French Open Day 5 - Little Red Cornet...All the Djoko's that were there before me...Give me the Keys...You must be a Lamasine

Schedule - http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/schedule/index.html

Thanks again.
I may enjoy Day 5 a little more since today Movistar installed a 50 Mb/s internet in my house and TV with ESPN HD.
It even has that function where you can pause live TV. That's cool, first time I've ever had that.

Robert v Zverev looks interesting. None of the seeds look under significant threat,

Henman Bill wrote:Thanks again.
I may enjoy Day 5 a little more since today Movistar installed a 50 Mb/s internet in my house and TV with ESPN HD.
It even has that function where you can pause live TV. That's cool, first time I've ever had that.

Seriously, I watch everything on a tape delay and media blackout. It's essential if one wants to fast forward delays, commercials, and every single second of the Wta. I can't watch tv live and in the states DVR has been a wide spread tech for decade or decade and half. On direct tv the biggest provider you can record hundreds of hours on your box and record 4 simultaneous channels while watching a fifth. I rate DVR as one of the ten greatest inventions in the same level as electricity, antibiotics, powered flight, and computers. Some may laugh but it has saved me from The terror of having to watch the matches of the ungrateful harpy brigade.

Tomic vs Coric probably the most interesting match for me.  I expect Tomic to win but Coric may be better suited to the surface, so who knows.

I do not expect to see Nole or Rafa involved in 5-setters.

Since it seems to be obligatory to focus on Murray's chances this tournament, I notice that Karlovic is currently playing doubles and he and his partner have just lost the first set 6-1. Does seem likely that he's feeling just a bit tired himself.

Carreno tries to put Aljaz to Bedene but ends up Busta.

Good win for Bedene that, regathered himself well to win the fifth set convincingly after having let a two set lead slip.

Djokovic having to scrap for the first set 7-5, but expect him to race away with it now.

Coric leads Tomic by two sets to one.

Surprised to see Djokovic go to 5-5 against Darcis. He has such a peach of a draw that I expected to see him through the 1st week with game losses of around 6-9 per match at most.

socal1976 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Thanks again.
I may enjoy Day 5 a little more since today Movistar installed a 50 Mb/s internet in my house and TV with ESPN HD.
It even has that function where you can pause live TV. That's cool, first time I've ever had that.

Seriously, I watch everything on a tape delay and media blackout. It's essential if one wants to fast forward delays, commercials, and every single second of the Wta. I can't watch tv live and in the states DVR has been a wide spread tech for decade or decade and half. On direct tv the biggest provider you can record hundreds of hours on your box and record 4 simultaneous channels while watching a fifth. I rate DVR as one of the ten greatest inventions in the same level as electricity, antibiotics, powered flight, and computers. Some may laugh but it has saved me from The terror of having to watch the matches of the ungrateful harpy brigade.

I think you can record stuff but I haven't really looked into it. I'll give it a go. Might be tricky to record tennis when you don't know the length of the match and for sure which match is on which channel. By the way, I think your last comment is in poor taste.

bogbrush wrote:Surprised to see Djokovic go to 5-5 against Darcis. He has such a peach of a draw that I expected to see him through the 1st week with game losses of around 6-9 per match at most.

Dunno. Darcis has got the sort of game that can annoy Djokovic, lots of slices and changes of rhythm, so if Djokovic is a little off it's understandable that he's struggling a bit. I'm watching a bit, and clearly Djokovic not at his best, a fair amount of frustration at some pretty routine errors. Still expect him to go through in straights mind you...

bogbrush wrote:Surprised to see Djokovic go to 5-5 against Darcis. He has such a peach of a draw that I expected to see him through the 1st week with game losses of around 6-9 per match at most.

Whilst he's not been at Murray levels of poor performance, he's not looked wonderful thus far. Rafa looking the most ominous at the moment...making easy work of the players he should be.

I thought Novak looked a tad uncomfortable out there today.. I sense a little tension .

This is sort of what I was wondering.

I think Nadal really might fancy his chances here.

Lets be fair Rafa has everything to win and nothing to lose the pressure is not on him as much as Novak

When Rafa gets into the groove, and we know him to be a slow starter,
He looks as relaxed as I have seen him in a very long time.
This will reflect in his game..he is looking good and feeling good as I understand it.. he has reason to feel more confident than he did that's for sure.

Problem with Rafa is the mental aspect of beating Djokovic for me. For all that Djokovic is below his best, can't see him losing before the SF, which means Rafa will have to beat him. Given it's been a while since he even won a set against him, it's not going to be easy for him, as surely he'll have (understandable) doubts. Think Nadal would certainly have preferred to be playing Djokovic in a (potential) final, where the "never-won-RG" demons of Djokovic would re-surface more violently...

On the flip side, Tsonga is being gripped by nerves and hes two sets down to Baghdatis. Rafas draw could open open a bit

The only serious obstacle to Djokovic / Nadal semi is Thiem. Everything else is preparation.

From what I have seen so far Djokovic, Nadal and Wawrinka look to be the contenders for this years French Open.  If Murray get to the quarterfinal then I would say that was a good result for him given he has been all over the place in the first two rounds.  I was beginning to think he had a good chance for Wimbledon now I don't know what to make of him. In the past he has come good in the slams - one can only assume the same will happen here.

I see that Djoko has chalked up his 50th win at RG. Completes the 50 set at the four GS for the Serb. Fed has done it and I reckon Rafa will eventually, although Murray may struggle to do it at the French.

I still think Murray will win it. He needs a couple of quick matches now, but Karlovic and Isner are unlikely to grind it out with him. If he can get through to a quarter final then start to play. I like his chances against Nishikori and this version of Stan.

I see that Djokovic has won more matches at Grand Slams than Rafa. I didn't know that. Show his consistency.

Just watched the last part of the Tsonga-Baggy match. Interesting the number of times the drop shot is being played at this tournament.
  Also good to see that players appear to be more attacking at the French than we've seen of late, although watching Simon trying to close out his match yesterday was - as ever with him - like watching paint dry.

Henman Bill wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:Thanks again.
I may enjoy Day 5 a little more since today Movistar installed a 50 Mb/s internet in my house and TV with ESPN HD.
It even has that function where you can pause live TV. That's cool, first time I've ever had that.

Seriously, I watch everything on a tape delay and media blackout. It's essential if one wants to fast forward delays, commercials, and every single second of the Wta. I can't watch tv live and in the states DVR has been a wide spread tech for decade or decade and half. On direct tv the biggest provider you can record hundreds of hours on your box and record 4 simultaneous channels while watching a fifth. I rate DVR as one of the ten greatest inventions in the same level as electricity, antibiotics, powered flight, and computers. Some may laugh but it has saved me from The terror of having to watch the matches of the ungrateful harpy brigade.

I think you can record stuff but I haven't really looked into it. I'll give it a go. Might be tricky to record tennis when you don't know the length of the match and for sure which match is on which channel. By the way, I think your last comment is in poor taste.

Its much easier to tape it because in tennis you don't need much of tape delay to fast forward through commercials and change overs. Once you do it a few times you get an understanding of how much delay you need, and often I am so right on the money that right as the match I want to watch is finishing that I catch up to live. Helps you watch twice as much sports, while using half the time. Not great for soccer/football but I can't watch American football at all without it. Instead of spending 3-4 hrs watching an American football match, I watch the whole in about an hour and a half. Time is the ultimate commodity after all.

As regards to the poor taste of my second comment, well that is the thing with taste its a matter of taste. Frankly, the behavior of the women's tour of sucking dry the tour I watch and care about through false allegations of sexism and discrimination, literally stealing half the growth of live revenue from the ATP during what should have been the golden age of revenue under fedal has probably retarded the development of the tour by years. Frankly, I thought in light of their false discrimination claims and destroying peoples lives over their greed induced money grab for 15 or so years calling them ungrateful harpies is more polite and diplomatic than they deserve. If this wasn't a polite forum, I would be calling them a lot worse, and deservedly so.

sirfredperry wrote:I see that Djoko has chalked up his 50th win at RG. Completes the 50 set at the four GS for the Serb. Fed has done it and I reckon Rafa will eventually, although Murray may struggle to do it at the French.

Interesting. I looked at the big 4's overall W:L at slams...

Federer
AO - 80/13 (86.0%)
RG - 65/16 (80.2%
Wim - 79/10 (88.8%)
USO - 78/11 (87.6%)
TOTAL = 302/50 (85.8%)

Djokovic
AO - 57/6 (90.5%)
RG - 50/11 (82.0%)
Wim - 52/8 (86.7%)
USO - 57/9 (86.4%)
TOTAL = 216/34 (86.4%)

Nadal
AO - 45/10 (81.8%)
RG - 72/2 (97.3%)
Wim - 40/9 (81.6%)
USO - 43/9 (82.7%)
TOTAL = 200/30 (87.0%)

Murray
AO - 45/11 (80.4%)
RG - 30/8 (79.0%)
Wim - 46/9 (83.6%)
USO - 40/10 (80.0%)
TOTAL = 161/38 (80.9%)

Open Era - in order
Bjorn Borg 89.2% (AO 50% RG 96% WIM 93% USO 80%) - AO is low because he entered it once! (won one, lost one...literally)
Rafael Nadal 87.0%
Noval Djokovic 86.4%
Roger Federer 85.8%
Rod Laver 85.7%
Pete Sampras 84.2%
Ken Rosewall 82.9%
Jimmy Connors 82.6%
Ivan Lendl 81.9%
John Newcombe 81.6%
John McEnroe 81.5%
Andy Murray 80.9%
Andre Agassi 80.9%
Boris Becker 80.3%  
Mats Wilander 79.6%
Stefan Edberg 79.1%

So Murray is same as Agassi but with 6 slams less!

lydian wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:I see that Djoko has chalked up his 50th win at RG. Completes the 50 set at the four GS for the Serb. Fed has done it and I reckon Rafa will eventually, although Murray may struggle to do it at the French.

Interesting. I looked at the big 4's overall W:L at slams...


So Murray is above Agassi but with 6 slams less!

I hate to say it but can you say logically speaking that this would be a tell tale sign of a strong era?

Correct in terms of the top 4 stopping him winning slams.

Or it's indicative of a failing in Murray that may have been evident regardless of what era he played in.
So it's not logical to make that assumption without further consideration.

Less than 30 comments kind of sums up today's play!

Am I right in saying that Murray's only defeat in SF or F to a non "big 3" player is Roddick at Wimbledon 09? Can't think of any others off hand, which does support lydian's idea IMO...

Just watching the highlights of Rafa's match, about an hour of it although to be honest I only looked up from my laptop for about half of that..or less. To be honest, it was kind of a boring match by the look of it.

What I found interesting was that virtually every time I looked Rafa was making an error or dumping a mediocre mid court ball, and yet when I looked at the score it was like 5-0 or something. Don't be fooled by that score. If he played like that against Djokovic, he would not get a set, not even here.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Or it's indicative of a failing in Murray that may have been evident regardless of what era he played in.
So it's not logical to make that assumption without further consideration.

If Murray switched places with Federer in terms of birthdays I have no doubt that he would roll the weak era boys to the tune of 6-10 slams. His masters numbers, his winning percentage, his finals appearances numbers, etc. are more comparable to players with several times the number of slams as he has.

I know you hate the fact that reality continually proves me right Julius, like on the weak era/golden generation issues. Yeah because players who can't win slams usually win double digit masters or play in what 8 grandslam finals. Murray would not role the weak era guys nearly as bad as Fed did, but he would roll them badly nonetheless.

There was this really bright guy on here who for years was ridiculed and laughed at over claims of stronger than normal slam competition in the current period. He  claimed that every era's difficulty in winning slams was basically determined by a handful of the best players on tour acting as gatekeepers and making the competition that much tougher to win slams. I remember him saying things like the top handful of the best players determine the quality of period and can hugely impact ones slam numbers if the quality is up or down.

God I am struggling to remember who that genius/visionary was who took so much stick for being so right for so long?

Gore Vidal:"the four most beautiful words in the English Language are 'I told you so'"

Henman Bill, you should watch the whole match. Besides the first few games where Rafa was trying to get his rhythm, he was just too good for his opponent. Watch Djoko vs Darcis and you would rethink your statement about Rafa vs Djoko. Its Djoko having problem hence the first set score of 7-5, not Rafa having problem. Rafa's opponent was a lefty from Argentina and hit hard and trying to attack all the time but Rafa figured him out pretty soon hence only lost 6 games and served out a bagel.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:Henman Bill, you should watch the whole match. Besides the first few games where Rafa was trying to get his rhythm, he was just too good for his opponent. Watch Djoko vs Darcis and you would rethink your statement about Rafa vs Djoko.  Its Djoko having problem hence the first set score of 7-5, not Rafa having problem.  Rafa's opponent was a lefty from Argentina and hit hard and trying to attack all the time but Rafa figured him out pretty soon hence only lost 6 games and served out a bagel.

Spot on.. sorry to disappoint HB. Rafa made it look easy he was very relaxed after a slow start. Whereas Novak looked sluggish and tense playing an opponent he should have taken to the bakery.., not an impressive performance I'm afraid.

Born Slippy wrote:Less than 30 comments kind of sums up today's play!

And half those comments are on Andy Murray who didn't even play.  Why?  I say this rhetorically. I am going to use this excellent observation to make a general comment addressed to the tennis forum.

Because he is an interesting player (in many ways).  And not only is he an interesting player he is British and most of the commentators here are I would suggest British.  ...

...Most British who call themselves British at heart would prefer a Brit to win even if his on court attitude they find disconcerting (actually I think Mauresmo said that) ... even if they find his on court attitude disrespectful and not something they want their kids to copy.  Would you want your kids to copy him - at least the way he treats his players box.  

But ultimately their interest in Murray is that they would be happy for him to reach his full potential, win a few more slams, be more focused in his court attitude, and maybe show more respect, maybe be a mature adult on court.  Sure outside of the court he seems a nice person.  But then people change (as Mauresmo noted), like how some people change when they get behind a steering wheel, or maybe in front of a keyboard.

Now my own thoughts are that it is possible that this is Murray's best.  That he is reaching his potential.  That maybe technically he does have issues.  That maybe his on court intelligence is a bit lacking when he is put under pressure etc.

But no matter ... there is that interest in Murray ... and interest means they actually have a certain caring attitude towards him.  Some people can't see that ... but that's life.

ps: a general comment is not the same as a specific comment.

lydian wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:I see that Djoko has chalked up his 50th win at RG. Completes the 50 set at the four GS for the Serb. Fed has done it and I reckon Rafa will eventually, although Murray may struggle to do it at the French.

Interesting. I looked at the big 4's overall W:L at slams...

Federer
AO - 80/13 (86.0%)
RG - 65/16 (80.2%
Wim - 79/10 (88.8%)
USO - 78/11 (87.6%)
TOTAL = 302/50 (85.8%)

Djokovic
AO - 57/6 (90.5%)
RG - 50/11 (82.0%)
Wim - 52/8 (86.7%)
USO - 57/9 (86.4%)
TOTAL = 216/34 (86.4%)

Nadal
AO - 45/10 (81.8%)
RG - 72/2 (97.3%)
Wim - 40/9 (81.6%)
USO - 43/9 (82.7%)
TOTAL = 200/30 (87.0%)

Murray
AO - 45/11 (80.4%)
RG - 30/8 (79.0%)
Wim - 46/9 (83.6%)
USO - 40/10 (80.0%)
TOTAL = 161/38 (80.9%)

Open Era - in order
Bjorn Borg 89.2% (AO 50% RG 96% WIM 93% USO 80%) - AO is low because he entered it once! (won one, lost one...literally)
Rafael Nadal 87.0%
Noval Djokovic 86.4%
Roger Federer 85.8%
Rod Laver 85.7%
Pete Sampras 84.2%
Ken Rosewall 82.9%
Jimmy Connors 82.6%
Ivan Lendl 81.9%
John Newcombe 81.6%
John McEnroe 81.5%
Andy Murray 80.9%
Andre Agassi 80.9%
Boris Becker 80.3%  
Mats Wilander 79.6%
Stefan Edberg 79.1%

So Murray is same as Agassi but with 6 slams less!

Very Interesting stats.  This is a comment to the forum that follows from the above excellent comment:

The theory of relativity.
Up to Seven Rounds - One tournament.
Lose in first round: win percentage 0%
Lose in second round: 50%
Lose in third round: 67%
Lose in fourth round: 75%
Lose in QF: 80%
Lose in SF: 83.3%
Lose in F: 85.7%
Win: 100%

Look how those win percentages tighten up between the fourth round and the final.  There is an enormous difference between 80% and 86+%.

Up to Fourteen Rounds - Two tournaments:  
Two rounds lost (hence not winning any titles)
No rounds won: 0%
1 round won: 33%
2 rounds won: 50%
3 rounds won: 60%
4 rounds won: 67%
5 rounds won: 71.4%
6 rounds won: 75.0%
7 rounds won: 77.8%
8 rounds won: 80.0%
9 rounds won: 81.8%
10 rounds won: 83.3%
11 rounds won: 84.6%
12 rounds won: 85.7%
13 rounds won (winning one title): 92.8%
14 rounds won(winning two titles): 100%

One round lost (winning the first tournament of the two played)
...
6 rounds won: 75%
7 rounds won: 100%
8 rounds won: 88.8%
9 rounds won: 90.0%
10 rounds won: 90.9%
11 rounds won: 91.7%
12 rounds won: 92.3%
13 rounds won: 92.8%
14 rounds won(winning two titles): 100%

I could extend this analysis to more than two tournaments.  But this is sufficient to show that small differences in win percentages can correspond to significant differences in real life outcome when we hit the 80% mark.


Now I don't know much about tennis, but I do put a lot of weight on what professional tennis players say, on what retired tennis professional players say, what coaches say, what intelligent commentators say, what commentators that have a lot of experience of the sport say etc.

Anyway  Pete Sampras said tennis is all about the one on one's.  Mano a mano.  And that is why Murray does not have more slams: there are too many "ones" that are better than him in slam tournaments (all in the head to heads in slam tournaments).  In this respect I think I am sort of agreeing with Socal in this instance - eras are determined by the competition at the very top of the pile.  

There are other factors of course.  The world is not explicable as a single factor or even two or three factors ...

Not sure we should read too much into Djoko's performances so far. He's had probs in Slams before, looked sluggish, out-of-sorts, even close to defeat (Anderson at Wimbledon last year) but has come through and played really well when it mattered.
However, he's bound to be nervous at RG as he's never won it. It's the one Slam where he cannot fall back on to the mantra: "I've been in trouble in this tournament before but I won it in the end."
Great stats on this thread, by the way.

Socal:  in academia opinion is worthless.  One has to assess the data and present arguments that support an interpretation of the data.  I do like the terminology "gate-keeper" - is that your own idea (as applied in tennis)?  "Gate-keeper" has legs as a concept in the discussion of sporting "eras".  Ideas, unlike opinion, have a lot of value in academia, and in some cases are patentable.

Then lets not read too much into anyone's performance in that case, don't let us keep it to just Djoko.
When such comments about Rafa's performance yesterday go unnoticed it seems

If he played like that against Djokovic, he would not get a set, not even here.

This is a slam which is just as important to Rafa
Judgements will be made on every match the BOTH play

socal1976 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:Or it's indicative of a failing in Murray that may have been evident regardless of what era he played in.
So it's not logical to make that assumption without further consideration.

If Murray switched places with Federer in terms of birthdays I have no doubt that he would roll the weak era boys to the tune of 6-10 slams. His masters numbers, his winning percentage, his finals appearances numbers, etc. are more comparable to players with several times the number of slams as he has.

I know you hate the fact that reality continually proves me right Julius, like on the weak era/golden generation issues. Yeah because players who can't win slams usually win double digit masters or play in what 8 grandslam finals. Murray would not role the weak era guys nearly as bad as Fed did, but he would roll them badly nonetheless.

Prove it. If you can prove it, then I too will have no doubt. If you can't prove it, then you can't claim to be 'right', you simply have an opinion.

sirfredperry wrote:Not sure we should read too much into Djoko's performances so far. He's had probs in Slams before, looked sluggish, out-of-sorts, even close to defeat (Anderson at Wimbledon last year) but has come through and played really well when it mattered.
  However, he's bound to be nervous at RG as he's never won it. It's the one Slam where he cannot fall back on to the mantra: "I've been in trouble in this tournament before but I won it in the end."
  Great stats on this thread, by the way.

I think I read before the Davis Cup Final that Darcis was so poor on clay that he didn't bother to attempt to qualify for clay masters. I am guessing he got in to RG on his ranking?

It's a poor performance by Djokovic, no doubt about that. However, he won in straight sets and slams aren't won in round 2.

It's a very British attitude that we care about doing things so correctly. In some other countries, to their detriment, they only care if they win, no matter how they do it.

An alternative analysis to the Nadal match is that he was playing in second gear. Yes he played rather average, but because there was no real need to expend energy upping his game at this point, and he has lots left in the tank (gears 3, 4 and 5).