2015 Shanghai Masters 1000

[bajana]

Even if the court was slow as mud, Roger should have been able to dispose of Ramos who was a qualifier here ...well Murray might have an easy path to hold onto the #2 for some time.

This is not actually unusual for Roger. Roger comes to this tourney after a long lay off and tends to be rusty. Many of you might have forgotten it, but last year in the very first match (I think against Leonardo Meyer), Roger saved five match points before going to win the entire tourney.

C'mon! He skipped Roger's Cup this year and won Cinci, beating Novak in the final! :nono

I'd say it's more lack of motivation and missing the family.

He also, if you remember, barely got out of R1 last year at this same Shanghai when Mayer missed that sitter at the net. Not so unusual a 1st round rust display from Fed.

 

[Kirijax]

Lots of great matchups today!

Nishikori vs Kyrgios
Goffin vs Isner
Ferrer vs Tomic
Fognini vs Anderson
Murray vs Johnson
Berdych vs Sock
Gasqyuet vs Pospisil
Thiem vs Lopez
Nadal vs Karlovic

:clap Gonna be a fun day.

 

[Kieran]

I don't get this trend towards slower courts. They should be speeding them up. We have enough baseline rallies in the game, time to increase the speed!

Maybe it's to hasten the old men out of the tour; too many geezers in their 30's! lol! :angel: :dodgy:

Used to be, this was the fastest part of the season. In out of the rain, under a roof, a sweaty, airless indoor court, serves pinging down the T, reflexes like a knife fight, sharp jabs at the net. Now? Uh, it's the same as the whole rest of the bloody tour! :cover

 

[nehmeth]

This is not actually unusual for Roger. Roger comes to this tourney after a long lay off and tends to be rusty. Many of you might have forgotten it, but last year in the very first match (I think against Leonardo Meyer), Roger saved five match points before going to win the entire tourney.

C'mon! He skipped Roger's Cup this year and won Cinci, beating Novak in the final! :nono

I'd say it's more lack of motivation and missing the family.

He also, if you remember, barely got out of R1 last year at this same Shanghai when Mayer missed that sitter at the net. Not so unusual a 1st round rust display from Fed.

:cover REALLY??

If you look a bit more closely you will see I quoted that factoid from GSM's post when I responded. Guess you didn't read it. I highlighted it for you this time.

 

[Fiero425]

C'mon! He skipped Roger's Cup this year and won Cinci, beating Novak in the final! :nono

I'd say it's more lack of motivation and missing the family.

He also, if you remember, barely got out of R1 last year at this same Shanghai when Mayer missed that sitter at the net. Not so unusual a 1st round rust display from Fed.

:cover REALLY??

If you look a bit more closely you will see I quoted that factoid from GSM's post when I responded. Guess you didn't read it. I highlighted it for you this time.

Roger supposedly saved 5 MP's against Mayer; most if not all in a 3rd set TB! I rarely watch early rounds so I missed it! Now if I hear Rafa went down in flames, I might have to drag out some video tape to save it! :snicker :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Front242]

I don't get this trend towards slower courts. They should be speeding them up. We have enough baseline rallies in the game, time to increase the speed!

Yeah, there's no sense to it. They have to really work a lot harder to find a better mix that rewards both defensive and offensive play 'cos many of the courts now make it way too difficult to have an aggressive, imposing game since most of the guys out there are fit enough to run down every ball rally after rally.

 

[Fiero425]

I don't get this trend towards slower courts. They should be speeding them up. We have enough baseline rallies in the game, time to increase the speed!

Yeah, there's no sense to it. They have to really work a lot harder to find a better mix that rewards both defensive and offensive play 'cos many of the courts now make it way too difficult to have an aggressive, imposing game since most of the guys out there are fit enough to run down every ball rally after rally.

They could do more than routinely hit to each other's weakness or strengths! There are angles that can be taken, hitting behind a player, and periodically attacking the net on deep approaches! Little of that is done; esp. in the lower tier of players who have all kinds of ability, but forget how to play in the crunch! It's weird to see how they come and go after so much promise! The last wave of Dimitrov, Simon, Gulbis, Isner, and so many others seem to have reached a ceiling only to fall back into obscurity! This has allowed "senior citizens" to excel and show their stuff late in their careers like Cilic, Anderson, Robredo, and a few other geezers! We can only hope the latest crop of Raonic, Kei, and a few others don't totally break down physically before they have to give it up! uzzled :nono :angel: :dodgy: :cover

 

[Front242]

I don't get this trend towards slower courts. They should be speeding them up. We have enough baseline rallies in the game, time to increase the speed!

Maybe it's to hasten the old men out of the tour; too many geezers in their 30's! lol! :angel: :dodgy:

You really want to see Novak gone in 2 years ? Nah, didn't think so!

 

[bajana]

He also, if you remember, barely got out of R1 last year at this same Shanghai when Mayer missed that sitter at the net. Not so unusual a 1st round rust display from Fed.

:cover REALLY??

If you look a bit more closely you will see I quoted that factoid from GSM's post when I responded. Guess you didn't read it. I highlighted it for you this time.

Roger supposedly saved 5 MP's against Mayer; most if not all in a 3rd set TB! I rarely watch early rounds so I missed it! Now if I hear Rafa went down in flames, I might have to drag out some video tape to save it! :snicker :angel: :dodgy:

Well since you quoted the heretofore referenced highlighted part, it would seem even odder that this time you would hazard a guess that he was missing family and lacking motivation, when that didn't seem to be the reason last year for almost a carbon copy occurrence.

 

[Kieran]

I don't get this trend towards slower courts. They should be speeding them up. We have enough baseline rallies in the game, time to increase the speed!

Yeah, there's no sense to it. They have to really work a lot harder to find a better mix that rewards both defensive and offensive play 'cos many of the courts now make it way too difficult to have an aggressive, imposing game since most of the guys out there are fit enough to run down every ball rally after rally.

Exactly. And it's not like we don't see enough baseline rallies at even Wimbledon. This part of the season they should let the hair down and speed things up...

 

[herios]

I imagine it is pretty hard for Federer to be as motivated for Shanghai. First of all, he just came off two heart-wrenching losses to Novak in Slam finals. A Masters even just doesn't have the cache, perhaps especially these last two which almost seem like "ATP 800" events. I know Roger says he loves playing at all tournaments, but I imagine he mainly just wants another Slam.

Suddenly this is an "800 ATP event"uzzled
. Have you called it this way last year when Roger won it? I cannot recall...

 

[nehmeth]

Well since you quoted the heretofore referenced highlighted part, it would seem even odder that this time you would hazard a guess that he was missing family and lacking motivation, when that didn't seem to be the reason last year for almost a carbon copy occurrence.

No, I just disagreed. I pointed out that he took the extra time off after Wimbledon and came in refreshed and ready to get after it in Cinci. I simply posited what seemed more plausible to me.

 

[Riotbeard]

I imagine it is pretty hard for Federer to be as motivated for Shanghai. First of all, he just came off two heart-wrenching losses to Novak in Slam finals. A Masters even just doesn't have the cache, perhaps especially these last two which almost seem like "ATP 800" events. I know Roger says he loves playing at all tournaments, but I imagine he mainly just wants another Slam.

Suddenly this is an "800 ATP event"uzzled
. Have you called it this way last year when Roger won it? I cannot recall...

I think he's referring to the shared sense that a lot of the best players aren't always as focused in this part of the season. I think it's a fair statement.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I imagine it is pretty hard for Federer to be as motivated for Shanghai. First of all, he just came off two heart-wrenching losses to Novak in Slam finals. A Masters even just doesn't have the cache, perhaps especially these last two which almost seem like "ATP 800" events. I know Roger says he loves playing at all tournaments, but I imagine he mainly just wants another Slam.

Suddenly this is an "800 ATP event"uzzled
. Have you called it this way last year when Roger won it? I cannot recall...

I think he's referring to the shared sense that a lot of the best players aren't always as focused in this part of the season. I think it's a fair statement.

The 1000s are mandatory and so even if they don't like, they show up. The 500's are another matter. Just to protect them, ATP has a rule saying that of the four 500s that the commitment players are expected to play, at least one must be after the USOpen.

Although, this part of the year is not very motivating for players, players enjoy the Shanghai tourney very much as evidenced by Shanghai repeatedly getting the best ATP 1000 tourney as voted by players.

 

[Kirijax]

Suddenly this is an "800 ATP event"uzzled
. Have you called it this way last year when Roger won it? I cannot recall...

I think he's referring to the shared sense that a lot of the best players aren't always as focused in this part of the season. I think it's a fair statement.

The 1000s are mandatory and so even if they don't like, they show up. The 500's are another matter. Just to protect them, ATP has a rule saying that of the four 500s that the commitment players are expected to play, at least one must be after the USOpen.

Although, this part of the year is not very motivating for players, players enjoy the Shanghai tourney very much as evidenced by Shanghai repeatedly getting the best ATP 1000 tourney as voted by players.

Even though the stands look empty. Money must be good there.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OH yes, Shanghai pays a lot to the players.

 

[Fiero425]

Suddenly this is an "800 ATP event"uzzled
. Have you called it this way last year when Roger won it? I cannot recall...

I think he's referring to the shared sense that a lot of the best players aren't always as focused in this part of the season. I think it's a fair statement.

The 1000s are mandatory and so even if they don't like, they show up. The 500's are another matter. Just to protect them, ATP has a rule saying that of the four 500s that the commitment players are expected to play, at least one must be after the USOpen.

Although, this part of the year is not very motivating for players, players enjoy the Shanghai tourney very much as evidenced by Shanghai repeatedly getting the best ATP 1000 tourney as voted by players.

Poor, naïve child! :snicker :lolz: :laydownlaughing - They bought it with prize money of $4,195,895; 3rd amongst the Masters after IW & Miami! The reason I respect Rome and MC more is because they've kept it simple with their ICONIC and historic relevance! They've also been able to keep the prize money down to a reasonable level for 1 tourney; avg. $2.5M! :angel:

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I did not see Federer's match today. But, judging by the following description by Tignor, Fed did not play that bad. It looks like he got broken way late in the third set with not enough time to get the break back.


Tignor says "Even the post-match statistics said Ramos-Viñolas should have lost. Federer won more points, hit nine more aces and 23 more winners, won a higher percentage of points on both his first and second serves, earned four more break chances, and was a very respectable 25 of 32 at net. Normally, Federer’s unforced errors would tell the tale in a loss like this, but that wasn’t the case, either. He committed just four more than Ramos-Viñolas."

 

[GameSetAndMath]

This is another one of the Simpson's Paradox matches by Fed. So, I am not really worried about this loss too much.

Here are the stats of the match. First colum is for Ramos and second one for Fed.

Service Stats

6 Aces 15
3 Double Faults 1
75% 1st Serve 71%
60 1st Serve Points Won 46
15 2nd Serve Points Won 13
6 Break Points Faced 2
67% Break Points Saved 50%
15 Service Games Played 14
65% Service Points Won 77%

Return Stats

9 1st Serve Return Points Won 27
9 2nd Serve Return Points Won 14
2 Break Points Opportunities 6
1 Break Points Converted 2
14 Return Games Played 15
23% Return Points Won 35%
48% Total Points Won 52%

 

[Fiero425]

I did not see Federer's match today. But, judging by the following description by Tignor, Fed did not play that bad. It looks like he got broken way late in the third set with not enough time to get the break back.


Tignor says "Even the post-match statistics said Ramos-Viñolas should have lost. Federer won more points, hit nine more aces and 23 more winners, won a higher percentage of points on both his first and second serves, earned four more break chances, and was a very respectable 25 of 32 at net. Normally, Federer’s unforced errors would tell the tale in a loss like this, but that wasn’t the case, either. He committed just four more than Ramos-Viñolas."

I only glanced at the stats, but according to what I saw, Roger led in every category including running half as much; it was like 1700M to 700M in his favor! How did he lose this match? :cover uzzled :nono :angel: :dodgy: