TennisFanatic7 said:
GameSetAndMath said:
herios said:
TennisFanatic7 said:
Federer has had one bad loss all year to Chardy but otherwise played better than Stan in the Davis Cup tie against Kazakhstan and losses to Anderson, Dolgopolov, Thiem and Haas in the other four Masters events, so I'd say Federer has been the more reliable/consistent player this year.
The rest, I guess I can't argue with but I still feel Stan's odds being that good are a bit generous based on winning Australia and that you'll see a better Federer in the slams than you will elsewhere. If he avoids Rafa I'd say he's got a better shot at the title than Stan myself but hey-ho.
Unless he gets Tsonga in R4, who will look for a revenge for his AO humiliation.
I would not call Fed's loss to Chardy a bad loss considering he had match point.
Actually, Fed's loss against Hewitt in Brisbane and Kei in Miami are bad losses for
Fed this year.
I meant bad in terms of it being in an early round and the stature of his opponent. I'd forgotten about Brisbane to be honest but you can kind of shrug off the early year 250 defeats to an extent. I wouldn't call the Nishikori loss that bad either, Kei has been in good form and would be a Masters winner by now if not for his back, not as bad as the ones mentioned that Stan has lost, at least.
I get the back-and-forth on the odds difference between Stan and Roger. (It's not like I understand betting at all, but I found Broken's explanation of p.1 of this thread useful.) But I'm kind of with TF7 on the difference between their odds being so exaggerated. If Rafa gets the shortest odds for having won it 8 times, which makes sense, why isn't there any taking into account that Federer knows how to win a Slam well enough to win 17 of them, whereas Wawrinka has the one, coming later in his career, and it isn't like he's taken the tennis world by storm since then? I get that Stan has the clay form to be considered the 3rd-most-likely, but we all are wondering (admit it) how he'll come into RG with the attention and pressure on him. Roger won't be bothered by that, because he's lived with it for 10 years, and if opportunity presents itself, he's far better than most at capitalizing. Stan could have a run to the final, even the win, (which would also likely take some opportunity) or he could hit a speed bump early and be out. It's hard to predict what Stan will bring. Some will say that Roger hits pot-holes more often now, too, but if we're just talking about consistency in Majors, you'd still have to say you'd see Roger later in the second week more likely than Stan, imo.
.
