General tennis news 2013-2014

[DarthFed]

RE: General tennis news

Let me out it like this for ya, Darth: fellers outside the top 4 have been losing to #18 so often over the last ten years, it's not news any more!

Yes, there is a reason those outside the top 4 are/were ranked below those in it

 

[brokenshoelace]

RE: General tennis news

What do you think of George Bastl? He beat Pete Sampras in a major.

I think nothing of him. He was a flash in the pan and he caught Pete on a disastrous day for him.

But - he finished the job. How often have we seen guys run scared of that - and yet we're supposed to praise them. Robredo did well that day and deserves praise for it. Federer didn't play his best, that's obvious, but it means nothing. He's often played worse and fellas let him wriggle off the hook...

EDIT: one thing I'm really happy to see is upsets at the majors, even though Rafa has been victim now twoce at Wimbo. I think they're a sign of good health in the game...

Robredo deserves praise. But it doesn't make the loss any less disastrous -- or alarming -- for Federer. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

Robredo deserves praise. But it doesn't make the loss any less disastrous -- or alarming -- for Federer. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Oh, I'm sure it was alarming for Federer and I can see it was for his fans, but the idea that only top 4 should ever win big matches is more alarming for the state of the game right now...

 

[brokenshoelace]

RE: General tennis news

Wait, you think that Federer has never played worse than that in the last 10 years - and still won? I remember Davydenko and Haas, in particular, scarpering for the hills at the first sniff of resistance.

If Federer ever played that badly against Davydenko or Haas back in the way, he would have been sent packing. That never happened. Not in a slam at least. I'd like for someone to provide an example that might prove otherwise.

But tell me this: how can the tour be strong when there's no competition? And how can there be competition when players ranked near the very highest echelons are not considered good enough to have a chance to win?

So Robredo is now indicative of a tour's strength/weakness? A player who was out for decades and had just made his return?

The circumstances were right and I think Tommy deserves applause instead of being put down for it...

Sure, but it will never change how badly Roger played. Ever.

 

[brokenshoelace]

RE: General tennis news

Robredo deserves praise. But it doesn't make the loss any less disastrous -- or alarming -- for Federer. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Oh, I'm sure it was alarming for Federer and I can see it was for his fans, but the idea that only top 4 should ever win big matches is more alarming for the state of the game right now...

Where did this idea originate from? People thinking Federer shouldn't lose to Robredo = only the top 4 should ever win big matches? How?

I know some feel we should never miss a chance to imply weak competition but this is a bit of a stretch...

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

Fed v Davydenko in Oz in 2010, he was down a set and 3-1 - then won the next 13 games, with nary a twitch from Davydenko to stop him until Nikolai was down a break in the fourth. He literally downed tools.

And of course, Haas in Paris, where one great shot from Federer at 3-4 down in the 3rd caused Tommy's knees to tremble. Unlike Davydenko, his knees never stopped trembling.

At least Robredo stuck to his task, which has been seldom in Fed's years, but most welcome. There is NO way Haas or Davydenko would ever send Roger packing at a slam, no matter how lousy he played... :nono

 

[Front242]

RE: General tennis news

Roger started playing FAR better after that shot at 4-4 30-30 in set 3. Definitely Haas' level dropped a bit but the difference here is Roger was just crap all match against Robredo. Big difference. He actually got worse, not better, with the worst scoreline (6-3) in set 3.

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

Robredo deserves praise. But it doesn't make the loss any less disastrous -- or alarming -- for Federer. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Oh, I'm sure it was alarming for Federer and I can see it was for his fans, but the idea that only top 4 should ever win big matches is more alarming for the state of the game right now...

Where did this idea originate from? People thinking Federer shouldn't lose to Robredo = only the top 4 should ever win big matches? How?

I know some feel we should never miss a chance to imply weak competition but this is a bit of a stretch...

Like I said above, you limited your argument: Roger shouldn't lose to Robredo (who he did lose to) but he should lose to...who?

Players who haven't beaten him?

I'm not sure this stacks up.

The fact that he lost to Robredo is proof positive that he should lose to him. If he hadn't lost there, under those circumstances, would you moan that Robredo was too weak to get the job done? Robredo's victory is indicative of what any player in the top 20 should aspire to, but so many don't seem to. He stuck to it, as have Rosol and Darcis and Stakhovsky, and personally I think tennis is a lot healthier when the lower orders get more unruly and less, well, ordered...

 

[Front242]

RE: General tennis news

Unlike Rosol, Darcis and also Stakhovsky, Robredo's level of play didn't need to be anywhere near as high to win. Therein lies the main and huge difference.

 

[brokenshoelace]

RE: General tennis news

Fed v Davydenko in Oz in 2010, he was down a set and 3-1 - then won the next 13 games, with nary a twitch from Davydenko to stop him until Nikolai was down a break in the fourth. He literally downed tools.

And of course, Haas in Paris, where one great shot from Federer at 3-4 down in the 3rd caused Tommy's knees to tremble. Unlike Davydenko, his knees never stopped trembling.

At least Robredo stuck to his task, which has been seldom in Fed's years, but most welcome. There is NO way Haas or Davydenko would ever send Roger packing at a slam, no matter how lousy he played... :nono

You honestly think Roger's level in those matches was as bad as it was against Robredo? No. It might have been for stretches (doubtful), but he certainly picked his game up, something he never did against Robredo. Of course Davydenko imploded more than once against Roger, but Federer would have been taken to the woodshed if he offered 3 sets as poor as the ones he did against Robredo. Never mind the fact that this would have been humanly impossible, since Federer playing horrible in say, 2010, is still better than old man Federer playing horrible in 2013.

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

Davydenko would never have taken Roger to the woodshed at a slam. This is the whole point. We can conjecture about these things regarding levels of play and who shouldn't do what - but the fact is that Robredo IS a top player and by beating Roger at a slam he proved himself different to other makeweights who supposedly have better pedigrees than him, but couldn't do it...

 

[Front242]

RE: General tennis news

Davydenko would never have taken Roger to the woodshed at a slam. This is the whole point. We can conjecture about these things regarding levels of play and who shouldn't do what - but the fact is that Robredo IS a top player and by beating Roger at a slam he proved himself different to other makeweights who supposedly have better pedigrees than him, but couldn't do it...

Do you honestly think Tommy played better than Rosol, Darcis or Stakhovsky? All 3 of them played out of their minds. Robredo didn't and he didn't have to 'cos his opponent played so badly. In those other 3 matches both Nadal and Federer didn't play that badly at all by any stretch. Their opponents still barely won those matches save for a break (the Rosol match 5th set break) or a few TB points in the case of the Darcis and Stakhovsky matches. But they all played outstanding.

Robredo won in a not even close straight sets match where Fed was flat out crap.

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

Lads, if a top player is off his game, then he should be in danger. And if he can't rouse himself in time, he loses. This isn't the WTA, but for too long it's been the male version of it...

 

[Front242]

RE: General tennis news

Lads, if a top player is off his game, then he should be in danger. And if he can't rouse himself in time, he loses. This isn't the WTA, but for too long it's been the male version of it...

Look up the scorelines of the Rosol, Darcis, Stakhovksy and Robredo matches and guess which one had the worst scoreline?

 

[brokenshoelace]

RE: General tennis news

Davydenko would never have taken Roger to the woodshed at a slam. This is the whole point. We can conjecture about these things regarding levels of play and who shouldn't do what - but the fact is that Robredo IS a top player and by beating Roger at a slam he proved himself different to other makeweights who supposedly have better pedigrees than him, but couldn't do it...

I bet Robredo would gladly exchange his win over Federer for Davydenko's career.

 

[Kieran]

RE: General tennis news

And I bet you're right!

 

[DarthFed]

RE: General tennis news

Davydenko would never have taken Roger to the woodshed at a slam. This is the whole point. We can conjecture about these things regarding levels of play and who shouldn't do what - but the fact is that Robredo IS a top player and by beating Roger at a slam he proved himself different to other makeweights who supposedly have better pedigrees than him, but couldn't do it...

This is a silly argument to say the least. Davydenko of 2006-2010 didn't get the "opportunity" to play Roger of 2013 at majors, same with Haas. Davydenko played lights out tennis to get to that lead in AO 2010, tennis that Robredo has never come close to reaching on a hard court. That's the point, Robredo, a career nobody on hard courts, didn't even have to play above himself to win 3 easy sets vs. Federer. That wasn't happening before 2013 for the "makeweights" who just happen to have way better careers than your new favorite. Certainly Robredo must also be greater than Roddick too for winning the USO match when Roddick couldn't win that 2009 final. And man that Stakhovsky is incredible, if only other players showed as much guts against Roger, surely they'd have beaten the 2004-2012 version :snigger

 

[Ricardo]

RE: General tennis news

I suspect that there's a lot of shape-shifting and yoga-like ankles behind the ears to try bend this one around against ol' Tommy. Sure, Federer at his best beats Tommy a hundred times out of a hundred, even if they played on cut-glass or quicksand. It's irrelevant: nobody plays their best 100%. And when they're off, the opponent may nab them.

While I don't rate the makeweights of the previous decade, I think it's unfair and contradictory of anyone who thinks this is the toughest tour ever to say that in beating Federer, a player of Tommy's calibre caused the biggest upset since Pontius was a pilot in Delta Airlines...

don't talk cheap here, Fed doesn't need to be at his best to beat Tommy..... he beat him 10 out of 10 times before and you wanna tell us that he was at his best in all those matches?

some people were surprised because Fed dropped to a level they simply didn't expect to see, not at a major anyway. Of course during that period he lost matches week in/week out to very low ranked players, who were supposed to be cake walks.... his level was too low, like he said himself.

now we know you don't rate players of the 2000s, you've made that clear for about the 100000th times; too bad they were born in the wrong era, should've played in the 90s so they could beat Sampras&co and prove their worth (aka Schaller, Yzaga, Haarhuis etc).

 

[Ricardo]

RE: General tennis news

Lads, if a top player is off his game, then he should be in danger. And if he can't rouse himself in time, he loses. This isn't the WTA, but for too long it's been the male version of it...

i don't know which tour you've been following, but Nadal and Djoker playing their B game are still better than the vast majority of players. They are rarely ever in danger because they either bring their A or B game, at least. Same with Fed in his prime, his B game would take care of guys because he was simply better..... i know it's a new idea for you, but not all great players play crap when they are off their A-game... like your 90s idols.

Get over it and get on with the times

 

[Ricardo]

RE: General tennis news

Davydenko would never have taken Roger to the woodshed at a slam. This is the whole point. We can conjecture about these things regarding levels of play and who shouldn't do what - but the fact is that Robredo IS a top player and by beating Roger at a slam he proved himself different to other makeweights who supposedly have better pedigrees than him, but couldn't do it...

Tommy 'IS' a top player in present tense? ok. Davydenko would've never done this and that, sure thanks for the wisdom of hindsight... priceless from you as usual :clap