Australian Open Day 10-14 - Djokurray! And others! :P

First topic message reminder :

Well some of you hardcore mob will no doubt be up watching the first round matches and even up first thing if your boarding the Fed Express. I will be utilising the power of Sky+!

So we have Federer, Nadal, Murray, Berdych, Gulbis and Dimitov all in action on the men's side.

On the ladies we have Halep, Sharapova, Bouchard, Ivanovic, Kerber and young gun Bencic.

Should be an action packed day.

Dimi has now played two very close matches in slams against Nole and Andy playing near their best (Wimby last year against Nole and today) but he still came up on the losing end both times.

I wonder if he will take it as encouragement that he is not too far from actually winning one of them, or whether he will get down on himself seeing that even after all the effort he has been putting in, he still cannot seem to make it.

summerblues wrote:Dimi has now played two very close matches in slams against Nole and Andy playing near their best (Wimby last year against Nole and today) but he still came up on the losing end both times.

I wonder if he will take it as encouragement that he is not too far from actually winning one of them, or whether he will get down on himself seeing that even after all the effort he has been putting in, he still cannot seem to make it.

His time will come of that I am sure. The current top dogs won't be around forever and he will be in prime position for slam wins. I would be more surprised if he never won a slam than if he does.

summerblues wrote:Dimi has now played two very close matches in slams against Nole and Andy playing near their best (Wimby last year against Nole and today) but he still came up on the losing end both times.

I wonder if he will take it as encouragement that he is not too far from actually winning one of them, or whether he will get down on himself seeing that even after all the effort he has been putting in, he still cannot seem to make it.

The problem I saw with Dimi today was he went all guns blazing in that first set. It was only Andy's lapse in the second that allowed the contest to become a match.

Dimi needs to work on his concentration in these big matches. Physically he can go the distance, just think some of his shot selection has a lot to be desired. The FH and BH I don't feel is quite up there. You wonder if Rasheed is the man to take him forward.

I just think his shot selection is poor in important moments. Does he have the shots? Yes he does but it is the ability to think clearly in the pressure moments that really separates the likes of nadal, federer, djokovic and Murray. They are less inclined to panic and go for a low percentage shot. They also have the ability to win ugly and when not at their best.

Dimitrov and the other top players yet to win a slam need these harsh lessons in order to improve. For this reason I think nishikori is best equipped, he doesn't really panic but needs to build his fitness and maybe get more free points off his serve.

Dimitrov will improve further but it will come down to the all important what matters between the ears next time the pressure is on. Murray showed that mettle today

With a few more tough matches under his belt Murray would have won that in 3. Dimi, for me, is still miles off being a slam winner. Still, a good workout for Andy. Stepping it up in time to avoid the extra physical effort of a 5th could be big.

slashermcguirk wrote:I just think his shot selection is poor in important moments. Does he have the shots? Yes he does but it is the ability to think clearly in the pressure moments that really separates the likes of nadal, federer, djokovic and Murray. They are less inclined to panic and go for a low percentage shot. They also have the ability to win ugly and when not at their best.

Dimitrov and the other top players yet to win a slam need these harsh lessons in order to improve. For this reason I think nishikori is best equipped, he doesn't really panic but needs to build his fitness and maybe get more free points off his serve.

Dimitrov will improve further but it will come down to the all important what matters between the ears next time the pressure is on. Murray showed that mettle today

The way I see it is that at most five years down the line Djokovic, Nadal, Federer, Murray and a lot more of the current top ten will have either hung up their racquet or will be in steep decline. Dimi at that time will be 28 and in his prime and very well positioned to mop up at least one slam surely?

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Dimi needs to work on his concentration in these big matches. Physically he can go the distance, just think some of his shot selection has a lot to be desired. The FH and BH I don't feel is quite up there. You wonder if Rasheed is the man to take him forward.

I am very glad to see Stephane Vivier is part of Dimi's team.

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2014/09/federers-physio-leaves-join-dimitrov/52898/#.VMUVK0IdJFI

Can't believe Dimi didn't force a fifth. Hung tough, big time for the first three sets, but lost the only set he was clearly the better player from set point at 5-2*. Story of his career, I suppose. I hope he wins a slam, because I really do like Dimi, but this and the defeat against Djokovic do point to mental frailties he hasn't completely banished.

I'm still going with him ending up a multi slam winner, but Kyrgios seems all on his own in terms of mental fortitude of the younger guys, which is funny because he looks like he's imploding the entire match. At a guess I'd say...

Kyrgios - > 4 slams
Dimi - 1-3 slams
Raonic - 2+
Nishi - 1 slam

In terms of who I want to win from here
Nadal
Wawrinka
Berdych
Kyrgios
Raonic
Gilles Muller



just saw CC's post. Yeah, assuming the 1994-2000 generation doesn't produce super athletes, he has to be able to sneak one somewhere!!

But surely CC within five years, hopefully and I do say hopefully, there will be others younger players coming through the ranks that might pour cold water on those aspirations. Im not saying he couldn't but frankly Ive never been totally convinced his prospects are as good as has been projected to date.

kingraf wrote:Can't believe Dimi didn't force a fifth. Hung tough, big time for the first three sets, but lost the only set he was clearly the better player from set point at 5-2*. Story of his career, I suppose. I hope he wins a slam, because I really do like Dimi, but this and the defeat against Djokovic do point to mental frailties he hasn't completely banished.

Sorry but I need to point out that Murray should have won the second set (he had all the chances and made all the running) so if you say Dimi should have won the fourth then Murray should have won the second so it would still have been over in four.

I agree CC that he should win once the others move aside and he gets more experience.

I think nishikori will win the most of the younger guys, dimi might get 1-2 slams. Not sure about kyrgios. I know a lot of people here don't like berdych but I hope he wins one. Very few people have slam wins over federer (Wimbledon and us open), Murray (French open), djokovic (Wimbledon). He is consistently up there, though his game doesn't vary much he is an amazing ball striker. I think he is due a win but Novak and rafa are huge obstacles for him

Haddie-nuff wrote:But surely CC within five years, hopefully and I do say hopefully, there will be others younger players coming through the ranks that might pour cold water on those aspirations.  Im not saying he couldn't but frankly Ive never been totally convinced his prospects are as good as has been projected to date.

Of course you will have another generation by then but they will need to serve their apprenticeship as well if you see what I mean. Players nowadays are peaking later so it will theoretically mean that new generation won't quite be ready in five years time to win slams in my opinion (if they are, say 16 or 17 at the moment).

I also hope ferrer wins one, again not very exciting but he is an amazing competitor who puts everything on the line and keeps coming back for more. You wouldn't begrudge ferrer nicking a slam

I don't know what you're disagreeing with, CC? I haven't awarded him any sets... I've merely said he did well to hang in sets one, two and three... but then failed to close the show in the only set he was the better player. It's a pattern similar to his match against Djokovic, where again he should have taken the fourth, but didn't (although it wasn't a collapse in any way as spectacular as this one). This is commentary on his mentality, not the match. The match serves as mere backdrop.

slashermcguirk wrote:I also hope ferrer wins one, again not very exciting but he is an amazing competitor who puts everything on the line and keeps coming back for more. You wouldn't begrudge ferrer nicking a slam

That would be really nice for the little man. He is the same age a Federer/Lopez/Hewitt though.

kingraf wrote:I don't know what you're disagreeing with, CC? I haven't awarded him any sets... I've merely said he did well to hang in sets one, two and three... but then failed to close the show in the only set he was the better player. It's a pattern similar to his match against Djokovic, where again he should have taken the fourth, but didn't (although it wasn't a collapse in any way as spectacular as this one). This is commentary on his mentality, not the match. The match serves as mere backdrop.

Ah right, apologies.

I was impressed with his fitness levels and don't think that let him down so that is a plus point. If Murray had dipped in form to degrees he used to he could have lost the match but we saw a steelier performance from him. True Dimi buckled at the business end of the fourth set but was it really a bad buckle or Murray raising his level to a level Dimi couldn't live with?

laverfan wrote:

slashermcguirk wrote:I also hope ferrer wins one, again not very exciting but he is an amazing competitor who puts everything on the line and keeps coming back for more. You wouldn't begrudge ferrer nicking a slam

That would be really nice for the little man. He is the same age a Federer/Lopez/Hewitt though.

Nothing would give me greater pleasure that seeing this incredible man pick up some giant silverware. It would be no more than he deserved.

I really really wish people would ignore Gerry. I have him on foe, but whenever someone replies to him his posts come up with the replies. Please people, for my sanity?

Anyway, didn't watch Murray today as I was in the train, but overall a four sets win vs Dimitrov is a good win, surely? Numbers seem good, BP conversion a bit average I guess and a shame about the second set, but not really a long match by Murray's standards.

Kyrgios apparently looked knackered by the end of today, and has now played back to back five setters, so I can see Murray dealing with him fairl comfortably. Murray will return enough of Kyrgios's serves, make him play the extra shot, and Kyrgios will get frustrated.

Berdych-Nadal should, on paper, be straightforward for Nadal. It's a match-up which favours him massively, and Berdych seems to not really believe he can beat Nadal anyway. Of course, this does come with the caveat that it's not the Nadal who nearly crashed out a couple of rounds ago who turns up, but his last two matches suggest that on paper he's looking fine.

Nishikori-Ferrer tomorrow, could be a looooooooooooong one that.

MFC - it was a good win. Fairly comfortably his best slam performance since the 2013 Wimbledon final. He moved absolutely tremendously. As agile as he's moved in years. his attitude was great, and he hit with decent depth and quality on both wings.

He had a couple of lapses, as anyone would in a long match against a good player, but he looked great overall. I don't think he'll win this tournament, but I have more confidence than I've had in ages that he's right back in the mix.

My only moan is that he couldn't close out the second set. Apart from that it was much as Danny said. He looked really pumped up for it which seemed to be absent last year.

Looking to tonight.

Watching Ferrer/Nishkori will no doubt leave me feeling out of breath!

Be surprised if Djokovic and Wawrinka are taken to 4 sets.

Can Lopez hit through Raonic?

Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

kingraf wrote:Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

I wouldn't worry so much as Dimi did the same in second set when Murray should have wrapped it up. I think same thing happened in both instances. One player raised their game whilst was a slight dip in others play. It happens and on these occasions it proved costly.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Looking to tonight.

Watching Ferrer/Nishkori will no doubt leave me feeling out of breath!

Be surprised if Djokovic and Wawrinka are taken to 4 sets.

Can Lopez hit through Raonic?

If Nishikori comes through in anything less than five sets then he'll have done well. Still think he will just edge it.

Novak has been the most impressive player in the tournament so far and Gilles Muller will be no match. Stan has looked good as well and take him to win in three. As for Raonic/Lopez I hope Lopez can win but I don't think so - Raonic in four sets perhaps.

Predictions for tonight then:

Nishi/Ferrer to go on for a while, anything less than five sets would surprise me, straight sets would shock me. Lots of breaks of serve.

Raonic-Lopez to yield at least one TB, probably two or more. Raonic to come through, three or four sets.

Djokovic-Muller might be close for a set, Muller might even nick the first, but then it's one-way traffc. Djokovic a comfortable winner.

Stan to ease through in three or four.

Thanks to CC and Danny for comments on Murray, watched some highlights, looked decent. Certainly movement looked beautiful, which is a good sign.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Looking to tonight.

Watching Ferrer/Nishkori will no doubt leave me feeling out of breath!

Be surprised if Djokovic and Wawrinka are taken to 4 sets.

Can Lopez hit through Raonic?

If Nishikori comes through in anything less than five sets then he'll have done well. Still think he will just edge it.

Novak has been the most impressive player in the tournament so far and Gilles Muller will be no match. Stan has looked good as well and take him to win in three. As for Raonic/Lopez I hope Lopez can win but I don't think so - Raonic in four sets perhaps.

It largely depends on what Feli comes out on court. On his day he can be a tough opponent.. He certainly has more mobility than Raonic.. He has an awesome back hand, and a pretty good serve of his own.. but..yeh but !!

Certainly he is ahead on charisma

kingraf wrote:Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

I don't think that really does justice to the quality of Andy's play at the end of that set. He barely put a foot wrong and took the match out of Dimitrov's hand. It was similar in the first set, from a break down Andy played brilliantly. A level we've not seen from him in 18 months.

I've seen comebacks where the ascendancy has been gifted to a player, but this wasn't one of them. He was outplayed in those spells.

Danny_1982 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

I don't think that really does justice to the quality of Andy's play at the end of that set. He barely put a foot wrong and took the match out of Dimitrov's hand. It was similar in the first set, from a break down Andy played brilliantly. A level we've not seen from him in 18 months.

I've seen comebacks where the ascendancy has been gifted to a player, but this wasn't one of them. He was outplayed in those spells.

Basically, that is what I said. Murray was ripping some superb shots at that time.

Danny_1982 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

I don't think that really does justice to the quality of Andy's play at the end of that set. He barely put a foot wrong and took the match out of Dimitrov's hand. It was similar in the first set, from a break down Andy played brilliantly. A level we've not seen from him in 18 months.

I've seen comebacks where the ascendancy has been gifted to a player, but this wasn't one of them. He was outplayed in those spells.

The first set was classic siege mindset.

Seen it from opponents against Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where the belief is the blast them from the court. In a BO5 have often is that successful? You can literally count on one hand the times it has been sustained and come off.

The thing with Andy in that first set was that he withstood it. Some of his CCFH were the best I have seen from him. Contained some real weight and depth. Not so much pace, but he found the range he needed.

If Andy utilised the DTLBH, with the rest of his repertoire then he certainly becomes a contender at Slams again.

For me it was Andy's best match since the semi at Wimbledon against JJ and even then I'm not sure - could have been his best for years

And he is once again a slam contender. I think we need to sometimes reflect on the past and remember he won Wimby with back troubles (which had started at the back end of 2012) and if he's now over them, it's natural that he'd possibly be better

The only argument would be have the others got better and only Stan and Kei, since his last slam, have.

I'm actually surprised how may people are surprised that Murray can play like he did

Let's take one step at a time banbrotam though. I will just enjoy seeing Andy back to a semblance of form and pumped up like he was against Dimi. I, like Danny, feel he won't win this slam but he is putting himself back in the frame again.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Yes, Murray did raise his level. But from 5-2, with a set point, it takes a monumental effort to lose the set without making a tie break. That I suppose is the disappointment. 5-2* is only a one break advantage, so it's not a crime to lose it, but to seem so incapable of stemming the tide once it had risen was disappointing.

I don't think that really does justice to the quality of Andy's play at the end of that set. He barely put a foot wrong and took the match out of Dimitrov's hand. It was similar in the first set, from a break down Andy played brilliantly. A level we've not seen from him in 18 months.

I've seen comebacks where the ascendancy has been gifted to a player, but this wasn't one of them. He was outplayed in those spells.

The first set was classic siege mindset.

Seen it from opponents against Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where the belief is the blast them from the court. In a BO5 have often is that successful? You can literally count on one hand the times it has been sustained and come off.

The thing with Andy in that first set was that he withstood it. Some of his CCFH were the best I have seen from him. Contained some real weight and depth. Not so much pace, but he found the range he needed.

If Andy utilised the DTLBH, with the rest of his repertoire then he certainly becomes a contender at Slams again.

and two of those on the one hand would be Soderling at the FO

Rosol at Wimbledon is another, and even then he may have lost without the break prior to 5th set. Just red-lined absolutely everything.

They truly are few and far between though, it's so hard to sustain it for long enough to send these top guys packing.

Kyrgios? Darcis?

stakhovsky?

Seppi?

What a win for Cibulkova! (over Azarenka)

Silver wrote:Rosol at Wimbledon is another, and even then he may have lost without the break prior to 5th set. Just red-lined absolutely everything.

They truly are few and far between though, it's so hard to sustain it for long enough to send these top guys packing.

Nishikori against Djoko at the US open was another and Cilic basically against everyone for that fortnight. Sometimes it can happen players get in the zone.

I would not count Darcis, Stakhovsky, Seppi or Nishi.

I think the initial question was not about big upsets in general, but about the difficulty of doing it by just trying to blast your way to the win.

That is what Soderling and Rosol did, perhaps also Kyrgios; the other ones did not just blast their way through.

Wow, Wawrinka drops the third set out of nowhere. Just a moment ago he was serving at 4:3 up a break.

That is a surprise SB. Stan looked to be in cruise mode and caught a bit of this earlier (only a fraction) and they were closing the roof. are the temperatures right up?

CaledonianCraig wrote:That is a surprise SB. Stan looked to be in cruise mode and caught a bit of this earlier (only a fraction) and they were closing the roof. are the temperatures right up?

Well certainly he wasn't in cruise mode the first set. GGL played some superb stuff.but then Lost his way in the second. Wawrinka was serving for the match and GGL pulled out the stops.  Some pretty incredible tennis played by both

This was the stuff they played in the first set

Great hold by GGL he has been playing such high risk tennis.. but its paying off

Come on GGL you deserve a fifth set

Oh what a match ...the duel of the back hands

Well played Stan.. GGL incredible tennis

Stan through in four but how did he win that tiebreaker with Garcia-Lopez having five set points? looked like a cracking match from what I caught of it.

CC It was incredible. On paper I didn't give GGL much of a chance of taking a set leave alone come so close to taking a second. But he took the match to Stan from the word go.. he played some high percentage tennis and the first set started like the last one finished.. His sh backhand is a dream I really dont remember him being that good.. I think he must have put a lot of work in. But what impressed me most about his game is that he never got tight.. his game was loose and he never let his mistakes affect his game. He did, as I say, lose his way in the second and I turned over to watch Serena Williams nearly lose to another Spaniard (shame she didnt) When I turned back Stan was serving in the third 5-4 and from there GGL played lights out tennis.

Yes from what I saw of him Garcia-Lopez was impressive. He will be sick he never won that tiebreaker having led 5-0 and 6-2. Stan rolls on but if he does meet Djoko in semis I only see Novak winning. I get the impression he will be after revenge for last year's defeat at the Australian Open.