AO 2016 - Day 11

First topic message reminder :

Order of Play - http://www.ausopen.com/en_AU/scores/schedule/schedule16.html

Live Scores - http://www.ausopen.com/en_AU/scores/index.html

Day 11 Preview - http://www.ausopen.com/en_AU/news/articles/2016-01-27/day_11_preview_can_roger_buck_the_trend.html

My predictions...

Williams in 2, Kerber in 2.

Djokovic in 5.

Lucky Djoko, 1 point.

Djokovic into the final again...lets hope Murray can save tennis

I shouldn't be disapointed considering the first two sets but I felt that 4th set was so winnable

Well played Djokovic. He wins 6-1 6-2 3-6 6-3 and moves into the final (his 5th slam final in a row). Federer did well to hang on in there but Novak, at the moment, is on a different level to ANYONE else at present.

Jermaine2015 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:but Novak, at the moment, is on a different level to ANYONE else at present.

It's called PED...

... and you have something to report to WADA? Baseless accusations are better kept to yourself.

Djokovic wins without the match being a physical battle and still gets PED accusations (admittedly not from a regular poster). I'm not sure which type of drug it is that causes mental strength, consistently hitting to a good length, and good tactical play.

No slugging it out, no abnormal physical power, just good solid play. Sorry passing trolls, look elsewhere.

Maybe he is on PEDs, maybe he isn't, but there's no reason to put more suspicion on him than others based on this performance.

laverfan wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:but Novak, at the moment, is on a different level to ANYONE else at present.

It's called PED...

... and you have something to report to WADA? Baseless accusations are better kept to yourself.

edited comment: I don't much agree with your opinion on this one

Even Courier took a beating from Djokovic.

Well at least I didn't miss a classic...
my commis to bb and the fed heads ofc

Please no sour grapes and PED talk, which puts us in trouble legally

Henman Bill wrote:Djokovic wins without the match being a physical battle and still gets PED accusations (admittedly not from a regular poster). I'm not sure which type of drug it is that causes mental strength, consistently hitting to a good length, and good tactical play.

No slugging it out, no abnormal physical power, just good solid play. Sorry passing trolls, look elsewhere.

Maybe he is on PEDs, maybe he isn't, but there's no reason to put more suspicion on him than others based on this performance.

A player that was plagued with multiple retirements in matches in years gone by yet roll forward a few years and he's now playing God mode tennis...yeah you fill in the blanks.

Jermaine2015 wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:but Novak, at the moment, is on a different level to ANYONE else at present.

It's called PED...

... and you have something to report to WADA? Baseless accusations are better kept to yourself.

The Lance Armstrong of tennis. 10 years timr he'll be exposed.

Please wait 10 years and post such statements when [and if] he is caught or when [and if] he admits on Oprah, not before. A friendly reminder, you will get banned, if you continue this refrain. Make it germane to Tennis, not some conspiracy.

Jermaine2015 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Djokovic wins without the match being a physical battle and still gets PED accusations (admittedly not from a regular poster). I'm not sure which type of drug it is that causes mental strength, consistently hitting to a good length, and good tactical play.

No slugging it out, no abnormal physical power, just good solid play. Sorry passing trolls, look elsewhere.

Maybe he is on PEDs, maybe he isn't, but there's no reason to put more suspicion on him than others based on this performance.

A player that was plagued with multiple retirements in matches in years gone by yet roll forward a few years and he's now playing God mode tennis...yeah you fill in the blanks.

On that basis then Roger must be at it. Lost his first few slam finals then turns into GOAT.

Or maybe Andy is - lost his first few slam finals then won two slams, olympic gold and Davis Cup.

... Improvement? He still struggles in the heat which used to prompt those anyway...

May I also reiterate the warning of my senior Mod, we don't want you to go, but we have no choice.

The area Andy's mind and his game is in at present his goal here (or should I say the best I can see is) should be to win the semi and protect his No.2 ranking. I can't see him beating Djokovic if he gets there unless he puts in a Simon-esque performance or unless he can be fully focussed and shows more stickability.

I am looking forward to Raonic v Murray, CC. I am also glad to see a new face at this level.

Come on Jermaine stop the baseless accusations. Yes tennis could do better at testing. And yes we would like to one dr Fuentes list of clients. But until then let's not make baseless accusations.

I still want the Spanish judge to release those blood samples from the doping allegations in Spain. Why are they keeping it under wraps.

laverfan wrote:I am looking forward to Raonic v Murray, CC. I am also glad to see a new face at this level.

From what I have seen Raonic has added more facets to his game and he needed to. Better at mixing it if need be on the baseline and serve volleying. Should be very interesting. Certainly he has more chance of being a slam winner in the future than say Dimitroc who many have drooled over.

djkbrown2001 wrote:Come on Jermaine stop the baseless accusations. Yes tennis could do better at testing. And yes we would like to one dr  Fuentes  list of clients. But until then let's not make baseless accusations.

I still want the Spanish judge to release those blood samples from the doping allegations in Spain. Why are they keeping it under wraps.

The result of the appeal by various bodies against that decision is due out this month - then we may see. As I understand it, not all of the samples are necessarily readily traceable to the 'owner'.

barrystar wrote:Adding doubles teams that I hold a candle for:

Murray/Soares in 3
Williams in 2
Kerber in 2
Djoko in 4
Hingis/Paes in 3

As a Fed fan the simple truth is that something pretty unusual needs to happen for him to get 3 sets vs. Djoko in an evening match at the latter's best slam; one wobbly match and otherwise less than stellar form thus far on the part of Djoko does not auger sufficiently well for Fed.  I'd love to be proven wrong, but as T21 says there's not a whole lot riding on it for Fed beyond the size of the dollop of icing this tournament adds to the already amazing cake of Fed's career.

In fact it was:

Murray/Soares in 2
Williams in 2
Kerber in 2
Djoko in 4
Hingis/Paes lose in 2

0-30 at the start of the 4th, dumps a load of 2nd serves tamely into the net! Would have been such a great start, was chasing after that too much

what? Djokovic didn't beat the old man in straight sets? he should be ashamed of himself.

Taking 6-2 and 6-1 sets off Federer is fairly rare.

Djokovic can do it even to Murray and Nadal, but this is the first time (ever?) he's really rolled off two sets like that against Fed for the lost of so few games.

The Wimbledon and US Open finals were all 6-4 and 7-6 sets.

Another good season ahead for Djokovic.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Jermaine2015 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Djokovic wins without the match being a physical battle and still gets PED accusations (admittedly not from a regular poster). I'm not sure which type of drug it is that causes mental strength, consistently hitting to a good length, and good tactical play.

No slugging it out, no abnormal physical power, just good solid play. Sorry passing trolls, look elsewhere.

Maybe he is on PEDs, maybe he isn't, but there's no reason to put more suspicion on him than others based on this performance.

A player that was plagued with multiple retirements in matches in years gone by yet roll forward a few years and he's now playing God mode tennis...yeah you fill in the blanks.

On that basis then Roger must be at it. Lost his first few slam finals then turns into GOAT.

Or maybe Andy is - lost his first few slam finals then won two slams, olympic gold and Davis Cup.

Roger won his first slam final. Hadn't even reached an SF previously.

Just wondering why the comment I specifically complained about is still there (and the subsequent one which compares Novak to Lance Armstrong). I'm not particularly a Djokovic fan but they should very obviously be deleted.

Laver - whilst I think I know what you mean, your post to Jermaine could be read as you agreeing entirely with his view. I would suggest editing it so that the word "if" appears in there somewhere.

Of course he did BS - the change I was thinking of is that he'd had no real slam success barring one QF in his first four years then turned into GOAT.

My point was made to the laughable poster that just because a player's career takes an upward turn does not equate to drugs.

Didn't see this morning but looks like Fed's serve was off at the start and, as soon as that's the case, he can't live with Novak (same happened in the first set of the US). Great fight to get a set and would have been very interesting if he'd sneaked the 4th.

Agree with your point Craig. Just pointing out that it was an even greater step up than you suggested!

CaledonianCraig wrote:The area Andy's mind and his game is in at present his goal here (or should I say the best I can see is) should be to win the semi and protect his No.2 ranking. I can't see him beating Djokovic if he gets there unless he puts in a Simon-esque performance or unless he can be fully focussed and shows more stickability.

I think Simon is being given a little too much credit. I didn't even feel he played that well. It was just an inexplicably woeful display from Novak who couldn't seem to find the court with mid-court forehands. Whilst Simon is awkward, he's not THAT awkward!

Hopefully, Andy will reach the final. Would be disappointing if he didn't given the match up and ability advantage he has over Milos. Just hope that if he does, he plays to win it (re-watching Canada or indeed the first two sets of Oz 15 would be a start). He must have spent a lot of time over the Winter working on a strategy to beat Novak and, if anyone can, it really should be him.

Net chord was turnabout for that great serve on BP Novak hit that was called out in set three that call lead to fed breaking and probably won the set.

I love how every time Fed is playing great gets to the end of a tournament plays Novak and Novak makes him look ordinary or poor and then everyone focuses on Fed. Well a lot of those errors come from the fact that the returns from Novak are coming back deeper and harder than you expect. He hit some mind boggling shots today, which of course will get lost everyone's Fedcentric view of the Universe. Novak pulls you side to side with his change of direction and average ground stroke depth while he holds the baseline. If he has you scrambling around like a chicken with your head cut off in the vast majority of baseline rallies guess what you are going to litter up the stat sheet and not in a good way.

Born Slippy wrote:Just wondering why the comment I specifically complained about is still there (and the subsequent one which compares Novak to Lance Armstrong). I'm not particularly a Djokovic fan but they should very obviously be deleted.

Laver - whilst I think I know what you mean, your post to Jermaine could be read as you agreeing entirely with his view. I would suggest editing it so that the word "if" appears in there somewhere.

I had much rather keep the history. Expunging such comments to make the thread look clean is an option. Let me ask T2 and see what T2 thinks, before T2/I delete comments.

Henman Bill wrote:

Jahu wrote:Net wins this match for Djoko!!!!

Fed was poised to put away the match turning volley for me. Agreed?

Agree, but maybe Fed would take that 4'th set, and then?

Federer looked scared and peed, very much like USO 2014. If he really wants #18, he needs his Soderling (or Wawrinka) to help him.

why the heck was my post deleted? Djokovic is a weak era champ - not his fault I guess. It's sad seeing Federer essentially ruin his legacy. Ignorant fans aided by an equally ignorant media think this is close to Federer's peak years. I would have loved to have seen peak fed against this Djoko. Great matches I reckon, but we can never get that.

Has there ever been fans of another player who get nastier and more petulant than Fed fans when their anointed one loses? If you beat Fed a lot you must be doping, or taking advantage of him because he is old. I mean did Fed feel sorry for Djokovic when Novak was 18 or 19 and Roger was in full pomp? In my history of watching tennis and commenting online I have never seen worse losers than Roger fans, obviously not all of them some of them who are gracious and knowledgeable. But really, I am so tired of post fed grandslam loss followed up by baseless allegations of doping for one of his great rivals. Pretty disrespectful and juvenile behavior.

greengoblin wrote:why the heck was my post deleted? Djokovic is a weak era champ - not his fault I guess. It's sad seeing Federer essentially ruin his legacy. Ignorant fans aided by an equally ignorant media think this is close to Federer's peak years. I would have loved to have seen peak fed against this Djoko. Great matches I reckon, but we can never get that.

I would have loved to see peak Laver against peak Borg and peak Federer. Or a peak Pancho vs a peak Federer.

This what-if analysis is fan-speak and is very different from reality on the ground. Djokovic shut Federer down, like Federer shut others in the past.

I am just glad to see the old man have a racquet and do what he loves to do. He is healthy, happy, reaches SFs at slams, at 34, has never retired. Just shows a tremendous love of the game.

If numbers are a measure of greatness, he already has those. Let someone else join him in halls of Tennis Pantheon.

socal1976 wrote:Net chord was turnabout for that great serve on BP Novak hit that was called out in set three that call lead to fed breaking and probably won the set.

I love how every time Fed is playing great gets to the end of a tournament plays Novak and Novak makes him look ordinary or poor and then everyone focuses on Fed. Well a lot of those errors come from the fact that the returns from Novak are coming back deeper and harder than you expect. He hit some mind boggling shots today, which of course will get lost everyone's Fedcentric view of the Universe. Novak pulls you side to side with his change of direction and average ground stroke depth while he holds the baseline. If he has you scrambling around like a chicken with your head cut off in the vast majority of baseline rallies guess what you are going to litter up the stat sheet and not in a good way.

I said this yesterday and earlier today. Federer hits shots that are winners against lesser players picking up points that way. He doesn't get that against Djokovic who returns these 'winners' with interest. With the ball back over the net it must spook Federer so much so he feels he has to push for even more outrageous shots for winners to win the point and it is just a step too far - even for the great Federer.

I find it strange that anyone would suggest Federer played poorly - could have served better but otherwise played as well he could. Novak would have demolished any other player in 3 quick sets today - accurate serve, punishing groundstrokes and unbelievable returns - and it was all ridiculously consistent.

Despite being disappointed by the outcome I thoroughly enjoyed the match and thought the standard was superb. Just a shame it didn't last longer.

laverfan wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:Just wondering why the comment I specifically complained about is still there (and the subsequent one which compares Novak to Lance Armstrong). I'm not particularly a Djokovic fan but they should very obviously be deleted.

Laver - whilst I think I know what you mean, your post to Jermaine could be read as you agreeing entirely with his view. I would suggest editing it so that the word "if" appears in there somewhere.

I had much rather keep the history. Expunging such comments to make the thread look clean is an option. Let me ask T2 and see what T2 thinks, before T2/I delete comments.

I saw it. The big admins know about it too now from a previous one. I could edit it I guess, thankfully though he stopped when we both asked.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Net chord was turnabout for that great serve on BP Novak hit that was called out in set three that call lead to fed breaking and probably won the set.

I love how every time Fed is playing great gets to the end of a tournament plays Novak and Novak makes him look ordinary or poor and then everyone focuses on Fed. Well a lot of those errors come from the fact that the returns from Novak are coming back deeper and harder than you expect. He hit some mind boggling shots today, which of course will get lost everyone's Fedcentric view of the Universe. Novak pulls you side to side with his change of direction and average ground stroke depth while he holds the baseline. If he has you scrambling around like a chicken with your head cut off in the vast majority of baseline rallies guess what you are going to litter up the stat sheet and not in a good way.

I said this yesterday and earlier today. Federer hits shots that are winners against lesser players picking up points that way. He doesn't get that against Djokovic who returns these 'winners' with interest. With the ball back over the net it must spook Federer so much so he feels he has to push for even more outrageous shots for winners to win the point and it is just a step too far - even for the great Federer.

Yep I read those comments and fully agree. If a tennis player is rushed he could be Roger Federer or your local club hacker that is when you make errors. Fed likes to stay up on the line well that is a great strategy but if the other guy is making you half volley your first shot because nearly every return is a foot or so from the baseline then you will make errors. I mean at this level they score something an unforced error but your opponents ability to get to balls and to put you under pressure plays into that number. A guy hits a great second serve with a lot of kick to Fed's backhand and he misses that ball meekly in the net, usually that gets scored an unforced error but that is a hard shot for a single hander hell even for a double hander. If the opponent doesn't hit a heavy and deep kicker fed probably won't miss it.

Also complete nonsense to suggest Federer is "ruining his legacy" - as a staunch Fed fanatic #18 is proving frustratingly elusive but I do now believe it will arrive soon. Regardless I'm delighted to see him play this well at this stage of his career, I certainly didn't expect it. Of course these aren't his peak years but I do think his recent level is better than it was 3 or 4 years ago.

Anyway the plaudits should all be going to Novak. That's the best match I've ever seen him play and ranks very high in the greatest performances of modern times.

Ok ive cleaned it up... couldn't do much though without getting rid of half the comments,
For the few who aren't happy with us doing our job. Remember its not us the mods for whom we ask for respect, its the founders WHO CAN GET SUED

theslosty wrote:Also complete nonsense to suggest Federer is "ruining his legacy" - as a staunch Fed fanatic #18 is proving frustratingly elusive but I do now believe it will arrive soon. Regardless I'm delighted to see him play this well at this stage of his career, I certainly didn't expect it. Of course these aren't his peak years but I do think his recent level is better than it was 3 or 4 years ago.

Anyway the plaudits should all be going to Novak. That's the best match I've ever seen him play and ranks very high in the greatest performances of modern times.

If anything his ability to stay relevant and at or near the top for so long has enhanced his legacy in my mind. I still believe that at his peak the best guys on fast courts were a bit soft, well the fact that he has played against such top competition after his prime and played so well balances that out and takes a lot of the sting out of the argument. My appreciation of him has only grown seeing how well he has competed the last couple of years, the exact opposite of tarnishing.

@T2... Thanks.

Federer can always get #18, after Djokovic retires.

theslosty wrote:Also complete nonsense to suggest Federer is "ruining his legacy" - as a staunch Fed fanatic #18 is proving frustratingly elusive but I do now believe it will arrive soon. Regardless I'm delighted to see him play this well at this stage of his career, I certainly didn't expect it. Of course these aren't his peak years but I do think his recent level is better than it was 3 or 4 years ago.

Anyway the plaudits should all be going to Novak. That's the best match I've ever seen him play and ranks very high in the greatest performances of modern times.

I think it's probably on a par to what it was 8 years ago. I know that isn't a popular viewpoint but his current results against players who he was playing who should be better now than they were then remains very similar. Of course, had he needed to be (and got the right coaching input at the time) he could have been even better at his peak.

Agree with Socal. I am firmly of the view that, great player though he was, Fed had very weak competition at his peak. The fact he has been able to improve his game subsequently, retain the desire necessary to compete with other ATGs and continue to destroy all others is something I'm not sure any other previous dominant player can match.

socal1976 wrote:

theslosty wrote:Also complete nonsense to suggest Federer is "ruining his legacy" - as a staunch Fed fanatic #18 is proving frustratingly elusive but I do now believe it will arrive soon. Regardless I'm delighted to see him play this well at this stage of his career, I certainly didn't expect it. Of course these aren't his peak years but I do think his recent level is better than it was 3 or 4 years ago.

Anyway the plaudits should all be going to Novak. That's the best match I've ever seen him play and ranks very high in the greatest performances of modern times.

If anything his ability to stay relevant and at or near the top for so long has enhanced his legacy in my mind. I still believe that at his peak the best guys on fast courts were a bit soft, well the fact that he has played against such top competition after his prime and played so well balances that out and takes a lot of the sting out of the argument. My appreciation of him has only grown seeing how well he has competed the last couple of years, the exact opposite of tarnishing.

Quite - weak era explanations are looking a bit flaccid now that we see how superbly a guy well past the usual tennis shelf-life has been competing in recent years.

But you are right - it's kudos to Djoko right now, I don't see how either Murray or Raonic will trouble him in the final. The big one this year is RG - I'd like to see him get that, he deserves it.

That finished 1 set all the first 2 sets Fed didn't take serious.

Very amusing people on this site say Fed's FH is just as good as 2006? I don't think any of you have watched highlights of Fed in his best years

Congrats to the Djokovic fans who haven't moaned about him not getting his azz kissed.

Hello All!

Just got out of my (excellent) customer session so I've not seen a minute, only just saw the result. Obvious sorry but not surprised, glad he got some respectability with the 3rd set. I won't watch the replay as it'll only wind me up.

Murdock / socal / slasher will be made up, which is good for them! I am wearing black

Just looking back through some posts, the one thing that riles me up too is this "Federer better than ever" carp. It took nothing away from Federer to accept that Agassi wasn't at his peak in the USO final; it takes nothing away from Djokovic to see that this isn't peak Roger. The problem for Fed now is that he HAS to make the rallies shorter, he hasn't the option to be very patient. Why can't some folk grasp that?

So the hope of Tennis world are resting with Andy or Raonic?

Not bad

bogbrush wrote:Hello All!

Just got out of my (excellent) customer session so I've not seen a minute, only just saw the result. Obvious sorry but not surprised, glad he got some respectability with the 3rd set. I won't watch the replay as it'll only wind me up.

Murdock / socal / slasher will be made up, which is good for them! I am wearing black

Just looking back through some posts, the one thing that riles me up too is this "Federer better than ever" carp. It took nothing away from Federer to accept that Agassi wasn't at his peak in the USO final; it takes nothing away from Djokovic to see that this isn't peak Roger. The problem for Fed now is that he HAS to make the rallies shorter, he hasn't the option to be very patient. Why can't some folk grasp that?

:DWelcome to my world... but mine is a shawl

bogbrush wrote:Hello All!

Just got out of my (excellent) customer session so I've not seen a minute, only just saw the result. Obvious sorry but not surprised, glad he got some respectability with the 3rd set. I won't watch the replay as it'll only wind me up.

Murdock / socal / slasher will be made up, which is good for them! I am wearing black

Just looking back through some posts, the one thing that riles me up too is this "Federer better than ever" carp. It took nothing away from Federer to accept that Agassi wasn't at his peak in the USO final; it takes nothing away from Djokovic to see that this isn't peak Roger. The problem for Fed now is that he HAS to make the rallies shorter, he hasn't the option to be very patient. Why can't some folk grasp that?

Some will say anything to give Djokovic as much credit as humanly possible. It makes them feel good if they think this is Fed close to his best form.

Fact is he lost last year to Seppi in AO and has been straight setted by Cilic before that, plus he's older.