CANADIAN MASTERS 2013 MONTREAL 2-11 August

[ClayDeath]

the prophesy was written in the stars and revealed at the castle.

the great dunblane warrior rises at flushing meadows.

lendl and the dunblane warrior have nole on the run. now there is no place to hide.




I think andy wins in montreal also. its his destiny. he is rising to meet it.

 

[Moxie]

nole has a tough road ahead. he will be defending wtf also.


if andy takes the u.s. open then he is also taking wtf.

and by the way, andy is taking the u.s. open.

With the WTF being played in London, Andy will have home
crowd support. Given that he was won Wimby and Olympics
at home, now the support will not be a pressure anymore and
will help him win it. That will be another first for Andy as he
has never won it before.

However, he is not going to take the USO again. Leave
that to Djoker or Delpo.

I don't see how anyone could put Djokovic or Del Potro above Murray, at this point in the season.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I don't see how anyone could put Djokovic or Del Potro above Murray, at this point in the season.

Here are the (best) betting odds for USO winner


Novak Djokovic

7/4

View all odds


Andy Murray

2

View all odds


Rafael Nadal

7

View all odds


Juan Martin del Potro

12

View all odds


Roger Federer

13

View all odds

 

[herios]

nole has a tough road ahead. he will be defending wtf also.


if andy takes the u.s. open then he is also taking wtf.

and by the way, andy is taking the u.s. open.

With the WTF being played in London, Andy will have home
crowd support. Given that he was won Wimby and Olympics
at home, now the support will not be a pressure anymore and
will help him win it. That will be another first for Andy as he
has never won it before.

However, he is not going to take the USO again. Leave
that to Djoker or Delpo.

I don't see how anyone could put Djokovic or Del Potro above Murray, at this point in the season.

Del Potro no, but Djokovic is above aAndy across all betting houses, ever so slightly.

 

[Moxie]

^ I'm sure you copied that from somewhere to make a point, but it doesn't make any sense to me. Feel free to illuminate, though. I don't really put much stock in those that make betting odds, because I don't think they really pay attention to the individual sports. For example, are they taking into account the emotional bump that Murray gets from winning Wimbledon? And that he did beat Djokovic - in straights - to do it? These things have emotional value. What about the fact that Djokovic hasn't won a tournament since Monte Carlo? And Del Potro...I'm not sure when. But therefore, I don't see how that would put either of them clearly above Murray. I would say all 3 are at the top in contention, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Murray may have an edge, given recent history and momentum.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^ I'm sure you copied that from somewhere to make a point, but it doesn't make any sense to me. Feel free to illuminate, though. I don't really put much stock in those that make betting odds, because I don't think they really pay attention to the individual sports. For example, are they taking into account the emotional bump that Murray gets from winning Wimbledon? And that he did beat Djokovic - in straights - to do it? These things have emotional value. What about the fact that Djokovic hasn't won a tournament since Monte Carlo? And Del Potro...I'm not sure when. But therefore, I don't see how that would put either of them clearly above Murray. I would say all 3 are at the top in contention, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Murray may have an edge, given recent history and momentum.

Of course, I did not make up those numbers.
It was a cut and paste for the odds of winning USO in betting houses.
So, you came down from "I don't think how anyone...." position to
"Murray may have an edge ...." position.

The point was to show to you that "Anyone could" position that you
initially took was an extreme position and is not really shared by
many people.

 

[Moxie]

^ I'm sure you copied that from somewhere to make a point, but it doesn't make any sense to me. Feel free to illuminate, though. I don't really put much stock in those that make betting odds, because I don't think they really pay attention to the individual sports. For example, are they taking into account the emotional bump that Murray gets from winning Wimbledon? And that he did beat Djokovic - in straights - to do it? These things have emotional value. What about the fact that Djokovic hasn't won a tournament since Monte Carlo? And Del Potro...I'm not sure when. But therefore, I don't see how that would put either of them clearly above Murray. I would say all 3 are at the top in contention, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Murray may have an edge, given recent history and momentum.

Of course, I did not make up those numbers.
It was a cut and paste for the odds of winning USO in betting houses.
So, you came down from "I don't think how anyone...." position to
"Murray may have an edge ...." position.

The point was to show to you that "Anyone could" position that you
initially took was an extreme position and is not really shared by
many people.

My point is that a) for folks who know nothing about odds, like myself, those numbers mean nothing, so a little help an analysis wouldn't go astray, and b) I still don't think that those that make betting odds pay enough attention to the finer points of tennis to be the last word on how things might go.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^ I'm sure you copied that from somewhere to make a point, but it doesn't make any sense to me. Feel free to illuminate, though. I don't really put much stock in those that make betting odds, because I don't think they really pay attention to the individual sports. For example, are they taking into account the emotional bump that Murray gets from winning Wimbledon? And that he did beat Djokovic - in straights - to do it? These things have emotional value. What about the fact that Djokovic hasn't won a tournament since Monte Carlo? And Del Potro...I'm not sure when. But therefore, I don't see how that would put either of them clearly above Murray. I would say all 3 are at the top in contention, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say that Murray may have an edge, given recent history and momentum.

Of course, I did not make up those numbers.
It was a cut and paste for the odds of winning USO in betting houses.
So, you came down from "I don't think how anyone...." position to
"Murray may have an edge ...." position.

The point was to show to you that "Anyone could" position that you
initially took was an extreme position and is not really shared by
many people.

My point is that a) for folks who know nothing about odds, like myself, those numbers mean nothing, so a little help an analysis wouldn't go astray, and b) I still don't think that those that make betting odds pay enough attention to the finer points of tennis to be the last word on how things might go.

Those numbers represent the return that you get, if you bet on that
person. For example, if you bet $1000 that Murray will win USO and
if he indeed actually wins it, you will be paid $2000. On the other hand,
if you bet $1000 on Nadal and if he actually wins, you will be paid
$7000. So, the larger the odds for a player, it means the betting
house estimates their chances of winning to be smaller. Hope it
explains.

There had been times when the odds for Fed was less than 1.
It the odds were say 0.75, then it would mean that if you bet
$1000 on Fed, and Fed actually wins, you will be paid $750.
If he loses, of course you will get nothing. Obviously, nobody
will spend money on that kind of bet.

While nobody can predict what will happen in the future,
as these bets involve real money, these betting houses will
be putting in lot of time and effort in coming up with these
odds and would consider all kinds of factors.

Finally, these odds will be dynamically changing also.
As more and more people are willing to put their money
on a particular player, that player's odds will come down
irrespective of that person's rankings and his chances of
winning as per the experts. This is because the betting
house cannot afford to disburse huge amounts of money to
lot of people even in a situation that has small probability of
happening.

 

[Mastoor]

Do you ever?

I do, every time Murray beats a Fedal I do. Is it my fault it happens only once every third blue moon?

Murray has an 11-9 winning record against Roger, so it's not rare.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=MC10&oId=F324

tented, it happened only 3 times in last 3 years that Murray beat (should I underline it? elderly) Fed and it isn't frequent. I think he had only 1 win against Rafa in those 3 years yet people talk about new and improved Murray.

 

[rafanoy1992]

Tsonga is out of Montreal because of a knee injury. It is the same one that he injured in Wimbledon against Gulbis.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

Do you ever?

I do, every time Murray beats a Fedal I do. Is it my fault it happens only once every third blue moon?

Murray has an 11-9 winning record against Roger, so it's not rare.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=MC10&oId=F324

tented, it happened only 3 times in last 3 years that Murray beat (should I underline it? elderly) Fed and it isn't frequent. I think he had only 1 win against Rafa in those 3 years yet people talk about new and improved Murray.

yeah, what gives? it might be because there's this other guy, current #1, that Andy has started beating in grand slam finals as of late. so maybe that's what they get the "new and improved" from. from the fact that he's currently the only guy holding the titles at new slam.

ridiculous, i know

 

[Moxie]

Do you ever?

I do, every time Murray beats a Fedal I do. Is it my fault it happens only once every third blue moon?

Murray has an 11-9 winning record against Roger, so it's not rare.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=MC10&oId=F324

tented, it happened only 3 times in last 3 years that Murray beat (should I underline it? elderly) Fed and it isn't frequent. I think he had only 1 win against Rafa in those 3 years yet people talk about new and improved Murray.

I think the New Murray dates to the beginning of 2012, when Lendl started coaching him. He hasn't even played Rafa since then. And he's beaten Federer about as much as not.

 

[lacatch]

Moxie--Murray beat a depleted Djokovic in the W final, as has been discussed numerous times (and graciously stated by Novak afterwards that he was shortening points). There's no way that Murray would beat an in-form Novak in straights, even at W. I don't doubt that Djokovic is feeling the pressure from Murray, and that he will want to reassert himself at the US Open for his second major win in '13. For different reasons, Murray must also be feeling increased pressure due to increased expectations, and he could succumb to that as well.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie--Murray beat a depleted Djokovic in the W final, as has been discussed numerous times (and graciously stated by Novak afterwards that he was shortening points). There's no way that Murray would beat an in-form Novak in straights, even at W. I don't doubt that Djokovic is feeling the pressure from Murray, and that he will want to reassert himself at the US Open for his second major win in '13. For different reasons, Murray must also be feeling increased pressure due to increased expectations, and he could succumb to that as well.

I was only responding to Mastoor on Murray v. Nadal in the last 3 years. But explain to me why Djokovic talking about shortening points because he was depleted would be "gracious?"

While I do believe that Djokovic seemed really mentally spent after the marathon with Del Potro, it's unfair on Murray to imply that's the only reason he won. I think Murray very much came with the attitude that he wasn't going to have his heart broken 2 years in a row. He played very very well. So it was a combination of things, but mental advantage, at this point, still goes to Andy.

 

[DarthFed]

nole has a tough road ahead. he will be defending wtf also.


if andy takes the u.s. open then he is also taking wtf.

and by the way, andy is taking the u.s. open.

With the WTF being played in London, Andy will have home
crowd support. Given that he was won Wimby and Olympics
at home, now the support will not be a pressure anymore and
will help him win it. That will be another first for Andy as he
has never won it before.

However, he is not going to take the USO again. Leave
that to Djoker or Delpo.

I don't see how anyone could put Djokovic or Del Potro above Murray, at this point in the season.

With Del Po there is no way he should be put above Murray or even Rafa for NYC. People have been overrating him for 4 years now when in all truthfulness this past Wimbledon is the 1st time he has been relevant at a big event since the start of 2010 (unless you count bronze at London).

But to state that it is ridiculous to put Djoker above Murray as a favorite is just wishful thinking on your part. I think you are drinking too much of the Samson Kool-Aid but he hates Djokovic like every other Nadal fan for obvious reasons and it is affecting his judgment. Grass is Djoker's worst surface and Murray's best while the fast hard courts of NY are truly the most neutral surface for these 2 to meet on. It's easy to forget that Nole has made 13 straight semis and 8 of 11 GS finals. Murray is more likely to be upset at USO than Nole but if those 2 meet I would favor Andy ever so slightly mostly due to possible lingering effects of the rout at Wimbledon.

 

[the AntiPusher]

nole has a tough road ahead. he will be defending wtf also.


if andy takes the u.s. open then he is also taking wtf.

and by the way, andy is taking the u.s. open.

With the WTF being played in London, Andy will have home
crowd support. Given that he was won Wimby and Olympics
at home, now the support will not be a pressure anymore and
will help him win it. That will be another first for Andy as he
has never won it before.

However, he is not going to take the USO again. Leave
that to Djoker or Delpo.

I don't see how anyone could put Djokovic or Del Potro above Murray, at this point in the season.

With Del Po there is no way he should be put above Murray or even Rafa for NYC. People have been overrating him for 4 years now when in all truthfulness this past Wimbledon is the 1st time he has been relevant at a big event since the start of 2010 (unless you count bronze at London).

But to state that it is ridiculous to put Djoker above Murray as a favorite is just wishful thinking on your part. I think you are drinking too much of the Samson Kool-Aid but he hates Djokovic like every other Nadal fan for obvious reasons and it is affecting his judgment. Grass is Djoker's worst surface and Murray's best while the fast hard courts of NY are truly the most neutral surface for these 2 to meet on. It's easy to forget that Nole has made 13 straight semis and 8 of 11 GS finals. Murray is more likely to be upset at USO than Nole but if those 2 meet I would favor Andy ever so slightly mostly due to possible lingering effects of the rout at Wimbledon.

he hates Djokovic like every other Nadal fan

That's not true.. I like Djoker and I give him the utmost credit for turning the tables on his rivalry against Rafa. For me.. I think that the tennis that these two produce is breathtaking and very close to Fedal except it doesn't have the contrast in styles. Djoker is the slight favorite over Murray at the US Open and I am very comfortable with Rafa flying under the radar but hopefully as a number 4 seed or better if possible.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

With Del Po there is no way he should be put above Murray or even Rafa for NYC. People have been overrating him for 4 years now when in all truthfulness this past Wimbledon is the 1st time he has been relevant at a big event since the start of 2010 (unless you count bronze at London).

Well, he made the finals in IW this year. I guess you are not
counting ATP 1000s as big events.

Even in that case, your statement may be true, but not because
Del Po sucked but because for a long long period of time since
he won the USO 2009, he was injured and simply did not even
participate. I guess in 2010, he played only 3 events or so
as he was going through wrist surgery.
In 2011, he was basically improving his rankings from infinity
to under 100. In 2012, he improved his rankings back into
top 10. Finally, 2013 is the year to make some noise.

When somebody is a player who beat Rafa and Roger back to
back (when they both were in their prime) and won the GS title and then got seriously injured
and then finally coming back to previous levels, one should
be taken seriously.

I expect him to win two of the four events DC, Montreal,
Cincy and US-Open. But, I do not predict as to which two.

 

[Iona16]

Moxie--Murray beat a depleted Djokovic in the W final, as has been discussed numerous times (and graciously stated by Novak afterwards that he was shortening points). There's no way that Murray would beat an in-form Novak in straights, even at W. I don't doubt that Djokovic is feeling the pressure from Murray, and that he will want to reassert himself at the US Open for his second major win in '13. For different reasons, Murray must also be feeling increased pressure due to increased expectations, and he could succumb to that as well.

I've no problem with Novak saying he was trying to shorten the points. Nothing wrong with that at all. I'm not sure why you think that shows grace though. Andy is the better grass court player. He's played Novak twice on grass and beaten him both times in straight sets. Every player will face challenges. It can be the weather, a tough semi or a day less rest. No slam win is easy. Sometimes you just have to accept that your guy was beaten by the better player on the day. I've had to do it many, many times.

 

[ClayDeath]

nole actually had the easiest draw at Wimbledon.

he also declared that he fresh, fit, and ready before the final.

the fact of the matter is this: andy took his will away. that can tire you in a hurry. mentally, emotionally, and physically.



same nole said before his semi against nadal at RG that he was "ready to play for 6 hours". he also predicted a win against nadal.



people are going to have realize sooner or later that both andy and nadal have major game.

nadal will be a lot better on the red clay next year than he was this year. he wont be coming back from a 7 month layoff.

and andy has conquered his demons. now he knows he belongs among the top guns.

 

[Iona16]

nole actually had the easiest draw at Wimbledon.

he also declared that he fresh, fit, and ready before the final.

the fact of the matter is this: andy took his will away. that can tire you in a hurry. mentally, emotionally, and physically.

same nole said before his semi against nadal at RG that he was "ready to play for 6 hours". he also predicted a win against nadal.

people are going to have realize sooner or later that both andy and nadal have major game.

nadal will be a lot better on the red clay next year than he was this year. he wont be coming back from a 7 month layoff.

and andy has conquered his demons. now he knows he belongs among the top guns.

Novak had the easiest draw when it came out. Andy's draw opened up - absolutely no doubt about that BUT he still had to beat the world no.1 to win the title.

The date was 7/7 and Andy was playing in his 7th slam final. He was trying to prevent Novak winning his 7th slam. It had been 77 years since Fred Perry had won Wimbledon. Virginia Wade last won in '77. It was written in the stars. Andy was not going to be denied.