset on grass. Lastly, if Federer and Murray go out of Roland Garros earlier than Djokovic and Nadal do (as I expect will be the case), they’ll benefit from the ultimate silver lining: a few extra days of preparation on grass, which matters because the grass-court season is almost comically short.

3) Confidence is a two-way street. Merely being at Wimbledon will imbue both Federer and Murray with a confidence that ought to help them in two ways: They should feel and play their best at the All England Club, while their opponents will most likely feel and play less well against them. Not only doesn’t the ball sit up on grass for bashers such as Tomás Berdych and Juan Martín del Potro to take huge cuts at it, but those players will come onto the court against Federer or Murray knowing that these guys feel superior there, have the better game for the surface and have the support of the crowd. Those are three huge variables going into any match, so much so that even somebody who might beat Murray or Federer on the clay of Roland Garros will feel they’re at a disadvantage if they meet again at Wimbledon just a few weeks later.

Add up all of this and it actually seems a rather safe bet that Federer and Murray have much to look forward to at Wimbledon, and that’s something I expect to be true for the rest of their careers, regardless of how they fare in the early months of this, or any, year. •

Taken from Tennis 15-30 nd the new issue is here: http://tennis15-30.com/issues/2013/06/15/

Hmmm so Federer is the favourite then? BB won't like that. 

It would seem this article was written some time ago pre-Murray's injury so am presuming Wilander will have scaled back his expectations on that front. 

Phew the pressure is released. 

Nothing gets printed nowadays unless it's 'controversial'. More of the same here.

Well that's them both jinxed then!!!

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hmmm so Federer is the favourite then? BB won't like that. 

It would seem this article was written some time ago pre-Murray's injury so am presuming Wilander will have scaled back his expectations on that front. 

Phew the pressure is released. 

Wilander is irrelevant, I'll make my own mind up based on facts.

Now the draw's in obviously the list of favourites goes 1. Djokovic. 2. Murray 3. Fed/Nadal

Why does an ex-player know any better what might happen than any of us?
This is Mystic Meg stuff...

He doesn't.

But when a newspaper/media website/tv station has the choice of giving a platform and a voice to either a former multi-Slammer and World No. 1 OR the likes of us Joe Bloggs ...........

I guess Wilander also has the privilege of talking to the top contenders face to face and looking into the whites of their eyes. BUT, given how good the pros are at hiding their real feelings and mood (even when speaking to another pro), that could actually be of questionable benefit when it comes to the prediction game.

The thing I love about Max is that by tomorrow.. or at the latest the day after... he will have changed his opinion.. especially with the help of the stupid Croft woman

Mats generally talks complete rubbish.

Indeed. In 2009 he wrote Federer off, said he had no cojones.
Boy was he wrong.

Well you're spot on there lydian !

A lot of what Wilander says is of course complete tosh, although I find it hard to actively dislike the guy. There's something about his confident-sounding delivery and his accent (albeit near-perfect English in fairness) that gives him just a little more credibility. But..... at the end of the day, he is no more accurate or perceptive than any of the other pundits - and, very often, even less so.

Wilander does talk a lot of sense in a way. He follows these guys round the world the whole year so he knows a thing or two. What I like about him is he tells it as it is. Others sometimes are too diplomatic to say someone has made a mess of a match or screwed up big time but Wilander just  says it no matter who it is.

I remember in Mats Point after the FO last year, he did a Wimbledon special. He looked at everyone and said the grass court season belongs to Federer/Murray.

He was very right as Fed/Murray picked up all the big prizes on the grass last year barring Queens for Murray and Fed's loss to Haas in Halle. He didn't focus on Djoko/Nadal as contenders and I was surprised...proved me wrong.

Mind you this year I think He's going out on a limb with putting Fed as a favourite...

I'm firmly in the Wilander talks a load of tosh camp and he talks too much. Far too much.

He's a major bandwagoner.

I always would have taken this report with a massive pinch of salt as it was obviously written around six weeks ago. So much has gone under the bridge since then and the draw today also obviously changes things. It is only now really that we can truly assess each players chances.

I agree 100% with Wilander. Murray and Federer are the two best grass court players - but only if they are at their best

Unfortunately their 'non-best' is far worse than Novak or Rafa's

Rafa is a better grass courter than Murray.

emancipator wrote:Rafa is a better grass courter than Murray.

If you mean on the turgid stuff that resulted in a memorable line from one of the greats from the past; "It's a green version of RG" (I paraphrase) then I might agree

If you mean under the slightly faster conditions (which is why Rosol caused him an issue) of last year, then I disagree

Let's remember that since 2011, Rafa has faced one of his three rivals once and lost

What we do know is that Rafa was "a better grass courter than Murray", whether he still is, who knows?

I'm not sure about that BB...if Nadal plays 100% he's not bad on the turf either...remember this is the clay kid who got to Wimb Jnr semis just turned 16yo in 2002 when it was quicker. He's good on grass. Very good.
Against Murray we just don't know...Nadal does things to Murray's game the others don't.
Banbrotam...to be fair Rosol would have caused ANYONE an issue last year, it was one of those perfect matches a lower player gets once in a lifetime. If you remember he was hitting winners and aces from all over the place, it didn't matter who was down the other end and he served it out like he was still in practice. Surreal match.

And my point is we don't know. There are two many question marks against both, given all that has happened in the last two years.

For me Rafa has the biggest question mark. We saw the other three up the quality of the SF's and Finals last year of the two events - we need to see it from Rafa

And even then, I think it will be about the day and actually I can't wait to see a match up between these two, simply because for me Murray has can now keep Rafa more 'honest' with his better forehand. Is it enough? That's the sweet thing about a match - to repeat and agree with you, we just don't know

I just think it's lazy of people to think that it will be 'normal service resumed' and Rafa sweeps all before them

To be fair Murray is in ominous form

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TEWAyUiB808#at=12

I'm hoping he has better control over the next two weeks and a bit!!

banbrotam wrote:I agree 100% with Wilander. Murray and Federer are the two best grass court players - but only if they are at their best

Unfortunately their 'non-best' is far worse than Novak or Rafa's

Thats the point Wilander failed to analyse:picard:, did he take into account Fed's and Murray's form? but boy oh boy everybody have the right to dream but to see it published in holy media is senseless.