French Open Day 13: It Paes to Have Cash

First topic message reminder :

http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/schedule/

Kicking things off with the women's semis at 1pm (Paris time) we have Serena Williams vs Kiki Bertens and Garbine Muguruza vs Samantha Stosur.

Not before 3pm we have Stan vs Andy and Novak vs Thiem also simultaneous semis.

With the possible exception of the 1pm start time, I think a good scheduling, the right matches on the right courts in the right order there.

If 4 semis in a day isn't action packed enough, you can stay on for the mixed doubles final between Hingis/Paes and Mirza/Dodig. We also have the men's doubles semis -relegated to court 1 - Lopez/Lopez vs Dodig (again)/Melo and Bryan/Bryan vs Kubot/Peya. And the women's doubles semis!

If Serena Williams, Murray, Stan, Andy, Novak and Martinna Hingis aren't enough big names for you, some legends matches feature a star-studded line up including Cash, Mcenroe, Bruguera, Ivanisevic, Ferrero, Moya, Chang, Santoro, Kafelnikov, Novotna, Davenport, Navratilova and others that deserve to be on the list but I got tired or typing. Not that any of those matches ever seem to be shown on TV.

But how much of it will actually get played. Well on the down side looking at the BBC's weather forecast I see a lot of pictures of clouds. On the positive side I see no pictures of rain coming out of them. Anyway, why don't they just get a really big tarp and just stretch it across the whole event with a few poles in the middle. Job done.

Theres no banning policy, when you see some of the stuff that the people who have been banned do, and how they react and get abusive, then thats a ban, thats how it is everywhere.

You can LITERALLY contact one of the boffins and ask them what happened and how it went down

Controversially, you could even be polite and convince them they might have been too harsh, and they MIGHT actually listen. You'd be amazed what a bit of dialogue can do...

Henman Bill wrote:I think the moderator said that Socal wrote an article, allegedly to criticize one poster. The article was deleted before I saw it, but others saw it. Others know more.

He was banned for a week on approx. Wednesday.

That's all I know.

If you want to know more you can PM a mod.

Thanks HB,

Does anyone have any further details?

It really is important, nay crucial, that I know the content of his article- any help would be appreciated




emancipator

Temp?

You seem like the kinda guy that may know the truth - few are privy to the true mysteries of life - I feel a kindred spirit in you.

You may divulge in private if it so pleases



emancipator

Henman Bill wrote:I don't agree here banbro. I didn't see the article but Socal made many inflammatory comments, as did Jahu, and I think the moderators have a right to ban if they see their rules being broken.

It's only a week ban anyway which is not that significant.

As an overall comment I think the moderation on this site is good as far as I can tell.

Yeah, I half agree. It's just that there seems to be a good few fair minded posters like LK for instance, totally put off

I'm aware of what the moderators job is and complained myself on another forum 

Anyway, I hope Socal comes back

Lk didn't leave for the moderation. My sources is the guy himself...

Socal had been quite bullish on his posting for a while. I asked him to stop in admittedly a very grumpy and not so polite manner, given the whole weeks events and and the extremely poor track record we have when asking nicely

he, amongst other simply said no and got nasty about it

Instead of ironing it out privately he made a topic specifically to attempt to shame me

I myself didn't di anything about this I asked the boffins what to do and they immediate gave him a week ban. Public shaming of mods is apoatently something they're very very strict on


I have t had a reply on lifting this ban yet when I suggested it tonight


Again. The boffins will tell you

Ah ok, I get it - sounds like I missed all the fun

Anyway, now that I know the details, I will deliberate after taking council with the intergalactic council of minions and inform you of our decision on whether or not to grant the accused, So son of Cal, a temporary reprieve.

'tis indeed a heavy burden that we bear.



emancipator

SoCal wrote a lengthy article attacking one of the mod team, personally I find that bang out of order and it was myself that banned him for a week, I was very much contemplating making it permanent for the flagrant disregard he had for the site and its moderators, the moderator in question has actually requested for SoCal to be allowed to come back early from his ban to enjoy the Final which shows to me that the Mod is certainly the bigger person.

Anyway back to the tennis.....

I don't buy the guff that Stan played rubbish as some here are saying. The commentators on various channels were spot on in that Andy got his tactics spot on. Those tactics shackled Stan denying him the chance to get his game going. He played low slice to the backhand and high bouncing balls to the forehand and Stan just couldn't work his way out of this. Andy served better than Stan, returned better than Stan and was mentally tougher than Stan and won the majority of the big points. Lets not forget this was the defending champion so put to the sword.

Well done Andy. If he stays so mentally tuned in as he did today he has a cracking chance on Sunday.

Can I read the original article. It is only part of due process if I am to deliver a fair verdict.

Thanks in advance,



emancipator

Look, it's not complicated. The mods and admins are the ones who run this place, they do it in their own spare time, and we should all be grateful for it. If a mod asks you to cut out the bickering, you don't go "who me?" or worse still initiate a shouting match with said mod, you simply cut out the bickering. You especially don't then go on to write an article attacking said mod. When you sign up for this board you among other things agree to respect the mods and admins and their decisions.

I'm sure some on here remember what this board was like a few years ago when there were more Nadal and Murray fans, and constant bickering, insinuations, etc. on almost every thread. It got to the point where it drove nearly all the Nadal fans away, and a fair few Murray ones too. We had admins and mods from other sections popping in daily to try to keep the peace. There followed a fairly lengthy discussion over what level of moderation posters wanted, and almost unanimously the posters expressed the view that they wanted a more civil level of discussion, with more zealous and hands on moderation to cut out the "noise".

There seems to be recently a couple of posters who feel that this has gone too far, and maybe - maybe! - they have a point. However, it's still infinitely better than it was in those days, since one can actually have some sensible tennis discussions nowadays...

CaledonianCraig wrote:Anyway back to the tennis.....

I don't buy the guff that Stan played rubbish as some here are saying. The commentators on various channels were spot on in that Andy got his tactics spot on. Those tactics shackled Stan denying him the chance to get his game going. He played low slice to the backhand and high bouncing balls to the forehand and Stan just couldn't work his way out of this. Andy served better than Stan, returned better than Stan and was mentally tougher than Stan and won the majority of the big points. Lets not forget this was the defending champion so put to the sword.

Well done Andy. If he stays so mentally tuned in as he did today he has a cracking chance on Sunday.  

Yup, I agree (as does Haddie). Tactically Murray was superb. Stan played very near his very best in the first set, but couldn't find a way through. Something I outlined in my earlier post was how good Murray was at getting the first strike in on his first serve, being particularly aggressive on his second shot (as well as, as you say, serving very well). Having watched some highlights, I feel this is very much the case, which means Stan was unable to get into a lot of points on Murray's serve.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Anyway back to the tennis.....

I don't buy the guff that Stan played rubbish as some here are saying. The commentators on various channels were spot on in that Andy got his tactics spot on. Those tactics shackled Stan denying him the chance to get his game going. He played low slice to the backhand and high bouncing balls to the forehand and Stan just couldn't work his way out of this. Andy served better than Stan, returned better than Stan and was mentally tougher than Stan and won the majority of the big points. Lets not forget this was the defending champion so put to the sword.

Well done Andy. If he stays so mentally tuned in as he did today he has a cracking chance on Sunday.  

Yup, I agree (as does Haddie). Tactically Murray was superb. Stan played very near his very best in the first set, but couldn't find a way through. Something I outlined in my earlier post was how good Murray was at getting the first strike in on his first serve, being particularly aggressive on his second shot (as well as, as you say, serving very well). Having watched some highlights, I feel this is very much the case, which means Stan was unable to get into a lot of points on Murray's serve.

Also mentally he was a rock. I never saw him remonstrate with himself once - even in times of pressure he remained 'in the zone'.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Anyway back to the tennis.....

I don't buy the guff that Stan played rubbish as some here are saying. The commentators on various channels were spot on in that Andy got his tactics spot on. Those tactics shackled Stan denying him the chance to get his game going. He played low slice to the backhand and high bouncing balls to the forehand and Stan just couldn't work his way out of this. Andy served better than Stan, returned better than Stan and was mentally tougher than Stan and won the majority of the big points. Lets not forget this was the defending champion so put to the sword.

Well done Andy. If he stays so mentally tuned in as he did today he has a cracking chance on Sunday.  

Yep, agree with this. Today's performance is in Andy's top 5 ever in my view. He was wonderfully aggressive on the forehand, winning lots of 1-2 punches on his serve. Mixed it up great on the backhand, and served and returned well. If he plays equally as well on Sunday he'll have a chance, even though Novak poses far more risk to Andy's serve.

Most of all, he was great on the big points. Like, really great. Even when he lost serve to lose the third set it was as much down to unlucky bounces as it was any lapse. I was chuffed to see Andy play so well against a direct rival. Having not won any matches against any of his main rivals in a long time, I believe he's won his last three in a row!!

Danny_1982 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Anyway back to the tennis.....

I don't buy the guff that Stan played rubbish as some here are saying. The commentators on various channels were spot on in that Andy got his tactics spot on. Those tactics shackled Stan denying him the chance to get his game going. He played low slice to the backhand and high bouncing balls to the forehand and Stan just couldn't work his way out of this. Andy served better than Stan, returned better than Stan and was mentally tougher than Stan and won the majority of the big points. Lets not forget this was the defending champion so put to the sword.

Well done Andy. If he stays so mentally tuned in as he did today he has a cracking chance on Sunday.  

Yep, agree with this. Today's performance is in Andy's top 5 ever in my view. He was wonderfully aggressive on the forehand, winning lots of 1-2 punches on his serve. Mixed it up great on the backhand, and served and returned well. If he plays equally as well on Sunday he'll have a chance, even though Novak poses far more risk to Andy's serve.

Most of all, he was great on the big points. Like, really great. Even when he lost serve to lose the third set it was as much down to unlucky bounces as it was any lapse. I was chuffed to see Andy play so well against a direct rival. Having not won any matches against any of his main rivals in a long time, I believe he's won his last three in a row!!

Spot on and even a bit of serve/volley to boot.

Even when Stan was trying to rouse himself and the crowd when he took the third set and you could be forgiven for thinking is this the change? Murray just carried on regardless and for all Stan's bursting a gut Andy took the fourth set comfortably.

A side effect of today's result is that the big 4 are the top 4 in the rankings again. First time in just over a year and approaching 8 years since that was first the case.

Delgado and the team have to take a lot of credit. A lot of Andy's verbals this week have been firing himself up, rather than whinging. And I don't think even Lendl oversaw 3 consecutive wins over top 5 rivals!

He has been more positive and proactive since the coaching change. He looks to have the most belief he's had since Ivan. I can't wait until Sunday, because win or lose I genuinely think Andy will do himself justice, which is all you can ask for.

2 Danny - there was a loss to Novak in Madrid ;-).

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:For Lydian's benefit, he also confirmed that he definitely isn't a tank.

You can pass that on to Jamie Baker then, after all he's the one who labelled Murray a "tank". For your myopic benefit:

JB - "We train differently but if we went up against each other he'd probably beat me in everything. Look at him, he's like a tank."

Born Slippy wrote:2 Danny - there was a loss to Novak in Madrid ;-).

I thought he beat Rafa and Novak in Rome, or is my mind playing tricks on me? It is isn't it. It was Nishikori he beat in Rome semis wasn't it.

Okay, 3 top five wins in 4 attempts.

Danny_1982 wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:2 Danny - there was a loss to Novak in Madrid ;-).

I thought he beat Rafa and Novak in Rome, or is my mind playing tricks on me? It is isn't it. It was Nishikori he beat in Rome semis wasn't it.

Okay, 3 top five wins in 4 attempts.

Pouille in the Rome SF - Novak played Kei! Rafa was Madrid. Still fantastic (and even the loss was a close one).

Just watched the backhand drop shot MfC referred to. Utterly ludicrous skill! The lob a couple of points later was something special as well.

Born Slippy wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:

Born Slippy wrote:2 Danny - there was a loss to Novak in Madrid ;-).

I thought he beat Rafa and Novak in Rome, or is my mind playing tricks on me? It is isn't it. It was Nishikori he beat in Rome semis wasn't it.

Okay, 3 top five wins in 4 attempts.

Pouille in the Rome SF - Novak played Kei! Rafa was Madrid. Still fantastic (and even the loss was a close one).

I'm normally better than this

summerblues wrote:SFs could be good - too bad I cannot take a day off to watch.

...or maybe not.

Born Slippy wrote:Just watched the backhand drop shot MfC referred to. Utterly ludicrous skill! The lob a couple of points later was something special as well.

The dropshot
https://twitter.com/Eurosport_UK/status/738756415272030208
love the commentary "unbelievable shot! unbelievable choice! how would you ever come up with that as a solution?"

The lob two points later
https://twitter.com/Eurosport_UK/status/738756918261354496

Here's a stat which backs up my point about Murray getting the first strike in: Murray apparently won 82 of the 135 points that ended in four shots or fewer. Also shows what a good job he did of neutralising Stan's serve.

Another fun fact, albeit one I've not bothered to check: Murray and Djokovic have become only the second pair of players, in the Open era, to meet in the final of all four slams. The other pair is Djokovic-Nadal. Anyone know if this is true?

Well Murray becomes the 8th man in the open era to reach all 4 Slam finals.

Galvatron wrote:Well Murray becomes the 8th man in the open era to reach all 4 Slam finals.

10th - the big 4, Agassi, Courier, Lendl, Edberg, Rosewall and Laver. MfC is correct that it's only Nadal/Novak who have met in every final in the Open era.