Indian Wells, BNP Paribas Open, CA, USA, ATP Masters 2017

[DarthFed]

My prediction going forward: The winner of Kyrgios-Federer will win the tournament.

Carreno Busta defeats Cuevas
Thiem defeats Wawrinka
Nishikori defeats Sock
Federer/Kyrgios

Thiem defeats Carreno Busta
Federer/Kyrgios defeats Nishikori

Federer/Kyrgios defeats Thiem

I'll give Roger the slight edge due to his form and experience, and that I think he'll find a way to get Kyrgios frustrated and possibly implode. But it will be tough.

I actually think Nishi would beat Kyrgios if that's the matchup and though I'd give Roger the edge in a semi vs. Kei I feel that'd be a tough matchup too and it wouldn't surprise me if Kei won.

 

[Carol]

Fed is the #1 player of the year so far for this year. After that performance yesterday against Nadal & the AO from every broadcaster and tennis journalist what is going on here with Fed is unprecedented. The last time I saw Nadal look this beaten in a match was Djokovic in his dominant stretch. The Fed backhand has altered all the dynamics in the men's elite field. Now I clearly expect Nadal to be a co-favorite or the favorite at the French if this trend with Djokovic continues. One of the things that was not stated about this performance and the AO by most commentators is that tennis at this level is as much mental as it is physical. Fed is looking across that net and he's playing freely and beautifully against his nemesis. Some years the draws have guys playing each other a lot not sure if that will continue but the rankings and seedings will have a lot to do with that.

Sorry to say but if you, his fans, every broadcaster and tennis journalist think because Roger has beaten his nemesis in the AO and yesterday is unprecedented, yes, he played very good but his nemesis besides a VERY poor serve (much worse than the previous matches) and very poor game then it was very logic his victory in spite his loss in Dubai against anyone and his very tied result against Johnson. I thought to see a match more competitive but Rafa's game yesterday was pathetic. Maybe their 'papers' has changed and now Rafa is the one who don't know how to beat Roger? hmmm I don't think so, it has to be something else

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Roger is expected to play RG and 0 or 1 warm up event for RG. So, the chances of him running into Rafa is not that great and even if it happens it won't happen multiple times.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Just checked early odds for RG out of curiosity. Here is what I find.

1. Novak 5/2
2. Rafa 11/4
3. Andy 7/2
4. Stan 9
5. Roger 25

 

[Federberg]

I beg to disagree. The ranking system is quite good, and in general all critics of of it that I read give me more reason to believe it is very good.

The case in question in fact is simple. Federer was not playing tournaments, so there was no way to know how well he could play. The ranking system is cold, but fair. Of course one would expect that a top player would return after injury playing better than his ranking indicates, but:

1) First, this is not a given. Other players returned playing bellow average. You can not use Federer as a standard. And even he could have returned playing worst. He earned his points the hard way, and that is exactly how it should be done. Every number we see after his name now is surely fair.

2) Anything other than a ranking system such as this introduces a completely unfair level of arbitrariness. For how much time a guy out for injury would keep his position/seeding/whatever? 3 months, 6, one year? In the mean time, what the whole rest of the field does? No matter what they do or how well they play, they cannot earn that spot.

In other words, if the guy is not playing, his level can not be assessed. So whatever ranking he gets is arbitrary and (here comes the bad part) subject to be viewed as an injustice. Thank heavens there was no such a thing prior to this AO. Had Federer received a #2 seed and won people would credit his title to this for ages to come.

I know it gets frustrating sometimes, but this comes from the nature of the game (player´s levels oscililate due to a lot of reasons), not from the ranking system. The ranking is not there to predict how good people will be playing, it merely assumes that, on average, the players who amassed more rankings points on the current "running" year are playing better than the ones who amassed less. Day in, day out, most of the times the higher ranked player in fact wins, so we have dozens of daily indications that the ranking system is actually good -- even if we generally forget or ignore that.

I largely agree. The only situation where I fully support protected rankings is in a Seles type situation. Let's just pray that never happens again

 

[Federberg]

I did not suggest that ranking should predict.

My other favourite sport is snooker, very popular here in the UK. Rankings cover 2 years rather than 1. This prevents such massive lowering of a players position unless they are out for an exceptionally long period. It also means they are under less pressure to compete when under strain or with a chronic injury. Also there is provision to protect a player with the agreement of the World Snooker Assoc. This was recently done for Carter who had cancer treatment and it worked well for him and was supported by other players. Wimbledon uses its own ranking system too - I am sure this ridiculous draw would not have happened there. For me the issue is not just about Federer. We are seeing far too many players injured. One of the reasons for this is they are playing so many tournaments to protect their points, often playing when unwell or injured. Current examples are Raonic, Edmund, Thiem, even Murray who had shingles. The ATP has the resources to review this and in the interests of the players well being, the tennis audience and the overall game I think they should do so.

I'm a fan of snooker too Mary, but I have to disagree. It's always struck me that the ranking system there is a bit absurd given that injuries are much less likely to happen in a sport that is far less physically demanding. Also a 2yr ranking system will damage the advance of younger players which is unfair and not good for the long term health of the game, particularly in tennis where the old guys just don't seem to want to quit. I think on balance they have it right. One final thing, I personally have no problem with the quarter of death we're witnessing here at IW. I would love to see more of it. Let the toughest guy win. This is sport. The more top level contests we see the better for the game imho

 

[Federberg]

Sorry to say but if you, his fans, every broadcaster and tennis journalist think because Roger has beaten his nemesis in the AO and yesterday is unprecedented, yes, he played very good but his nemesis besides a VERY poor serve (much worse than the previous matches) and very poor game then it was very logic his victory in spite his loss in Dubai against anyone and his very tied result against Johnson. I thought to see a match more competitive but Rafa's game yesterday was pathetic. Maybe their 'papers' has changed and now Rafa is the one who don't know how to beat Roger? hmmm I don't think so, it has to be something else

It certainly seems that this is something new. I just watched the match, and I was stunned. Roger beat him like a ginger haired step child. His backhand was his primary weapon which is something I never thought I would say, and Rafa... for now... is having difficulty finding an effective response. Particularly how Roger is starting to brutalise on his service returns. Fedfans have been screaming at Roger for years to stop bunting the ball back to Rafa. Who knew he would finally listen in his dotage. Well done Lujbicic!

 

[shawnbm]

I tend to agree with Federberg in a number of ways. Roger was so confident in the late 2000s that he basically would block or slice the return in play and outplay everyone from the backcourt. That did not work against Nadal and I used to think the same thing--he should be swinging through these returns and hitting them with authority. I also used to think that his using the slice during rallies was particularly ineffective against Nadal, who could muscle a ball from ankle height almost at will crosscourt with tremendous spin. Now he is being pulled off the court by harder, quicker Fed backhands and any ball that does not make its way back crosscourt is falling right into Roger's forehand and he takes over. I also think Nadal is not physically tired so much as a little low in confidence--something that has happened many years in the past. It is usually the clay season that gives buoyancy to his year and it may be that, like other years, his first victory of the year will be on the red clay of Europe. To say that Roger is not playing stupendously against Nadal in the past few weeks is to ignore the obvious--he most definitely is.

 

[Federberg]

I tend to agree with Federberg in a number of ways. Roger was so confident in the late 2000s that he basically would block or slice the return in play and outplay everyone from the backcourt. That did not work against Nadal and I used to think the same thing--he should be swinging through these returns and hitting them with authority. I also used to think that his using the slice during rallies was particularly ineffective against Nadal, who could muscle a ball from ankle height almost at will crosscourt with tremendous spin. Now he is being pulled off the court by harder, quicker Fed backhands and any ball that does not make its way back crosscourt is falling right into Roger's forehand and he takes over. I also think Nadal is not physically tired so much as a little low in confidence--something that has happened many years in the past. It is usually the clay season that gives buoyancy to his year and it may be that, like other years, his first victory of the year will be on the red clay of Europe. To say that Roger is not playing stupendously against Nadal in the past few weeks is to ignore the obvious--he most definitely is.

Yes I agree re: Rafa. The clay season is going to be crucial for him. I can't wait to see him against: Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Thiem and even Goffin in particular. He needs to stamp his authority on this bunch or his confidence could dip even further. It could be career defining. I question the confidence of both Murray and Novak though so let's see what happens

 

[Carol]

One thing is to lose a competitive match because the opponent has played better (most of the times there is a thin line between to win or to lose) but another thing is to lose badly, first because the serve, second the passivity and third making many errors. I know that the good game of the opponent has to do with it too but to serve and to move so badly like Nadal did yesterday it's a very diferent story. Johnson gave Roger a lot more fight, Rafa looked completely off

 

[shawnbm]

Nadal did look off, Carol, but he came up off a huuuuuuggggeee letdown in losing to Roger in the AO final being up a break in the fifth after evening the match by winning the fourth set. Rafa is human--it had to be tremendously deflating, particularly because he would have been the first in the Open Era to complete the career double slam (winning each major at least twice), to say nothing of pulling within two major's of Federer's record. It had to hurt. Fed now admits years later how deflated and shaken he was when he lost Wimbledon to Nadal after coming back to even the match after four sets. This shaking of confidence can and does manifest itself in a player appearing flat and with seemingly less energy. It has everything to do with confidence as opposed to exhaustion. I think Nadal needs a victory in an event and clay is just the remedy.

 

[El Dude]

I'm reminded of last year, when at this point Rafa was 13-5 with no titles and having lost in the 1R of the AO to Verdasco, and losing in the SFs of the early clay ATP 250s to Thiem and Cuevas. He had a good run at IW, beating Verdasco, Zverev, and Nishikori to lose to peak Novak in the SF. He retired vs. Dzumhur in Miami, then came back to win Monte Carlo and Barcelona, but then lost to Andy and Novak in Madrid and Rome, respectively, and then of course pulled out of Roland Garros because of injury.

Right now Rafa is 14-4, so one win better than last year. Now of course things were different his year - he had a great run at the AO, and thus started the year much better than last year. But since then he's looked more similar to 2016 in terms of results.

If I remember correctly, there was a sense he was "kind of back" in clay season last year after Monte Carlo. It was his first big title in almost two years going back to 2014 Roland Garros. His Rome/Madrid results were a bit disappointing, but understandable considering who he was facing. He entered RG not as the favorite given Novak's level, but as a serious contender.

I don't think we can overstate how important clay season is for him this year. He really, really needs to win at least one clay Masters to get back in the saddle. Barcelona would be nice, but he really needs a Masters title, and I think also he needs to beat one of Roger, Novak, or Andy. Consider his current streaks against those three:

Roger: 0-3 (going back to Basel of 2015)
Andy: 0-1 (Monte Carlo 2016)
Novak: 0-7 (going back to Monte Carlo 2015)

That's clearly a concern. Actually, playing Novak now might be just what the doctor ordered.

 

[herios]

My prediction going forward: The winner of Kyrgios-Federer will win the tournament.

Carreno Busta defeats Cuevas
Thiem defeats Wawrinka
Nishikori defeats Sock
Federer/Kyrgios

Thiem defeats Carreno Busta
Federer/Kyrgios defeats Nishikori

Federer/Kyrgios defeats Thiem

I'll give Roger the slight edge due to his form and experience, and that I think he'll find a way to get Kyrgios frustrated and possibly implode. But it will be tough.

Thiem ain't making the final

 

[Carol]

Nadal did look off, Carol, but he came up off a huuuuuuggggeee letdown in losing to Roger in the AO final being up a break in the fifth after evening the match by winning the fourth set. Rafa is human--it had to be tremendously deflating, particularly because he would have been the first in the Open Era to complete the career double slam (winning each major at least twice), to say nothing of pulling within two major's of Federer's record. It had to hurt. Fed now admits years later how deflated and shaken he was when he lost Wimbledon to Nadal after coming back to even the match after four sets. This shaking of confidence can and does manifest itself in a player appearing flat and with seemingly less energy. It has everything to do with confidence as opposed to exhaustion. I think Nadal needs a victory in an event and clay is just the remedy.

I agree, Rafa this year is playing better than the last two years but he still has not got out of the roller coaster, he has reached and losing two finals, one in the AO and the other one in Acapulco. I don't think he has forgot to play, he looks healthy and strong but his mind/confidence is still playing tricks on him. Definitely he needs a victory on HC, clay or grass and 'pronto'

 

[kskate2]

My prediction going forward: The winner of Kyrgios-Federer will win the tournament.

Carreno Busta defeats Cuevas
Thiem defeats Wawrinka
Nishikori defeats Sock
Federer/Kyrgios

Thiem defeats Carreno Busta
Federer/Kyrgios defeats Nishikori

Federer/Kyrgios defeats Thiem

I'll give Roger the slight edge due to his form and experience, and that I think he'll find a way to get Kyrgios frustrated and possibly implode. But it will be tough.

I actually think Nishi would beat Kyrgios if that's the matchup and though I'd give Roger the edge in a semi vs. Kei I feel that'd be a tough matchup too and it wouldn't surprise me if Kei won.

I agree. Nicky has a serious matchup problem w/ players that return serve very well like Nishi and Murray. If he had played Novak before Djoker fell off a cliff, that's a match I would really like to see. But Novak's returns are a shell of what they used to be.

 

[kskate2]

No way should he skip RG. Who says Novak, Rafa or Andy will do well? Anything can happen and the way he's playing now he can beat any of them.

Rog can beat the old guard, but it's the young guns I would be concerned with. A match w/ Thiem, Nick or Zverev at RG could go to the next gen.

 

[kskate2]

Tignor the Kiss of Death picks

Djokovic over Kyrgios
Nadal over Federer


Front ..Steve is a complete azzClown:laydownlaughing

LOL yeah, he did badly this time. Thankfully :snicker h2h Rafa and Roger is now 9-9 on hard courts I believe. Nearly all the remaining matches Nadal won on clay save for Wimbledon 2008.

See what I mean? This guy is hardly ever right. You have to go back years to find a correct prediction and they play tennis 47 out of 52 weeks every year. :cover

 

[kskate2]

2013 Indian Wells Nadal defeated Federer 6-4 6-2 in the quarterfinals

KS..Was Roger's game in a decline at that time..

It's just a question not a dispute..

Rafa's just hasn't made the proper counters to Roger's hitting aggressively with his backhand /racket plus serving less than 26 % of serves to Roger's bh at a avg serving speed of less than 95 mph was his biggest Waterloo..

AP,
This isn't 2013. And if it was, I can't answer that question without seeing the match again. Nadal's problems are greater than this one result. This has been going on for a couple of years now. I know he's your boy, but I'm sorry AP, he isn't doing anything new. After all those losses Fed took from Nadal and Djoker, he's finally flipped the script because he was willing to make some changes after he started declining.

Rafa isn't doing that. He continues to play the same defensive way. He won't step up to the baseline for returns, he's constantly dropping the ball short and he doesn't actively seek to come to net and force the issue. The fact that he does it in doubs means he can do it, he just doesn't do it in singles. I don't know if it's willful blindness or just plain stubbornness, but it will be a quick slide into retirement at this rate.

Everything you wrote is painful about Rafa but it's true. A few people mentioned that the way Rafa played without making any adjustments is shameful, Rafa should be made to walk his way to Miami. I seriously doubt that he should play Maimi, what for, he can't win because he too stubborn ( I am being pc) to change. Rafa's last great match was vs Dimitrov..

You know I will always shoot you straight. Even that Dimi match was tense. He could have lost that. I don't understand what's the purpose of bringing in Moya if he isn't going to try anything different.

 

[Carol]

Carreño and Cuevas playing a good match, one or the other one will in the final, wow, something new. Cuevas has stoped the match in the third set 5-4 and 40-40 because one of his fingers is bleeding

 

[Carol]

And Carreño goes to the semis vs Wawrinka or Thiem, not bad at all