Us open mens day 12- Time to Stan and Deliver. Do Fed ex deliver Sabr's or am I Rogered? Erm... Cleaning with Novak-umn is hard... Something related to Cilic.

First topic message reminder :

Mens place, someone wanted a half hearted attempt at a mens thread, so here she is.

temporary21 wrote:So much for. Classic nail biter. Roger and Novak better make amends in the final

Attempted jinx?

Stan playing off 2nd serve here, really bad.

Cooooool.

Cmon Fed, don't spoil it........

No actually. To be fair I actually prefer a 5 set nail biter with ferrer and granollers to any straight setter. Whoever it's involved in. I've never watched sport to relax I want it to be edge of your edge stuff tense and close, this is nice tennis but there's no real tension and so it's not scratching my itch 

I think I exolained this before, and likely gives away why I ike watching who I do, I think I just watch it for different reasons to most of you all. So aye those 2 better be giving me heart attacks come Sunday

Total schooling.

Great.  All done in just over 90 minutes and before 9pm.

Very impressive.  Even if Roger were to get triple bageled on Sunday, just being #2 in the world and reaching back-to-back slam finals (this one with no sets dropped) is pretty nice.

2 massive beat downs. Stan just throwing his arm at anything in the end. Now then. Can roger last more than 2 and a bit sets this time, he bloody better

A victory for Bogbrush and those others that believed. Surprisingly good from Federer. That was a tough half of the draw and Federer sailed through.

Federer was tense and off in the 1st set, but deserves credit-,he won that on guile and experience.... Completely our thought and unsettled Stan. He found his serve rhythm in the second and just pressured Stan into a complete breakdown.

That was a great performance.

He may not best djokovic, but the Level federer is reaching at this stage of his carreer, age, # of matches is spectacular and just adds to the legacy.

Nore Staat wrote:A victory for Bogbrush and those others that believed.  Surprisingly good from Federer.  That was a tough half of the draw and Federer sailed through.

You may give me a bit too much credit, I hedged plenty. But true, I did think he'd take the time away from Stan.

That's was a very tough draw though, and to get through for the loss of no sets and few games is incredible.

Now, can he make it a clean sweep if Cincy & New York? Odds against, but he will make Djokovic earn it. The key to the match will be Djokovic's serve and Federers return.

Just got back in time from dinner to watch the whole match. For those that missed it in the UK and elsewhere, Stan played Ok in the first set but couldn't quite reach the heights. Key stat from set 1 was the BP conversion, I think Stan was 0/4 and Fed 1/1. Sets 2 and 3 Stan's level dropped, more errors, and Federer started to ease away with it. Several games when he got to 0-40.

SABR wise I counted 5 of which Rog won 2 and lost three. Just a side show that, but the tactics of going to the net seemed to work well for him, with good hands on the volley and a good smash. Rog's forehand is powerful, controlled, and looked in good shape.

Impressive achievement to get to the final without losing a set.

Does anyone know how many times Federer has been broken in the tournament? What about Djokovic?

Henman Bill wrote:Does anyone know how many times Federer has been broken in the tournament? What about Djokovic?

2, both in that dodgy set against Kohlschreiber.

Don't know about Djokovic, but plenty more.

I think SABR did its job today. I saw Stan over press lots of times on his first shot while Federer stayed back. That's it's job, not the actual points won.

Djokovic now reached 11 finals this year out of 12 touurnaments played.
The one he failed to reach the final was the first one, so also 11 finals in a row.
Of course he won most of the finals before losing the last two, so that's something he needs to reverse.

EDIT: To add also the first year he reached all four slam finals. Maybe had it slightly easier this year: Stan, Murray, Gasquet, Cilic in the 4 semis he won.

Federer has now won 6 matches here in a row in straight sets (18 sets) plus 5 matches in a row at Cincinatti (10 sets). That's 28 sets in a row including matches against Murray, Djokovic and Stan.

The last time he lost a set was against Djokovic in the Wimbledon final. In his other 6 matches at Wimbledon, he lost only one set to Sam Groth, on a tiebreak. He also won Halle with only one set lost in the first round.

So in his last 4 tournaments since we left clay behind he has a W-L record of 22-1. Of those 22 wins, 20 have been in straight sets. His sets record is won 57 of the last 62 sets.

He also has a nice tiebreak record in that period. He won the last 5, before that lost 2, then won another 6 at Halle before that so has 11 out of the last 13 since clay.

That all adds up to a dirty word called hope.

summerblues wrote:

laverfan wrote:At least this is a better contest than 0,1,2 earlier (which is a record, IIRC).

More one-sided than 2008 RG final.

RG2008 was Nadal d Federer 6-1, 6-3, 6-0 (loser won 4 games), Djokovic d Cilic was 3 games. I think this is a USO record.

Henman Bill wrote:Does anyone know how many times Federer has been broken in the tournament? What about Djokovic?

Djokovic

v Cilic - Cilic won 1/1 BPs.
v Lopez - Lopez 1/6 BPs.
v Bautista-Agut - BA won 4/8 BPs.
v Seppi - Seppi won 2/7 BPs.
v Maurer - Maurer won 0/0 BPs.
v Souza - Souza won 0/0 BPs.

Total 8/22 BPs

Federer

v Wawrinka - Wawrinka won 0/4 BPs.
v Gasquet - Gasquet won 0/0 BPs.
v Isner - Isner won 0/5 BPs.
v Kohlschreiber - Kohli won 2/4 BPs.
v Darcis - Darcis won 0/1 BPs.
v Mayer - Mayer won 0/1 BPs.

Total of 2/15 BPs.

Henman Bill wrote:That all adds up to a dirty word called hope.

Indeed HB indeed. By the end of 2013 I was no longer getting nervous when Fed was playing - just watched him play, enjoyed the matches in which he played well and understood that he would likely bomb out before the final rounds. But this summer is not helping - first he makes 2014 W final with a great performance against Andy, now he is in the USO final without dropping a set. I will be nervous yet again on Sunday.

He is the underdog, but he does have a chance.

I think it is too much to believe that Federer has much of a hope to win against Djokovic (at least for me) ... but me personally I can now accept that Federer is the best ever we have seen in men's tennis.  His longevity is insane and his ability to reinvent himself incredible.  The weak era debate that has fizzled out seems best explained by Federer just being a step up from anything the game had seen at that time.

Nadal's main attribute was his ability to super top spin the ball - apparently up to 5000 revs per min, his movement especially on clay, and his strength which came at an early age - an example of being a "man-boy".

Djokovic's super ability is his flexibility and elastic strength + movement & anticipation on returns.

I am sure others could add in more difficult to identify aspects (at least for me as a novice) regarding details of the forehand and backhand.

Saw the first set of Djokovic and Cillic and turned over. May as well been a W.O.

I missed Djokovic / Cilic but have read Djokovic generously stressing Cilic being injured. Was that evident?

The thing is we have not yet seen a Novak or Rafa or even Murray at age 30+ and so we wont know for now that they may or may not reinvent themselves. For now yes Fed may be the best ever, so far.

I think Novak may be a step too far for Fed, just like at Wimbledon. Novak can just grind and grind and serves and returns well.

bogbrush wrote:I missed Djokovic / Cilic but have read Djokovic generously stressing Cilic being injured. Was that evident?

I noticed that he was wearing an ankle brace but didn't think much about it - apparently he twisted it playing JWT.

Yep Cilic twisted his ankle in that match.

... and here is the Cilic post-match conference:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/cilic-positive-despite-us-open-defeat

"The foot was causing me some trouble with movement but Novak was able to expose me much more today."

One thing is sure - Federer goes in the fresher of the two (around three hours less on court) so fatigue can be ruled out for tomorrow. It is a battle of the titans and may the best man win.

I agree, I think this means Fed can manage 4 sets. Not 5 though, if Djokovic wins two sets, he wins the match.

What time is the final tomorrow (UK time) ?

Hopefully not too late.

Really thought Rog had a chance, yesterday's Djokovic performance has made me doubt it now. Djokovic hadn't looked good since Wimbledon until yesterday. Fed had looked really good bar the Kohlschrieber match.

This is the exact same situation as Wimbledon. Roger needs to prove he can go longer than 2 sets this time, or win in 3

It's a mighty proposition to even get to successive Slam Finals at Federer's current age - let alone win one of them ; I guess that explains why nobody has managed it in almost 50 years or so of trying.

Fed may have been way too good for the likes of Murray at Wimbledon, and then for Stan here - but when you're up against one of the game's best-ever returners who has enjoyed another truly superb season, and who can happily grind you down for as long as necessary ..... well the odds are stacked about as high as can be, and I certainly won't be putting any serious money on an upset.

But regardless of how the Final itself plays out, to 'just' remain competitive on the Tour overall .....holding down the number two spot against much younger rivals, with a fair degree of comfort, is impressive stuff. Someone mentioned longevity in an earlier post, and that is indeed what stands out. This year will I believe (?) mark a record number of successive appearances by Federer at WTF, eclipsing Sampras and Lendl amongst other big names.

Speaking of Lendl .... Fed currently trails him in total ATP career match wins, with 1047 v 1071. So he should catch him fairly soon, barring any catastrophe or meltdown. Connors remains way out on 1254, so pretty safe there I'd say. Although, some seem to think Federer could play on for perhaps three years (I'm really not convinced myself). But neither the evergreen Jimbo, nor Lendl, were making Slam Finals at 34.

By pure coincidence am actually travelling on to NYC tomorrow from Washington, but won't be at the stadium for the big match. Unless anyone cares to donate a ticket ......

You know what.  I got burned last time. I'm gonna give you hope and I reckon Feds gonna do Im in 4. Feels like 2002

Well, brave call, and I wish you the best with that one ..... but your money not mine !!

Pete was three years younger than Federer, and was up against an ageing Agassi in that final - not the dominant all-conquering World Number One, with 2 Slams already in the bag and a host of other quality titles during the season.

If Federer won this it would go down as the biggest achievement if his career, bar none. Far bigger than winning RG in 2009, or 7th Wimbledon, or even passing Pete.

To beat the current, dominant, peak #1 at the age of 34 would reset the standards of longevity. I'll be hoping but not with much confidence.

Bet placed. Roger in straights a tenner. 5/1 odds!

+1. 
Nobody beats RF in 2 GS finals in a row, 34 years old not withstanding.

Matchpoint wrote:+1. 
Nobody beats RF in 2 GS finals in a row, 34 years old not withstanding.

Apart from Rafa.

I didnt wanna say it, also is it a consecutive slam thing?

"In a row"

Sounds like it.

Which Rafa did in 2008 at Roland Garros and Wimbledon.

Oops, CC, my bad. A bit of bluffing never hurts anyone. Haha. Let me revise: nobody beats RF in a GS final in a row after 2008. Better? I'll probably have to eat humble pie. So what.

Matchpoint wrote:Oops, CC, my bad. A bit of bluffing never hurts anyone. Haha. Let me revise: nobody beats RF in a GS final in a row after 2008. Better? I'll probably have to eat humble pie. So what.

Ha ha. Fair enough. Nobody beats Murray in slams since September 10th 2015 in slams.

I'm not going to be around much tomorrow, so I'll offer my tuppence worth on the final now!

If the only thing I knew about the players was how they had played in this tournament, then I would make Federer favourite and probably a fairly comfortable one too.

However we know that conditions, match up and the age difference are relevant to the encounter.

Federer has an advantage in that his level of play is already good enough but I think Djokovic will need to raise his level. But I thought that and Wimbledon, and he did.

Djokovic has an advantage in that I think he can drop two sets and still win. If Fed drops two sets, I think he is done for.

I think the key dynamic will be how well Novak serves and how well Federer returns that serve.

My gut tells me that Federer will do it. My head keeps reminding me that taking 3 sets off Djokovic on this court is tough.

I'm going to very cautiously predict Federer.

HM Murdock wrote:
I think the key dynamic will be how well Novak serves and how well Federer returns that serve.

This is spot on. It's all about how many times Roger can break serve. I think he needs to break at least 4/5 times.

I think weather conditions will play a big factor. If it's overcast and rainy as predicted, conditions will slow down and give Djoko an advantage. Fed needs to hope for some quick conditions.

I'm not sure how much Djoko played in the day, but Fed was nearly all night matches. I wonder if that will be a transition for him.

There are a large number of points in Roger's favour:

---good form, not lost a set.
---no more super saturday, so rest time, likewise straights sets semi, makes for a less physical final.
---won the last time they played at Cincinatti
---fastest of the slams, easier to beat Djoko here than at AO or FO. Seems to be getting faster at least compared to 2011 and maybe even compared to about 2013.

But somehow, I don't think those points are that important.  When I have watched Federer, my gut feeling is that despite all the straight set wins, he still isn't at the peak level quite, and isn't quite playing well enough.

The bottom line is he has to play particularly well, or Djokovic particularly poorly, and so I think this is 40% Federer 60% Djokovic, but I don't see that Federer is a massive underdog. It wll not qualify as a "shock" or "upset" to me if he wins. Over the course of the match you change 5 unforced errors to 5 winners, with some of them on big points, and you have the difference between an average and a great performance. His eye needs to be in.

Djokovic has lost his fair share of finals to various players but on the other hand in the head to head against Federer has tended to win more at important venues (Wimbledon) and less at lesser ones (Dubai).

I think each player is as likely as the other to win in straight sets, but the longer it goes, the more you favour Djokovic due to mental and physical strength.

Djokovic is 3-0 in matches lasting 5 sets (head to head over whole career) and I don't think that's a coincidence. Two were at this very tournament of course.

But another thing to note is that in recent year's Federer has only won in straight sets. Djokovic leads 5-4 in the last 9 matches. All of Federer's 4 were in straight sets.Only one of Djokovic's was. This didn't used to be the case throughout their rivlary. Coincidence or a sign of age? So in the last 9 matches Federer has not been able to win any matches if he conceded a set.

If you told me the match would be in straight sets but didn't tell me who the winner would be, I'd make it 50/50.
If you told me one player will win in four sets but didn't tell me who I'd make it 60/40 the Djoker.
If you asked me at the start of a fifth who I think takes it, probably give you 70/30 to Novak.

Another worrying stat for Roger fans: Winning the match after losing 1st set: Djokovic, 7–1. That's over their whole career. Even against pre-11 Djokovic, Federer never survived losing the first set. Fast dubai at a relatively minor tournament in a 3-setter, in '14, was the only time he has.

Djokovic v Cilic - http://www.usopen.org/en_US/scores/stats/day18/1601ms.html - is not a good measure of Djokovic's current form. Losing a set each to Bautista-Agut and Lopez is a better indication.

The score-line in BA's or Lopez's case may be a better barometer.

Cilic had 37 UEs in a match of 122 points, which is roughly 1/3. Total points won are 39, which are almost the same as UEs.

Cilic didn't offer much. one stat though. Cilic was winning 15 percent of second serves. Novaks return was right in cur