2019 Men's Wimbledon Championships

[Bonaca]

Anything is possible in that match.

Ok that could be said for any match. It’s not likely, nearly impossible for the Greek to win. He’s a joke.

 

[Bonaca]

faker's draw is disgusting.

Yes this time he has to take out bull by himself with good play, can’t rely on Novak to do this job. Poor Maestro. If he loses, everyone of you Federer fans will suffer badly.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Yes this time he has to take out bull by himself with good play, can’t rely on Novak to do this job. Poor Maestro. If he loses, everyone of you Federer fans will suffer badly.

I mean. Maybe some Fed fans will "suffer badly." But for me. While I'm absolutely pulling for title number 9 for him, if he loses to Rafa or before Rafa, I will not be surprised because I accept that he's almost 38 and winding down.

So chill.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Ok that could be said for any match. It’s not likely, nearly impossible for the Greek to win. He’s a joke.

Seeing as he's done it before it is not nearly impossible. It's as simple as that. Rafa is not the player he was a couple years ago. By which I mean he's back to his best. And Kyrgios is a lesser player for the most part than he was a young exciting player. But. With his serve. He's still a huge threat.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Pulling for Fed. Thank God Nadal landed in his half so I don't have to hear any more whining about the seeds. All that was ridiculous. That formula has been in place since 2002. It's not new. The fact that Wimbledon is the only one that changes it is completely irrelevant. They can do whatever they want. And always have.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Pulling for Fed. Thank God Nadal landed in his half so I don't have to hear any more whining about the seeds. All that was ridiculous. That formula has been in place since 2002. It's not new. The fact that Wimbledon is the only one that changes it is completely irrelevant. They can do whatever they want. And always have.

Rafa had a right to complain,he did make the s.final last year,the WTA do seed on rankings,Bary being the new No1 player no player in the WTA complained,even though Kerber and Serena played the final last year.I totally disagree 'that Wimbledon can do whatever they want'

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Does anyone know if Nadal plays on Monday or Tuesday? Thanks

 

[tenisplayrla08]

As for the draw.

First quarter:
Djokovic got a doozy of a first rounder in Kohlschreiber. He'll almost certainly win it. But we've seen him struggle with Kohla (is it Kohlya? How do we do his nickname. I can't remember.) I would love to see Gulbis summon it all up again and make it to Djokovic and pull a rabbit out of the hat and get the upset. But he'll probably lose to Mayer.
Assuming Dimitrov deals with Moutet, it looks like FAA is going to get a trial by fire draw this time out. Pospisil was out for a while after back surgery. FAA is a better player anyways and looked solid on the grass last week. Would love to see him get to La Monf and Djokovic and would love to see him beat both. We'll see if he's got that in him. Dimitrov would love to find his old grass court form and confidence and get to Djokovic.
Then Medvedev, Goffin, Edmund and Tsitsipas in the second half of this quarter. Would love to see Medvedev/Goffin. Still don't care about Edmund. Tsitsipas has a solid opening here. He'd love to get to Djokovic and play a big 3 opponent for the 3rd successive slam. I mean. I'm sure he'd love to not have to go through Djokovic more. But he'll relish the match up too. I for one haven't really decided I'm a fan of his. I like FAA already and of course I'm a Coric guy from the young guys. So I'm not sure I'm gonna insert Tsitsipas into the group. But he's a fantastic player. Fun to watch. If Djokovic had to go through all the young guys I'd be totally ok with that. Of course, I'm hoping he loses to Kohlschreiber. Or Gulbis or Hurkacz or Lajovic. Or FAA or La Monf. Or Dimitrov. But I'll take what I can get.

Second quarter:
No Murray. Zverev lucked into being in the quarter without a Big 3 opponent. Anderson the defending finalist though. Hence the 4 seeding. IF Anderson is healthy, he certainly won't be an easy out for anyone. For Zverev, he's got to get past Vesely first. It's Vesely who has 2 fourth round appearances here in the last 3. Lost to Berdych in 5 sets in 2016 and Nadal in straight sets last year. Paire in Zverev's 16th. Better on clay than grass. Though I would think it'd be the other way around. But of course it's Wawrinka, Raonic, Khachanov and RBA in the middle of this quarter that are probably the best slated to come out of it. I mean. If Zverev can find some form, he's good on the grass and everyone and their mother want to see him break through. I could care less about him. And he's been ... not good for a couple months now. I shouldn't actually include Wawrinka in that group. Grass really not his forte. Raonic will likely deal with him if Wawrinka gets that far. I look for Raonic to get to Anderson (if Anderson gets there) and to make the quarters again. Feliciano Lopez is here. We'll see if he can turn his last stand into something. Had a great run at Queens club. I feel like that's probably as good as it gets. But he can totally beat Khachanov on grass and RBA too. Older brother Mischa Zverev is here in Alexander's quarter. But has another older vet in Darcis in the first round.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Rafa had a right to complain,he did make the s.final last year,the WTA do seed on rankings,Bary being the new No1 player no player in the WTA complained,even though Kerber and Serena played the final last year.I totally disagree 'that Wimbledon can do whatever they want'

Well I totally disagree that they can't. I mean. They moved up Serena last year. And maybe the only reason Serena made the final is because she had a seed. But she still made the final. She won the title the last time she played it before last year. She deserved the seed. They've given Serena and Venus better seeds than their rankings before as well. Wimbledon believes in giving an extra reward for past performance. This is where the whole discussion of seeds existing in the first place comes into play. They are there so that those who have clearly shown they are better than most don't end up playing someone else who has clearly shown they are better than most in the first 3 rounds. Nadal is still a top 4 seed. Still can't play the other two guys vying for the GOAT crown until the semis. That's completely unchanged by being 2 or 3. Yes. He's shown that he's currently the second best player in the world and shouldn't have to worry about being in Djokovic's half. But. It worked out. He had a 50/50 chance. And it's a random draw no matter what.

The reason I have no problem with Wimbledon changing the seeds is because it's a formula. EVERYONE gets the benefit of the formula. Nadal got his 720 points from last year added in. And his 4th round from the year before. But Fed won this thing in 2017 and made the quarters last year. 1500 points from 2017, along with his warm up event points, was enough to close the gap. The gap was only 1325 points. The gap now is only like 600 or so points. But Fed is now 600 or so points above Nadal. I'd bet you part of the reason Fed played the clay season was to get the points he needed to close the gap in the seedings at Wimbledon. Nadal doesn't do Wimbledon warmups. Hasn't since like 2015. That's on him. This thing has been around for 17 years and this is arguably the first year it's had any big change like this. When Fed was dominating, he was number 1 and was defending the title, it didn't matter. I think Andy Roddick may have gotten a nice bump one year. I legitimately can't remember any other major changes. I'm sure there are guys in the bottom 29, 30, 31, 32, that have been dropped before because someone got in that had better grass court results added to their ranking. But, I mean. Again. It's a formula. And it's not like Fed is 6 or 8 or 10 in the world. He's right behind Rafa. That's the only reason this is possible. It's one year. AND, you still gotta play your matches. Even if Rafa had ended up in Djokovic's side, they couldn't have met until the semis and Djokovic beat him last year. He is capable of beating Djokovic here I'm sure. But in the 2011 final and the semis here last year he hasn't pulled it off. And he's been the most vulnerable Big 4 player at Wimbledon for years. It worked out that he ended up in Fed's half and he still might have to play Kyrgios in the second round who has beat him here before. Now you can say that if he was the second seed he would be in Fed's spot and Fed would have to play Kyrgios. But there's no guarantee that Kyrgios would have been picked where he was in an alternate reality. Kyrgios is unseeded. He could have been picked and placed anywhere. I guess you could argue that you don't need an alternate reality for this situation. Because the top 2 seeds get placed automatically and if Nadal was at 2 and everything else went the way it did, he wouldn't potentially have Kyrgios in the second round. And Fed would. And I'm sure he would have loved to have a shot at having Fed and Djokovic in the same half so he could only possibly play one. But he's got to get to them first. Kyrgios is not the only player Rafa has to worry about on grass. He's not one of the two best players on grass in the world and that is a fact. And he's probably not top 5. Hasn't been for a long time. And it's really hard to argue Fed didn't earn his seed when he's got 8 titles, one of them in the last 2 years and that fits into the formula that has been around for 17 years!

And then there is the fact that for Nadal's entire career there's been 32 seeds rather than 16. He's already benefited from not having to face top 20 players early than the 3rd round for 15 years. That is also true for everyone else. But I just think all the players from ALL time before the change to 32 seeds would look at Rafa or anyone complaining about 1 seed change and laugh. Because they all lost to people who were just outside the seeds at slams, but would have been seeded if there were 32. This fact is not entirely fair to bring up in reference to this particular discussion. The change to 32 seeds has benefited everyone and all the slams did it. But I do think Nadal or anyone whining about Wimbledon's formula has less of a leg to stand on since they've been benefiting from 32 seeds for their entire careers.

 

[Federberg]

Rafa had a right to complain,he did make the s.final last year,the WTA do seed on rankings,Bary being the new No1 player no player in the WTA complained,even though Kerber and Serena played the final last year.I totally disagree 'that Wimbledon can do whatever they want'

I'm not sure what the controversy is. Wimbledon have ALWAYS done this. Everyone knows it. If any player had an issue with it then it was up to them to take steps to ensure it didn't affect them. It's that simple really. Complaining about it would be lazy and whiny if indeed that's what he did

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Well I totally disagree that they can't. I mean. They moved up Serena last year. And maybe the only reason Serena made the final is because she had a seed. But she still made the final. She won the title the last time she played it before last year. She deserved the seed. They've given Serena and Venus better seeds than their rankings before as well. Wimbledon believes in giving an extra reward for past performance. This is where the whole discussion of seeds existing in the first place comes into play. They are there so that those who have clearly shown they are better than most don't end up playing someone else who has clearly shown they are better than most in the first 3 rounds. Nadal is still a top 4 seed. Still can't play the other two guys vying for the GOAT crown until the semis. That's completely unchanged by being 2 or 3. Yes. He's shown that he's currently the second best player in the world and shouldn't have to worry about being in Djokovic's half. But. It worked out. He had a 50/50 chance. And it's a random draw no matter what.

The reason I have no problem with Wimbledon changing the seeds is because it's a formula. EVERYONE gets the benefit of the formula. Nadal got his 720 points from last year added in. And his 4th round from the year before. But Fed won this thing in 2017 and made the quarters last year. 1500 points from 2017, along with his warm up event points, was enough to close the gap. The gap was only 1325 points. The gap now is only like 600 or so points. But Fed is now 600 or so points above Nadal. I'd bet you part of the reason Fed played the clay season was to get the points he needed to close the gap in the seedings at Wimbledon. Nadal doesn't do Wimbledon warmups. Hasn't since like 2015. That's on him. This thing has been around for 17 years and this is arguably the first year it's had any big change like this. When Fed was dominating, he was number 1 and was defending the title, it didn't matter. I think Andy Roddick may have gotten a nice bump one year. I legitimately can't remember any other major changes. I'm sure there are guys in the bottom 29, 30, 31, 32, that have been dropped before because someone got in that had better grass court results added to their ranking. But, I mean. Again. It's a formula. And it's not like Fed is 6 or 8 or 10 in the world. He's right behind Rafa. That's the only reason this is possible. It's one year. AND, you still gotta play your matches. Even if Rafa had ended up in Djokovic's side, they couldn't have met until the semis and Djokovic beat him last year. He is capable of beating Djokovic here I'm sure. But in the 2011 final and the semis here last year he hasn't pulled it off. And he's been the most vulnerable Big 4 player at Wimbledon for years. It worked out that he ended up in Fed's half and he still might have to play Kyrgios in the second round who has beat him here before. Now you can say that if he was the second seed he would be in Fed's spot and Fed would have to play Kyrgios. But there's no guarantee that Kyrgios would have been picked where he was in an alternate reality. Kyrgios is unseeded. He could have been picked and placed anywhere. I guess you could argue that you don't need an alternate reality for this situation. Because the top 2 seeds get placed automatically and if Nadal was at 2 and everything else went the way it did, he wouldn't potentially have Kyrgios in the second round. And Fed would. And I'm sure he would have loved to have a shot at having Fed and Djokovic in the same half so he could only possibly play one. But he's got to get to them first. Kyrgios is not the only player Rafa has to worry about on grass. He's not one of the two best players on grass in the world and that is a fact. And he's probably not top 5. Hasn't been for a long time. And it's really hard to argue Fed didn't earn his seed when he's got 8 titles, one of them in the last 2 years and that fits into the formula that has been around for 17 years!

And then there is the fact that for Nadal's entire career there's been 32 seeds rather than 16. He's already benefited from not having to face top 20 players early than the 3rd round for 15 years. That is also true for everyone else. But I just think all the players from ALL time before the change to 32 seeds would look at Rafa or anyone complaining about 1 seed change and laugh. Because they all lost to people who were just outside the seeds at slams, but would have been seeded if there were 32. This fact is not entirely fair to bring up in reference to this particular discussion. The change to 32 seeds has benefited everyone and all the slams did it. But I do think Nadal or anyone whining about Wimbledon's formula has less of a leg to stand on since they've been benefiting from 32 seeds for their entire careers.

 

[Shivashish Sarkar]

Seeds are so that two top players don't play in an earlier round (which would be odd). And in the context of Wimbledon, the Wimbledon seeds identify these top players we need to consider.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I'm not sure what the controversy is. Wimbledon have ALWAYS done this. Everyone knows it. If any player had an issue with it then it was up to them to take steps to ensure it didn't affect them. It's that simple really. Complaining about it would be lazy and whiny if indeed that's what he did

It is about time they changed.Personally I think they should go on current rankings,not on how many Wimbledon titles a player has previously won.I would think the same if a no2 ranked player not named Rafa received the same treatment.No other Grand Slam tournament takes this stance.The draw has been done,time to move on.

 

[Federberg]

It is about time they changed.Personally I think they should go on current rankings,not on how many Wimbledon titles a player has previously won.I would think the same if a no2 ranked player not named Rafa received the same treatment.No other Grand Slam tournament takes this stance.The draw has been done,time to move on.

I think it's redundant now that surfaces aren't that different. This is a residue of a bygone era when clay court specialists and grass court specialists were a thing. The argument was, why pollute the seedings with fellas that weren't going to live up to their ranking? It made some sense then, now it's irrelevant. But to be clear, it's about a time weighted grass court ranking if I remember correctly. The fact that Rafa did so well last year at Wimbledon is actually to his credit. In the end let's face it. It's made no difference whatsoever. With Roger and Rafa on the same side of the draw there is really no difference between 2 & 3

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I think it's redundant now that surfaces aren't that different. This is a residue of a bygone era when clay court specialists and grass court specialists were a thing. The argument was, why pollute the seedings with fellas that weren't going to live up to their ranking? It made some sense then, now it's irrelevant. But to be clear, it's about a time weighted grass court ranking if I remember correctly. The fact that Rafa did so well last year at Wimbledon is actually to his credit. In the end let's face it. It's made no difference whatsoever. With Roger and Rafa on the same side of the draw there is really no difference between 2 & 3

Agree the draw made no difference as both Rafa and Roger are in the same side of the draw,still if could have gone the other way maybe the 'draw gods' felt sorry for him

Hmm they did not feel sorry for him in rd 2 btw might have to play 'the tantrum king'.EEK.

 

[kskate2]

Does anyone know if Nadal plays on Monday or Tuesday? Thanks

The defending men's champ always plays on Mon at 1pm. If Nadal and Fed are on the other side of the draw they'll probably play Tues

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Totally agree with the Tennis.com 5 first rounders to watch.

I immediately picked out all 5 of them when I saw them. Especially Querrey/Thiem and Tiafoe/Fognini. Because I remember their RG match from a couple years ago and I know Fognini is terrible on grass. If I'm Cilic I'm probably not too worried about Mannarino. He has always been solid on grass but Cilic has the serve to deal with him. AND Cilic just beat Nadal at the Hurlingham Exhibition (Aspall Tennis Classic). It's just an exhibition and Nadal was clearly just getting his bearings on grass. But it's a serious exhibition the guys use to warm up for Wimbledon. He'll take some confidence from it.

I mentioned Djokovic/Kohlschreiber in my draw breakdowns. I do think he'll have to play well and Kohlschreiber can still probably get a set. But Djokovic is almost certainly going to win that match. Especially after the loss earlier this year, as he's already beaten him twice since then. He'll be on top of his game because he knows Kohschreiber is a threat and he can't afford to give away games or sets.

I guess I didn't really see Anderson/Hugues-Herbert because while I do know that HH has had a nice grass season, Anderson's serve is likely going to be too much and he'll likely take 3 out of 4 tiebreaks. But also Anderson is good enough to break on occasion. So it may go 5. And anyone can win it if it goes 5. But I guess I just figured that Anderson will probably deal with HH in 4.

If I were Tennis. com I would have chosen the Zverev/Vesely match over Anderson/HH. I mean. Zverev is in a veritable slump and Vesely just qualified and is defending a fourth round. He's 6'6" like Zverev and his serve at Wimbledon has been a force. That's the upset I'm on the lookout for. Thiem/Querrey the only higher seed I'm really thinking might fall. I mean. Thiem can beat Querrey. Querrey just getting back to playing and had not looked good for a while before that. But Querrey totally capable of being right back to his top grass court form like we've seen from him this week in Eastbourne. But also. He's got to play the Eastbourne final tomorrow. He'll have to recover quickly to challenge Thiem. Tough draw for Querrey who I was really hoping would be able to do well here this year. And he still may. I just don't want it to be at the expense of Thiem. One of those draws that didn't go the way of my fandom this time.

Other matches to watch include:
Tsitsipas/Fabbiano. Fabbiano just lost to Querrey in three sets in the Eastbourne semis. Still. Hard to see 5'8" Fabbiano beating one of the tours hottest players who also happens to be 6'5". I mean. He beat Querrey, 6'6", in a second set tiebreak. But Querrey is just back and doesn't have the game Tsitsipas does. Still. Tsitsipas will need to be on top of it.
Garin/Rublev. Rublev still trying to get back to the form he had before the injury when he was in the conversation with Coric and Zverev at the US Open in 2017 or 2016.
Kyrgios/Thompson. Because Kyrgios can't threaten Nadal if he can't deal with Thompson.
Fritz/Berdych. Feel sort of bad for Fritz. He's had a solid season. He's getting better. But Berdych, even though he's been struggling, should be too good for him on grass. Even though Fritz will challenge Querrey for the Eastbourne title tomorrow. Tough draw.

Struff/Baghdatis. Could be Baghdatis' swan song. If he wins, then Coric will likely be his swan song. Buuuuttt he could get on a little, last time out run. Coric is beatable and had to pull out in Halle. Struff has been great over the clay season and the early season. He's having the start of a late career surge. Couldn't call it a resurgence. He never surged much early on to begin with. Got confidence from doubles last year. Made the quarters in doubles here last year. And the 3rd in singles. Should win this match. But Baghdatis just may have enough in him to beat someone who isn't all that great on grass. Though it was never Baghdatis' forte either. Schwartzman and Krajinovic are also beatable if he can get past Coric. I'd be shocked if he did any of that. But.... ya never know.

Nah. We know. Watch this match. But Struff will likely win it. Baghdatis is going because he knows he can't stay.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

Realized I didn't write up the third and fourth quarters. Not sure why. Got distracted I guess.

Third quarter.
Obviously watch out for Nadal/Kyrgios in the second round. And Thiem/Querrey in the first round. Should Nadal come through Kyrgios, or just through whoever to Shapovalov, that is definitely one to watch for. If Shapovalov can get there. He's definitely been struggling. And as I mentioned in the last post. Cilic just beat Nadal at the Hurlingham exhibition. Yes. It's just a exhibition, even if a serious exhibition. And it's only 2 out of 3 sets. But Cilic will certainly take some confidence out of it and if he gets to Nadal, he could definitely make a serious match out of it. Cilic has been to a Wimbledon final more recently than Nadal. And despite the fact that I generally think of DelPo as better than Cilic and Nadal dealt with DelPo last year. It took Nadal five sets and Cilic may be better on grass. Even if DelPo is not slouch on the grass. And then IF Thiem comes through and Nadal comes through. On grass.... man I'd love to see that. I'd also love to see Nadal/Querrey though. I'm just hoping Querrey doesn't beat Thiem and then lose in the second round to Garin or Rublev. Because then you're likely going to get a Simon or Tiafoe facing Nadal in the quarters and that's just.... oy. But again. Nadal may not make the quarters. Cilic really could beat him. Shapovalov could challenge him. Kyrgios could beat him. I gotta tell y'all. As good as Nadal has looked the last year or two, I do not think his semi here last year suddenly means he's back to making the semis and finals of Wimbledon. Everyone he has to play remembers his 5 to 6 year stretch of seriously struggling here. He lost some close ones. But the point is he can be taken the distance. Big servers can beat him. He's got 3 potential ones in his quarter.


Fourth quarter:
Fed shoullllld be safe to the 4th round. Honestly Fed should be the semifinalist. Coric looms in the 4th round. Coric had to pull out of Halle in the quarters though. And there's never a guarantee he wins the matches he should. But I like him on grass a lot. I want Fed to get his 9th title. I was hoping Coric would be no where near him so I could root for him to make the semis or the final. Even if that seems like futility most of the time. But. As it falls. It is what it is and I just hope Fed can beat him if it comes to it. Lloyd Harris is a name many should have taken notice of last year a bit as he won a bunch of Challengers. He's 6'5". Maybe that means he can serve and challenge Fed. But Fed played Halle. Won it. He's warmed up. It wouldn't be the first time he's had trouble in the first round. But I don't think Harris has the grass bona fides to suggest he can tango with Fed. Obviously I don't think either Noah Rubin or Jay Clarke have the goods to beat Fed. I don't know much about either. But. I mean. I know Rubin has struggled to get any consistency going in his career. And Jay Clarke, I've legit never heard his name. He's a WC. Maybe Britain knows something we don't. But I doubt it. Pouille/Gasquet could end up being Fed's 3rd round opponent. Both solid on grass. Obviously Fed doesn't worry about Gasquet. Though, you can't get complacent. But Pouille has really shown promise on the grass. Fed doesn't have the 16-0 or whatever h2h he has against Gasquet against Pouille. Pouille will have some belief.
But it's the fact that Isner and Berrettini and Berdych landed in Fed's quarter that maybe should give us pause. Isner of course is Isner. That massive serve. But. He's not Anderson. Every now and again he can break. But not even as well as Anderson. Fed would likely win against Isner. But even with the 12-12 tiebreak, Fed would want to keep to 4 sets or less for sure. But Isner, coming back from injury and his first child coming into the world, may not have the goods to get anywhere near Fed. Berrettini did look really solid on grass so far this year. That was a welcome surprise. But should Berdych beat Fritz like I think he will, then Berrettini will have his hands full with that. So Berdych possibly could come out of this to play Nishikori or De Minaur in the 4th round before a quarter with Fed. I'm hoping Nishikori can get back to the quarters this year. Just to defend the points. Though someone of his caliber could threaten Fed, even on grass, so maybe I don't want that. Though. I mean. I would be like 90% confident Fed would beat Nishikori in the quarters. Again. I was hoping Nishikori, like Coric, would be nowhere near Fed. I hate this draw.
But honestly, with Coric up and down this year and maybe not even healthy and Isner's fitness unknown and Berrettini still trying to establish himself, even if Berdych made it to the quarters, I'd pick Fed. If Berdych made the quarters he'd clearly be playing at a level that he has not seen since his return from injury. And on the grass he could find it. But Fed probably still too good right now. Fed should be the semifinalist. BUT I'm aware that I have a Fed bias and am open to the fact that he could be upset. He looked good enough on clay to me to suggest he's playing really well. Following it up with the Halle title just reinforces that.

Since I don't think Nadal is gonna make the semis, and even if he did, I think Fed will be your finalist. And has a very good chance to beat even Djokovic in the final. But. Nadal could be him. Djokovic could beat him. Cilic could maybe beat him. Coric could surprise me and beat him on grass again. Maybe Pouille has the goods. Maybe Berrettini gets there and has something we don't know about. It's no longer a situation, even on grass, where Fed is at 80% or 90% likely to win his matches any time he steps on court. Certain players? Yes. But most of the seeded guys can definitely challenge him. Especially if he can't find his best on any given day.

 

[El Dude]

A title here gives Fed a chance to hold off the island bastard. The problem is Fed didn't keep winning Wimbledon. If he'd properly taken care of business here over the years his career wouldn't be under attack right now.

I've never heard you say this before.

 

[El Dude]

If Rafa makes it to the SF and Roger, I almost think he'll win it - he'll have gone through some really tough players, while Roger has a cakewalk. That said, I don't think he'll make it to the SF...too many landmines. Kyrgios, Tsonga/Shapovalov, Cilic, Thiem. Ouch.

In fact, I'm also predicting an upset for Novak, and that Roger will be the only one of the Big Three to reach the semis.