AUSTRALIAN OPEN, Melbourne, ATP GRAND SLAM

[DarthFed]

Impressive stuff. Keep it up, get through quick and get ready for a cage match with the Stanimal

 

[Moxie]

Murray had no Plan B either

Sidebar question, before I call it a night, and since I didn't see the match: Did Murray underestimate Zverev? Did the S&V just catch him flat-footed or what?

 

[DarthFed]

Zverev getting his teeth into it now as Roger not returning quite as well as the first few games.

 

[britbox]

Sidebar question, before I call it a night, and since I didn't see the match: Did Murray underestimate Zverev? Did the S&V just catch him flat-footed or what?

I'd say both, but his returning wasn't great.

Good start to set 2 from Mischa, but I think Fed will regroup pretty quickly

 

[DarthFed]

Terrible service game from Roger and hopefully he didn't just tweak his leg

 

[DarthFed]

He seems to be alright, hopefully breaks back here.

 

[britbox]

Also Murray was reacting from the baseline... Federer has a natural tendency to go forward... his court positioning is far more aggressive... he's on those balls in the short court far quicker than Murray.

 

[DarthFed]

Zverev has picked it up and Roger has not been sharp at all this set.

 

[DarthFed]

After a crappy set he finds himself with 3 BP's! This would be demoralizing. Zverev outplayed him much of this set surprisingly. And there's the break!

 

[britbox]

After a crappy set he finds himself with 3 BP's! This would be demoralizing. Zverev outplayed him much of this set surprisingly. And there's the break!

I'm not sure he did, it probably just felt that way because Zverev played way above expectations and Roger below...

Roger should wrap up the second now.

 

[britbox]

Lol. Incredible lob.

 

[Federberg]

Aw come on , Roger's skill as a vollier is no better than Nadal's and Djokovic's. However Roger has a better natural game that can allow for attacking tennis than either Nadal or ND. Or to put it in another way, none of the three don't come within a bull's roar on past era champions volley skills such as Pete Sampras, Rafter, Edberg or McEnroe.

I think that both Roger and Rafa are far more competent volleyers than Novak. Now don't get me wrong, I'm a monster Edberg, Rafter and Mac fan, and I think they're the 3 most accomplished volleyers I've ever seen, but it was a damn sight easier to engineer a net approach in those days than it is now with modern technology the way it is. I don't think that you can make a proper comparison between Rafa and Roger because Rafa only uses volleys to close out points. He doesn't really employ serve and volley. I don't get why this is so controversial

 

[britbox]

Dear God, this game seems to have lasted longer than the first set.

 

[britbox]

Roger v Stan... that might be a piece of dynamite.

 

[Federberg]

^Stan has to prove that he can beat Roger outside of clay. There might be a mental thing there. I doubt it, but I raise it as a possibility. He should have won at the ATP finals a few years ago

 

[Tennis Fan]

Aw come on , Roger's skill as a vollier is no better than Nadal's and Djokovic's. However Roger has a better natural game that can allow for attacking tennis than either Nadal or ND. Or to put it in another way, none of the three don't come within a bull's roar on past era champions volley skills such as Pete Sampras, Rafter, Edberg or McEnroe.

Exactly, you kept to the actual subject and gave a fair assessment, the same type of assessment that the older greats have said in the past.

 

[Tennis Fan]

Roger v Stan... that might be a piece of dynamite.

I know that Stan usually turns into a monster towards the end of a tournament, but I don't see him doing that against Roger. I was surprised at how well he played Tsonga, but this time the circumstances are different, sentimental favorite, awesome chance at getting another major, that might be pressure on Stan. I would be surprised if Stan will be that aggressive with Roger, but I guess we'll see.

 

[mrzz]

The fact that people try to switch the narratives cracks me up too. The initial conversation was about volleys, not serve and volley, but sometimes people want to be so right that the point gets lost in the "arguing." The fact that Federer considers himself an aggressive baseliner seals the deal for me, no matter how many stats people try to use, and then, only in the four majors although they play all year? Not convinced. That type of data would have to be all-inclusive, not cherry picked, IMO.

I hate to address you directly (as you ask me no to do it) but you are spreading miss information, so I have no choice. @masterclass did not "cherry pick" data, he got a sample. We all should thank him that he spent his time to do it in order for all of us have a better informed discussion. Why he got a sample? To begin with, maybe simply there is no data of all matches, and second, it takes quite an effort to analyze them all. There is a thing called statistics that allows you to infer results of populations out of samples. They use it in elections, for example, and the maximum error should around 3%, if done honestly or competently, as all elections in the world bar the last American one show.

The good thing about data is that it often surprises you. When I compiled the (small) data of this AUS OPEN, I was quite sure Nadal´s number were a bit lower. They were quite good, indeed.

Back to Masterclass" sample... Is it a good one? Hell it is... he chose majors (exactly the highest stake), at the later rounds, where you are playing against better adversaries. So you can safely bet that Federer´s overall statistics are probably way better than that. As yourself has observed the obvious fact that he would attack more against lower ranked players.

I have no problem with non-mainstream claims, but the least you can do is to give some reasoning to them. It is appalling, offensive and completely disrespectful to -- while not bringing no argument to the table -- ignore and dismiss the DATA someone else compiles just because it does not fit your argument.

If you want to make a valid point, you should discuss what those "net points" really mean. They are not necessarily only volleys. But I guess that is the best data we can get.

 

[Vince Evert]

Wow. Roger really turned back the clock tonight. I expected a more competitive straight sets match but not as one sided as this. Did Zverev suffer a let down ? Is he a one trick pony ? NOW GO AND WIN THE BLOODY CHAMPIONSHIP AND IT WOULD BE ONE OF SPORT'S GREATEST FEATS, AYE ? I tell ya, a 35 year old Roger winning the AO will put the tournament at Melbourne Park on centre stage WORLDWIDE.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Stanimal being Stanimal. Seriously decent chance that he comes away with another one on Sunday.

Starting to think he's the favorite to win it all. Hoping Fed has a vintage day against him.