2015 - What Can We Expect?

[Kieran]

Welcome to the forum, FastNatr!

 

[Federberg]

And though I was surprised he reached the Wimbledon semi, I would also expect over his career he might reach a slam semi, or final, like Berdych.

He's going to be better than Berdych. It's actually worth watching the Federer match, even the highlights do some justice. There *is* something there, and unlike Jerzy he has a certain consistency about him (read he doesn't just overhit and then look good for one match and then terrible for others) which leads me to believe that he can replicate that level.

He will be dangerous at Wimbledon/USO. And yes he absolutely can beat the likes of a Roger and Rafa in a slam at this stage in their careers. He has a bit of the Del Potro problem though, which is that he might have to face several players in a row that are bad matchups for him (so eg Nishikori, Murray, Novak would be too much for him)

I have to agree. Watched the whole match, and I was more impressed than I ever thought possible. I must admit I was in the school that says he's far too limited to win the big stuff. That view has changed now. His ground strokes have improved because of his better movement. And best of all his returns have improved out of all recognition. Roger had a good serving day, but yet Milos hit Djokovic like returns at certain points. It was scary. But the thing that really tops it for me, is that his serve was a bit off today. He made it tight, not because of his serving, but because he was matching Roger from the back of the court. He also showed a mental toughness I haven't seen before... yes he was in the zone in Paris, but this was real grit. I don't like the guy, but facts are facts. That was a seriously impressive performance and I am now forced to reassess my conviction that he's just a top 10 candidate a la Berdych.

This is a guy who in effect has put himself into the same category as the Berdych's and Tsongas of this world, but then clearly went somewhere in the off season and asked himself a question those guys never have... What do I need to do to take myself to the next level? This guy WANTS to be number one in the world, and believes he'll get there...

 

[mrzz]

The posts above pretty much resume what I thought after the match, but let me play the devil's advocate here: how much the surface had helped him in this particular case?

 

[Riotbeard]

Dimitrov again stands a serious chance at Wimbledon. He came very close to beating Djokovic there in 2014. I don't foresee much for Cilic. Wawrinka will either do great at the AO or have an average season; it all comes down to recreating what he had before. Federer will reach the Wimbledon final again. I'm giving Djokovic 50% at RG.

It was a competitive match but he was hardly close to beating Djokovic.

 

[Federberg]

The posts above pretty much resume what I thought after the match, but let me play the devil's advocate here: how much the surface had helped him in this particular case?

That's a very good question. Only time will tell. Even if it means that he'll only be competitive on hard courts, that's 2 slams. But I have to say.. with his game, there's no reason he shouldn't be good even on clay. He's already shown he can be a force at Wimbledon, and that would have been the one I would have thought would be most difficult because of the lower bounce. But let's face it, these days the 2nd week bounce works in his favour. If he can cope with the dodgy surface and lower bounce in the 1st week he'll cause serious problems

 

[FastNatr]

Dimitrov again stands a serious chance at Wimbledon. He came very close to beating Djokovic there in 2014. I don't foresee much for Cilic. Wawrinka will either do great at the AO or have an average season; it all comes down to recreating what he had before. Federer will reach the Wimbledon final again. I'm giving Djokovic 50% at RG.

It was a competitive match but he was hardly close to beating Djokovic.

Could be I'm remembering it wrong; the third set tiebreak wasn't particularly close. Still, they did get to a third-set tiebreak tied at 1-set all. I guess it was mostly that Dimitrov was playing very, very well in the third set, enough so that it looked like he could take it in a tiebreaker. But he didn't.

 

[Federberg]

^We've seen that type of thing time and time again. A talented youngster goes up against the seasoned champ. Makes a good fist of it for a few sets, but then the pressure of playing at a higher level for a sustained period of time gets to the youngster. And the champ kills them off tamely in the closing sets. It shows his potential. But getting to the level where you can sustain that level is rare. In recent times I would suggest there are only 6 or 7 guys who can do that consistently. Obviously, Roger, Rafa, Novak, Murray, but I would add Wawrinka and Ferrer... Dimi is not there yet. I don't think the blow out in Brisbane says anything about whether he'll be able to this year, it's too early. Besides, some times you just get blown away by Roger. But that's his main challenge now. We need to see more than a set or 2 of big boy tennis. Murray was like that at the beginning. Sometimes I think we're a bit too hard on Dimi... I really feel sorry for him about that Baby Fed tag. Remember when we talked about how similar Fed's game was to Pete's?

 

[Riotbeard]

Dimitrov again stands a serious chance at Wimbledon. He came very close to beating Djokovic there in 2014. I don't foresee much for Cilic. Wawrinka will either do great at the AO or have an average season; it all comes down to recreating what he had before. Federer will reach the Wimbledon final again. I'm giving Djokovic 50% at RG.

It was a competitive match but he was hardly close to beating Djokovic.

Could be I'm remembering it wrong; the third set tiebreak wasn't particularly close. Still, they did get to a third-set tiebreak tied at 1-set all. I guess it was mostly that Dimitrov was playing very, very well in the third set, enough so that it looked like he could take it in a tiebreaker. But he didn't.

Dimitrov played sets 3 and 4 close, but to me close to beating would imply he was up in the set count at least some point, which he was not. Dimitrov was very competitive, but there was clearly still a level in between him and Djokovic in that match. He was light years ahead of Raonic against Fed though. That match was not very interesting.

He definitely had a great Wimbledon and that match against Novak should give him confidence.

 

[herios]

It was a competitive match but he was hardly close to beating Djokovic.

Could be I'm remembering it wrong; the third set tiebreak wasn't particularly close. Still, they did get to a third-set tiebreak tied at 1-set all. I guess it was mostly that Dimitrov was playing very, very well in the third set, enough so that it looked like he could take it in a tiebreaker. But he didn't.

Dimitrov played sets 3 and 4 close, but to me close to beating would imply he was up in the set count at least some point, which he was not. Dimitrov was very competitive, but there was clearly still a level in between him and Djokovic in that match. He was light years ahead of Raonic against Fed though. That match was not very interesting.

He definitely had a great Wimbledon and that match against Novak should give him confidence.

We all agree he had a great Wimbledon, but let's analyze what happened to him afterwards?
How do you explain that he went suddenly cold and he did not showed anything special for about...5 months, without being injured?

 

[Riotbeard]

Could be I'm remembering it wrong; the third set tiebreak wasn't particularly close. Still, they did get to a third-set tiebreak tied at 1-set all. I guess it was mostly that Dimitrov was playing very, very well in the third set, enough so that it looked like he could take it in a tiebreaker. But he didn't.

Dimitrov played sets 3 and 4 close, but to me close to beating would imply he was up in the set count at least some point, which he was not. Dimitrov was very competitive, but there was clearly still a level in between him and Djokovic in that match. He was light years ahead of Raonic against Fed though. That match was not very interesting.

He definitely had a great Wimbledon and that match against Novak should give him confidence.

We all agree he had a great Wimbledon, but let's analyze what happened to him afterwards?
How do you explain that he went suddenly cold and he did not showed anything special for about...5 months, without being injured?

We were just talking about Wimbledon. I am not convinced dimi isn't just another gasquet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[herios]

Dimitrov played sets 3 and 4 close, but to me close to beating would imply he was up in the set count at least some point, which he was not. Dimitrov was very competitive, but there was clearly still a level in between him and Djokovic in that match. He was light years ahead of Raonic against Fed though. That match was not very interesting.

He definitely had a great Wimbledon and that match against Novak should give him confidence.

We all agree he had a great Wimbledon, but let's analyze what happened to him afterwards?
How do you explain that he went suddenly cold and he did not showed anything special for about...5 months, without being injured?

We were just talking about Wimbledon. I am not convinced dimi isn't just another gasquet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Funny that you wrote that, I read on another forum, Dimi should have never been called "Baby Fed" rather "Baby Gasquet".
Was that you who wrote that?:huh:

 

[Riotbeard]

We all agree he had a great Wimbledon, but let's analyze what happened to him afterwards?
How do you explain that he went suddenly cold and he did not showed anything special for about...5 months, without being injured?

We were just talking about Wimbledon. I am not convinced dimi isn't just another gasquet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Funny that you wrote that, I read on another forum, Dimi should have never been called "Baby Fed" rather "Baby Gasquet".
Was that you who wrote that?:huh:

I don't think so. I don't have an axe to grind against the guy, just not convinced either.

 

[Carol]

Well, we'll see if the AO and the USO 2015 will give us more surprises like last year but if the top players play well then I don't think so:eyepop

 

[Fiero425]

Well, we'll see if the AO and the USO 2015 will give us more surprises like last year but if the top players play well then I don't think so:eyepop

The law of averages finally came into play last season! Don't get me wrong, I feel fortunate to live in this era of greats who have already surpassed the accomplishments of players we thought "the best" just 10-15 years ago! I've ranted already about how gutless I think the current crop of pros have been; esp. against Rafa on clay! Even Federer could be at multiple MP's and still give it all back to Nadal on clay! I'm quite proud of Stan and Cilic for breaking the lock on the major titles by the "top 4!" He took the AO and a Masters title over his countryman Roger and united with him to take their first Davis Cup! Let's keep it going with more diversity in winning on the tour! :angel: :dodgy:

 

[Carol]

Well, we'll see if the AO and the USO 2015 will give us more surprises like last year but if the top players play well then I don't think so:eyepop

The law of averages finally came into play last season! Don't get me wrong, I feel fortunate to live in this era of greats who have already surpassed the accomplishments of players we thought "the best" just 10-15 years ago! I've ranted already about how gutless I think the current crop of pros have been; esp. against Rafa on clay! Even Federer could be at multiple MP's and still give it all back to Nadal on clay! I'm quite proud of Stan and Cilic for breaking the lock on the major titles by the "top 4!" He took the AO and a Masters title over his countryman Roger and united with him to take their first Davis Cup! Let's keep it going with more diversity in winning on the tour! :angel: :dodgy:

Diversity is good and to watch Stan and Cilic winning their first GS was a big surprise for most of the tennis fans, both players played pretty well and deserved the win but later, what else they did? ok, Stand beat Fed in Monte Carlo but still....and Cilic, injured. It seems to be the curse to beat the best ones:devil
:nono

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Picking the winner of the first Grand Slam of the year,personally is the hardest.Wawrinka is the defending Champion,Novak is always hard to beat on slower HC surfaces,he has a great record at the Australian Open.In saying that players are only playing smaller tournaments to get practice in,so I dont take a lot of notice regarding form in ways.

I will wait till the draw comes out,usually the players that make it in the business end of a slam,the second week are the one's I keep my eye on,I feel they have the best chances to make it to the final.

 

[Fiero425]

Well, we'll see if the AO and the USO 2015 will give us more surprises like last year but if the top players play well then I don't think so:eyepop

The law of averages finally came into play last season! Don't get me wrong, I feel fortunate to live in this era of greats who have already surpassed the accomplishments of players we thought "the best" just 10-15 years ago! I've ranted already about how gutless I think the current crop of pros have been; esp. against Rafa on clay! Even Federer could be at multiple MP's and still give it all back to Nadal on clay! I'm quite proud of Stan and Cilic for breaking the lock on the major titles by the "top 4!" He took the AO and a Masters title over his countryman Roger and united with him to take their first Davis Cup! Let's keep it going with more diversity in winning on the tour! :angel: :dodgy:

Diversity is good and to watch Stan and Cilic winning their first GS was a big surprise for most of the tennis fans, both players played pretty well and deserved the win but later, what else they did? ok, Stan beat Fed in Monte Carlo but still....and Cilic, injured. It seems to be the curse to beat the best ones:devil
:nono

Add on Murray and Del Po who are also suffering with their meager success against the elite and are floundering a little with injuries! :angel: :dodgy: :devil

 

[Carol]

The law of averages finally came into play last season! Don't get me wrong, I feel fortunate to live in this era of greats who have already surpassed the accomplishments of players we thought "the best" just 10-15 years ago! I've ranted already about how gutless I think the current crop of pros have been; esp. against Rafa on clay! Even Federer could be at multiple MP's and still give it all back to Nadal on clay! I'm quite proud of Stan and Cilic for breaking the lock on the major titles by the "top 4!" He took the AO and a Masters title over his countryman Roger and united with him to take their first Davis Cup! Let's keep it going with more diversity in winning on the tour! :angel: :dodgy:

Diversity is good and to watch Stan and Cilic winning their first GS was a big surprise for most of the tennis fans, both players played pretty well and deserved the win but later, what else they did? ok, Stan beat Fed in Monte Carlo but still....and Cilic, injured. It seems to be the curse to beat the best ones:devil
:nono

Add on Murray and Del Po who are also suffering with their meager success against the elite and are floundering a little with injuries! :angel: :dodgy: :devil

Yep, poor Delpo, first one wrist and later the other one, I'm not sure how well he is going to do from now, in September he will 27 years old, he is still young but if his wrist continues bother him I don't see him winning another GS. What a shame, he is a really good player.

 

[herios]

Aside of the near future, there is clear that Novak and Roger will be the top 2 for a while, because how much ahead are now in front. Also, Nadal is defending more than either of the two at the AO, so less likely for him to get closer to them for a while.
Below, in the range 4-8, there will be quite a competition, especially considering that Wawrinka is bound to fall, if he is not defending his title.
Lots of changes to be expected in the ranking in the top 10, aside the top 3.

 

[Carol]

Picking the winner of the first Grand Slam of the year,personally is the hardest.Wawrinka is the defending Champion,Novak is always hard to beat on slower HC surfaces,he has a great record at the Australian Open.In saying that players are only playing smaller tournaments to get practice in,so I dont take a lot of notice regarding form in ways.

I will wait till the draw comes out,usually the players that make it in the business end of a slam,the second week are the one's I keep my eye on,I feel they have the best chances to make it to the final.

I hope Rafa can get a easy draw