Miami Masters 27 March 2014

by Jahu Thu Mar 27, 2014 3:36 pm

First topic message reminder :

Dolgo up and down with Berdy, breaks him, then loses his serve.

Come on Dolgo, spit him like a cheap czech lager Whistle

by sirfredperry Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:30 am

So, who will win today ? It's a tough one to call. One of the few times when you can genuinely make a good case out for either player triumphing.
May be Djoko's last chance to beat Rafa for a while. Every year when we get to the European clay court season I expect Rafa to have trouble defending his points from the previous year and every year he seems to have no trouble at all.
Also, the chasing pack (actually it's just Djoko) cannot rely on Rafa going out in the first round at Wimbledon again.

by HM Murdock Sun Mar 30, 2014 7:37 am

I'd probably have Rafa as marginal favourite today. Not much in it, a Novak win wouldn't be a shock at all, but I think Rafa showed a bit more bite in his early rounds.

The big factor is how each serves. Both have been crushing any 2nd serves they've faced this week.

by Silver Sun Mar 30, 2014 7:54 am

It's a pick'em for me. Court marginally favours Novak, tournament form goes slightly in Rafa's direction. Could go either way! Here's hoping for another good match between them.

(Happy Mothers Day to any Mums out there, too)

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 8:08 am

I'll say Djokovic in straight sets. He's better than Nadal on a hard court and is carrying momentum from that IW triumph. The walkovers will be a help rather than a hindrance because it's not as if he's short of match practice.

by Jahu Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:44 pm

I hope Nadal wins, (thought he's the main culprit for ruining tennis and turning it into a 5 meters from baseline sport, Djoko is his best student) Whistle

by CaledonianCraig Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:48 pm

I think it will come down to who plays the big points best. It could go either way really but I have a sneaky feeling Djokovic will prevail.

by **laverfan** Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:21 pm

socal1976 wrote:
laverfan wrote:Equating slam finals to MS 1000s is not very prudent. As someone has stated already, slams are a different "animal". I think Djokovic can win Miami and join Federer in the double-peat IW/Miami ranks, if he can stop himself from second-guessing while serving for it.

I disagree, look at the list of the slam winners the last few years and the list of masters winners and you will find a lot of the sames names. There is only one player who has won more than one slam and not also won masters events. And there are very few players who regularly win masters and don't win slams. There is a very direct correlation between being good enough to win a masters and good enough to win a slam. If anything you don't get as easy early round matches in a slam as you do in a Masters event where from the get go you are playing the top levels of the tour. If you can beat a player over 3 you can beat him over 5 unless you have a fitness problem that you either can't or won't address.

The way the current Top 4 have dominated last few years, this is very true. I would consider this selective data picking.

Rios and Davydenko are exceptions, as is Nalbandian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_Masters_Series_records_and_statistics#Records_and_trivia

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:27 pm

I didn't realise Sampras only won 11 Masters titles. That's pretty "meh" for a man of his standing in the game.

by socal1976 Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:28 pm

laverfan wrote:
socal1976 wrote:
laverfan wrote:Equating slam finals to MS 1000s is not very prudent. As someone has stated already, slams are a different "animal". I think Djokovic can win Miami and join Federer in the double-peat IW/Miami ranks, if he can stop himself from second-guessing while serving for it.

I disagree, look at the list of the slam winners the last few years and the list of masters winners and you will find a lot of the sames names. There is only one player who has won more than one slam and not also won masters events. And there are very few players who regularly win masters and don't win slams. There is a very direct correlation between being good enough to win a masters and good enough to win a slam. If anything you don't get as easy early round matches in a slam as you do in a Masters event where from the get go you are playing the top levels of the tour. If you can beat a player over 3 you can beat him over 5 unless you have a fitness problem that you either can't or won't address.

The way the current Top 4 have dominated last few years, this is very true. I would consider this selective data picking.

Rios and Davydenko are exceptions, as is Nalbandian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennis_Masters_Series_records_and_statistics#Records_and_trivia

Every rule has its exceptions. As I said there is a strong correlation. If you look at players who have won a few masters most of them are slam winners as well. As I said if you can beat a player in 3 you can beat him in 5 sets as long as you don't have a fitness problem. Nalbandian clearly fits into this category after 3 sets he would invariably start thinking about which all you can eat buffet he would be visiting and his knees would start to quiver. This trend existed long before the big 4 dominance.

by socal1976 Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:36 pm

I think it really is as close to 50/50 as we can get in this match. It really depends on how well Novak starts and maintains his focus. He simply can't afford to go off the reservation mentally in a match against Nadal because he will deliver the knockout punch. If Novak starts well and focuses throughout the match then I think he should win as he is better on this surface. That being said Nadal will have some added motivation as he has been close but never won this tournament.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:51 pm

By the end of today, Nadal and Djokovic would have completed the duopoly... owning all nine Masters and the WTF. Boom.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:05 pm

The Special Juan wrote:I didn't realise Sampras only won 11 Masters titles. That's pretty "meh" for a man of his standing in the game.

He didn't really care about the Masters the way he did about slams - to him they were just warm up events, to tune up for the real deal.

by socal1976 Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:08 pm

Yeah i read that stat yesterday and it is pretty amazing when you think about it. A big gap exists between the top two and everyone else. This is why I think this match is significant. More so for psychology going into the clay court season. I think Rafa will be pumped and will try to blunt Djokovic's momentum going into the clay court swing. He would much rather have a less confident Novak in the clay court swing. If Novak wins the confidence will be flowing for him and we know how dangerous he can be then.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:12 pm

I've never known whether to be amazed, or bemused at Sampras' contempt at anything not a Slam.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:20 pm

kingraf wrote:I've never known whether to be amazed, or bemused at Sampras' contempt at anything not a Slam.

The game has changed kr - once one or two top players start concentrating on the Masters (either through wanting the ranking points, the increased marketing/pressure from sponsors, increased visibility on TV, or just sheer competitiveness) the other top players follow suit. It's all part of the increased professionalism and commercialisation of the sport. Sampras concentrated on what mattered back then - slams, and little else, defined a great player.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:29 pm

I get that, but Emerson didn't even know he held the Slam record, while Borg simply took off two slams shy of it (or tied with Laver, if we assume he also didn't know Emerson had the record). Then there is the dearth of players who played in the Australian Open... Just seems that while slams were obviously the holy grail (uh...), they weren't quite the numerical obsession painted out. Think Connors snubbing Garros, because they snubbed him. Hardly the actions of a generation focused on one thing and one thing only.

by lags72 Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:30 pm

If it's as tight as the IW Final, tonight should be a cracker (exact same number of games won by Novak & Fed, points total of 197 split 99 to 98 and Novak taking it on the TB)

Re the Sampras Slam v Masters topic ..... I think the very fact that we can all reel off the total Slam titles won not just by Sampras but by Borg, Mac, Lendl, Connors, Agassi etc etc (but NOT their respective Masters tally) says a lot about how Slam performance will - ultimately - always be the most significant retrospective defining factor of a career.

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:43 pm

Good luck Nole

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:50 pm

Rafa missing out on a an early break

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:54 pm

kingraf wrote:I get that, but Emerson didn't even know he held the Slam record, while Borg simply took off two slams shy of it (or tied with Laver, if we assume he also didn't know Emerson had the record). Then there is the dearth of players who played in the Australian Open... Just seems that while slams were obviously the holy grail (uh...), they weren't quite the numerical obsession painted out. Think Connors snubbing Garros, because they snubbed him. Hardly the actions of a generation focused on one thing and one thing only.

It wasn't a numerical obsession. or an obsession with records, it was about winning the biggest tournaments - the ones that really mattered. I don't think Borg and Connors were concerned with numbers. The AO was simply too far away and not considered very important back then - something that the organisers and the tour spent a lot of time, money and effort addressing later on.
And you can't equate he Connors/Borg generation with the Sampras one - too much had changed in the meantime. The same way you can't equate the Sampras generation with the current one - it's a totally different game these days, at the pro level.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:54 pm

Rafa holds to love. ND 1*-1 RN

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:56 pm

RN 1*-2 ND comfy hold

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:58 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:I didn't realise Sampras only won 11 Masters titles. That's pretty "meh" for a man of his standing in the game.

He didn't really care about the Masters the way he did about slams - to him they were just warm up events, to tune up for the real deal.

I didn't know that but it's a poor attitude to have. You'd never see that nowadays (at least not from Djokovic and Nadal). It's amazing to see how much tennis has changed over the years with regards to players' attitudes towards tournaments.

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:00 pm

Is this the only thing missing from Nadal's trophy cabinet?

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:02 pm

Nadals forehand is loaded today.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:07 pm

The Special Juan wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:I didn't realise Sampras only won 11 Masters titles. That's pretty "meh" for a man of his standing in the game.

He didn't really care about the Masters the way he did about slams - to him they were just warm up events, to tune up for the real deal.

I didn't know that but it's a poor attitude to have. You'd never see that nowadays (at least not from Djokovic and Nadal). It's amazing to see how much tennis has changed over the years with regards to players' attitudes towards tournaments.

It wasn't considered a poor attitude at the time - it was quite admired. He peaked for the big events and everyone marvelled at it. Too much money involved and global coverage to get away with it nowadays.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:09 pm

Djokovic breaks... Gawddammit!

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:14 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:I didn't realise Sampras only won 11 Masters titles. That's pretty "meh" for a man of his standing in the game.

He didn't really care about the Masters the way he did about slams - to him they were just warm up events, to tune up for the real deal.

I didn't know that but it's a poor attitude to have. You'd never see that nowadays (at least not from Djokovic and Nadal). It's amazing to see how much tennis has changed over the years with regards to players' attitudes towards tournaments.

It wasn't considered a poor attitude at the time - it was quite admired. He peaked for the big events and everyone marvelled at it. Too much money involved and global coverage to get away with it nowadays.

Peaking at the right time is something few ever get right consistently - great if you can get it right like Sampras but you look foolish otherwise. To add to your last sentence, the sponsors wouldn't have it nowadays either. As I said, attitudes have changed so much.

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:15 pm

The Special Juan wrote:I didn't know that but it's a poor attitude to have.

Why?

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:20 pm

summerblues wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:I didn't know that but it's a poor attitude to have.
Why?

I appreciate things were different back then to now so looking at it from nowadays perspective only, I feel that professional athletes should give 100% in everything they enter, otherwise what's the point of entering in the first place? Then again, I am old fashioned!!

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:22 pm

Nice hold, good set from Nole, let's have one more like it.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:25 pm

Following Djokovic's pretty routine first set win, I just put £40 on Rafa at 11/2... Let's go!

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:25 pm

kingraf wrote:Following Djokovic's pretty routine first set win, I just put £40 on Rafa at 11/2... Let's go!

I hope that's your money down the drain.

by Born Slippy Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:26 pm

Agassi didnt even play the Australian until he was 25. Times change which makes it very difficult to compare the records of older players to those of today. Its only really since the late 90s that tennis has stayed fairly static.

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:28 pm

Born Slippy wrote:Agassi didnt even play the Australian until he was 25. Times change which makes it very difficult to compare the records of older players to those of today. Its only really since the late 90s that tennis has stayed fairly static.

Even then, quite a lot of things changed - certainly playing conditions if nothing else. Much easier to do RG/Wimb double for example.

by Jahu Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:28 pm

Come on Nadal wake the h3ll up!!!!

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:31 pm

Nole overhead special.

by Jahu Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:31 pm

Djoko starting to melt, come on Nadal deck himmmm

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:31 pm

Oh carp... Off to bed then... Congratulations to Nole fans. and I suppose being the only Rafa fan left, I'll send commiserations to myself.

by Born Slippy Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:32 pm

summerblues wrote:
Born Slippy wrote:Agassi didnt even play the Australian until he was 25. Times change which makes it very difficult to compare the records of older players to those of today. Its only really since the late 90s that tennis has stayed fairly static.
Even then, quite a lot of things changed - certainly playing conditions if nothing else. Much easier to do RG/Wimb double for example.

I was more referring to attitudes and status of events. I guess the only real change has been the massively enhanced status of the Olympics and probably a renewed commitment to the WTF.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:37 pm

kingraf wrote:Following Djokovic's pretty routine first set win, I just put £40 on Rafa at 11/2... Let's go!

Brave, considering Rafa hasn't beaten Djoko after losing the first set since 2009.

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:42 pm

Born Slippy wrote:massively enhanced status of the Olympics

Especially in UK I imagine Smile

Born Slippy wrote:and probably a renewed commitment to the WTF.

WTF has always been fairly high on the list - I would perhaps even say that more so in the Lendl/Becker/McEnroe days than now. But I do not think it ever really faded. Again, perhaps from the UK perspective - with WTF in London - it may look like the interest has been renewed, but I do not think it is a global feel.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:46 pm

Been incredibly hot at the bookie recently, Julius - thought twas worth a go. Still though - nothing tops the £100 I've most likely thrown away on Arsenal winning the EPL at 8/1... smh

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:55 pm

This is supreme tennis from Djokovic. Every part of his game looks to be at at least 90% today and he's making Nadal look ordinary. Credit to Rafa though, he's done very well to hang with Djokovic for a lot of this match.

by carrieg4 Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:56 pm

summerblues wrote:
Born Slippy wrote:massively enhanced status of the Olympics
Especially in UK I imagine

I think a lot of it is to do with obtaining the 'golden slam'. Once more players got the career slam they kind of upped the ante and wanted a more unique claim. I think that is behind Federers desire to win it, he doesn't want anyone else holding a tennis record that he doesn't.

Don't think it will help Murray though, I can see him bagging an Aussie open but RG ...........yeah.

by carrieg4 Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:59 pm

Not watching the match. Pundits speculating that Nadal has a back problem?? How does it look?

by The Special Juan Sun Mar 30, 2014 4:03 pm

carrieg4 wrote:Not watching the match. Pundits speculating that Nadal has a back problem?? How does it look?

He's looked a bit flat but I've not seen any sign of any injury problem at all.

by kingraf Sun Mar 30, 2014 4:05 pm

He's been a bit flat, but it's been more the big points, rather than anything else
0/1 break points first set, missed an opportunity to break back immediately at 0-30 in the second. Nole has shown no such reservations

by CaledonianCraig Sun Mar 30, 2014 4:08 pm

What a superb display by Djokovic to win 6-3 6-3. He never gave Nadal a look in once he got ahead. I wonder if HM Murdoch feels a bit more positive about the future now?

by summerblues Sun Mar 30, 2014 4:08 pm

Yes!

Pretty good considering the man is a long shot to ever win another slam.

Let's have more of this during the clay court season.

by Sponsored content