Indian Wells, BNP Paribas Open, Masters 1000

[kskate2]

Results from the Indian Wells - BNP Paribas Open, Men's Singles Round 2 matches on Sunday

T Daniel d. (10) N Djokovic
7-6(7-3), 4-6, 6-1

(8) J Sock d. T Fabbiano
6-2, 7-5

(6) J del Potro d. A de Minaur
6-2, 6-1

(2) M Cilic d. M Fucsovics
7-5, 6-3

J Sousa d. (4) A Zverev
7-5, 5-7, 6-4

(29) D Ferrer d. T Sandgren
6-2, 7-6(7-3)

(18) S Querrey d. M Zverev
6-4, 7-5

(32) M Raonic d. F Auger-Aliassime
6-4, 6-4

M Baghdatis d. (14) D Schwartzman
7-5, 6-4

Y Bhambri d. (9) L Pouille
6-4, 6-4

G Monfils d. (15) J Isner
6-7(5-7), 7-6(7-3), 7-5

D Sela d. (21) K Edmund
6-4, 6-4

(31) P Kohlschreiber d. T Smyczek
1-6, 6-4, 6-4

P Herbert d. (24) G Muller
6-3, 7-5

(28) F Lopez d. E Escobedo
6-4, 6-3

 

[britbox]

Given that it does not take that much effort from both of them to come back to where they know how to be, given the example of Roger, and the fact that you set only the top 10 benchmark (not #1 and 3 slams in Roger's case) and the fact they are 6 year younger than Roger and the fact there are two of them not just one Roger, you're highly likely to be wrong.

Chris, I don't think Roger should be used as an example. He's not a standard blueprint to follow... he's proved to be an exception to the rule/blueprint. Roger's success at an advanced age is not really something I think can be connected with Djokovic or Murray. Their own comebacks will be totally individual to them. Roger doesn't come into it.

On the other hand, a Top 10 benchmark rather than a Top 1,2 or even 3 is far more likely to be attainable, so as you mentioned, the bar is set lower.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Chris, I don't think Roger should be used as an example. He's not a standard blueprint to follow... he's proved to be an exception to the rule/blueprint. Roger's success at an advanced age is not really something I think can be connected with Djokovic or Murray. Their own comebacks will be totally individual to them. Roger doesn't come into it.

On the other hand, a Top 10 benchmark rather than a Top 1,2 or even 3 is far more likely to be attainable, so as you mentioned, the bar is set lower.

Hmmm, interesting opinion, BritBox. Do you simply think that Roger is a tennis superhuman and no one can achieve the same esp. in terms of longevity at the top, or that his plying style and strength are so different than those of Novak/Andy that they cannot take any inspiration, even emotional and not technical? Because emotional inspiration is all they really need, IMO. They have their own techniques obviously.

If former, then Jimmy Connors is the only other comparable open era player. But I don;t think the incidence of a player growing into "superhumanship" needs to be that rare nowadays, with advanced sport medicine, nutrition and recovery therapy, etc. At the top 100 and especially top 10, we have most players past a magic 30year age barrier. Why not another Connors (besides Roger who is there already) growing among them?

If latter, can you elaborate in more detail? Because as a tennis fan who plays only occasionally, I don't get it what would be the reason for Roger's success and longevity be so "individual" and not repeatable.

 

[Federberg]

^it's not that Federer or Nadal are super-human, freakish absolutely, but there is no evidence to date that Novak comes back from this. So far his mentality has not been championship quality. I'm reserving my opinion about Murray until he's back in proper physical shape, but I'm more bullish on him because there's no evidence that his mentality has changed at all. Novak has had a lot of success playing with a chip on his shoulder, but it's awfully tough to sustain that given the success he's had

 

[lob]

^it's not that Federer or Nadal are super-human, freakish absolutely, but there is no evidence to date that Novak comes back from this. So far his mentality has not been championship quality. I'm reserving my opinion about Murray until he's back in proper physical shape, but I'm more bullish on him because there's no evidence that his mentality has changed at all. Novak has had a lot of success playing with a chip on his shoulder, but it's awfully tough to sustain that given the success he's had

It's too soon. The guy cleaned W, USO, AO and RG in a row less than two years ago. There's bound to be a letdown. He's been a streak player of sorts. 2008, 2011, 2015/16. Unfortunately for him, his 'safe slam' changed surface when he had entered a rough patch.

 

[Busted]

Precisely the problem I expected him to have coming back. It’s easy to look at Fedal and think it’s easy. I tell you Fedal are unique. Freakishly so

Normally I think Peter Fleming is an idiot...but I saw an article where he said about Djokovic's IW loss that unlike Federer who was willing to live with the mistakes as part of his comeback, that Djokovic isn't just shrugging off the misses. He's getting frustrated and not letting them go and moving past them. You could see that frustration kind of mounting up as the match went on. Afterwards he sad in the press conference that it felt like his first match on tour. He also said he'd been sick for a few weeks and wasn't in the best health. In which case - why play IW? Why not skip it if you're sick and wait until Miami?

Some quotes from the ATP article on his press conference -

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/indian-wells-2018-djokovic-reaction

“For me it felt like first match I ever played on the tour,” said Djokovic. “Very weird. I mean, I just completely lost rhythm, everything. Just struggled also a little bit with the health the last couple of weeks.”

“I was grateful to be out on the court after surgery that quickly. But at the same time, I just didn't feel good at all.”

“Obviously having only played a couple of matches in nine months, you're still, in a way, battling inside of your mind whether you're fit or not,” reflected the Serbian. “And even though you don't have pain, you're still thinking about it, because it's been something that I have been feeling and dragging for over two years.”

“I was not even supposed to be here because of the surgery that was only five, six weeks ago. But I recovered very quickly, and I got myself ready,” said Djokovic.

“I'm just happy that I managed to recover that quickly after surgery and just get out on the court.”

 

[Busted]

Djokovic's smash has always been pretty crappy. And kudos to Daniel for hanging tough.

Yep. I'm still waiting for a good technical explanation of why this is. Bad footwook, is there a glare on his contacts, is he just crappy at judging vertical distances, bad technique? How do you get to be #1 in the world and can't put away probably 50% of overheads? What gives?

 

[Busted]

It's a confidence shot and he doesn't hit many since he isn't at net that often! A lot of baseliners have the same problem and would rather just hit a groundstroke; often backing up to do so! In my hey day, I lived at the net and pounded many over the fence! I had no fear of hitting them, but bounced them if too high in the air! :whistle:

That could be...but it seems more technical than it just being no confidence in his overhead...for his entire career. Isn't that what practice is for?

 

[Busted]

Milos -Felix playing. Good times for Canadian tennis ahead I think.
Milos is looking better than...well, he hasn't played well for a long time so he is OK. Felix is being overpowered a bit but the guy has every shot. He has to grow into his body , get powerful and fit. I hope he has the right people around him.

I normally don't watch Raonic...cuz he's boring as hell...but I watched most of his match to see Auger-Aliassime. I can definitely see what the hype is about. Hard to believe he's only 17. Between him and Shapo the Canadians have a couple of really good Top 10 prospects.

 

[Busted]

It's too soon. The guy cleaned W, USO, AO and RG in a row less than two years ago. There's bound to be a letdown. He's been a streak player of sorts. 2008, 2011, 2015/16. Unfortunately for him, his 'safe slam' changed surface when he had entered a rough patch.

I agree that it's too soon to say about Novak. I was one of the people who thought that if IF HE WAS HEALTHY when he returned in Australia that he could his mojo back and hit the ground running. Obviously - he was NOT healthy. I think the reality for him is that his grinding style has taking a much bigger mental toll on him that Nadal's grinding style has taken on Nadal. Nadal is the real Energizer Bunny. He just keeps grinding away no matter the physical toll it's taking on his body. In the Daniel match you could see Novak trying to come forward more - hence all the crappy overheads - and you could see that's not too comfortable doing that. Obviously he needs to figure out a game plan for shortening points going forward - especially if he's struggling mentally.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

So, Sasha in a sophomore slump. Goes home early again.

 

[Busted]

So, Sasha in a sophomore slump. Goes home early again.

I think it's slightly more than a sophomore slump because it started last year after he won Montreal. More like 2 big wins too soon and now everybody's familiar with his game and he has no plan b..

BTW - What was the deal with Ferrero? Did he fire Ferrero or did Ferrero quit? I saw a blurb the other day where Ferrero called Sascha a spoiled brat and "arrogant" and said he was always at least 30 minutes late to practice, that when he agreed to join the coaching team he had several rules that Sascha had agreed to - and not being late was one of them. I didn't read the full story so I don't know the context or if he was fired and it might just be sour grapes.

 

[Fiero425]

So, Sasha in a sophomore slump. Goes home early again.

Probably, but more than likely, this isn't like the old days when seeds routinely won early rounds and made their appointed positions in the draw; esp. on the ladies' side of things! You have to be ready from round 1, day 1 or you'll be a spectator so fast, it'll make your head swim! Sasha's gotta tighten it up and close out matches he should win; same with Thiem and Dimitrov who's already gone as well! I had high hopes for this next generation, but have been terribly disappointed; even with 2 Masters wins by Zverev last year! How do you go from big winner to early round casualty again and again like this? He probably thought he had a chance to acquire that $1M bonus for winning both the singles and doubles; out in both so early! Shame!

 

[Federberg]

It's too soon. The guy cleaned W, USO, AO and RG in a row less than two years ago. There's bound to be a letdown. He's been a streak player of sorts. 2008, 2011, 2015/16. Unfortunately for him, his 'safe slam' changed surface when he had entered a rough patch.

I think you're cutting him waaay too much slack. I can't understand how people keep on making excuses for what we're seeing on the courts. Good grief just a couple of years ago people were getting hysterical about Federer needing to retire when he was still making slam semis and finals. Yet Novak is checking out in deciding sets like a rookie, and rationalisations are being made. I don't get it. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying he's done, I'm saying he needs to show me more before I can consider him a slam contender again

 

[herios]

Probably, but more than likely, this isn't like the old days when seeds routinely won early rounds and made their appointed positions in the draw; esp. on the ladies' side of things! You have to be ready from round 1, day 1 or you'll be a spectator so fast, it'll make your head swim! Sasha's gotta tighten it up and close out matches he should win; same with Thiem and Dimitrov who's already gone as well! I had high hopes for this next generation, but have been terribly disappointed; even with 2 Masters wins by Zverev last year! How do you go from big winner to early round casualty again and again like this? He probably thought he had a chance to acquire that $1M bonus for winning both the singles and doubles; out in both so early! Shame!

In comparison to last year, Sasha is in a slump. I predicted for him to drop out of the top 5 to 6-10 range when the season begun, I start to believe that I was generous. It will be more like 10-20.

 

[Fiero425]

In comparison to last year, Sasha is in a slump. I predicted for him to drop out of the top 5 to 6-10 range when the season begun, I start to believe that I was generous. It will be more like 10-20.

There's a serious loss of points going out early when so successful the previous season! Only a player like Nole has seen him win 2 majors, play in the final of a 3rd in 2016 and still drop to #2 in the world because his 2015 was so great! If you overachieve one year, it's hard to keep that ranking; esp. if you go out early! Sasha very well may drop out of the top 10 before all's said and done unfortunately! Other players are challenging him and the other elites of the game except Roger! :whistle:

 

[DarthFed]

Sascha strikes me as a typical millennial when I watch him, I think his main issue is concentration. I separate a bit from being mentally weak like we've long seen from a guy like Dimitrov. But Zverev doesn't ever seem dialed in from start to finish and hopefully it's something he grows out of. This "slump" is a good 7 months old already and with this tour in scrub status you'd figure he could seize the opportunity.

 

[mrzz]

If you overachieve one year, it's hard to keep that ranking; esp. if you go out early!

This is a common misunderstanding about the rankings system:

Actually it is precisely the other way around. If you overachieve, it is hard to maintain the points week in, week out. But the ranking position is another story... if you amassed a lot of points, it means that you are way ahead, so it is in fact easier to keep ahead (as it should be). Your only problem comes when there is a good amount of points about to be dropped and there is someone close to you... but if that someone is close it is because he amassed almost as much points as you, and his points will eventually drop out too. Also, it is precisely those points that keep you seeded, and thus with a better path to later rounds.

 

[Haelfix]

Yep. I'm still waiting for a good technical explanation of why this is. Bad footwook, is there a glare on his contacts, is he just crappy at judging vertical distances, bad technique? How do you get to be #1 in the world and can't put away probably 50% of overheads? What gives?

There are professional baseball players who can't throw a baseball to second base. I mean the human body is a mystery sometimes. In this case, its likely that he has hit more overheads than all of us combined in a lifetime, and yet there are many juniors who could outhit him in that stroke.

When you watch youtubes of him hitting it, you could point to many breakdowns, footwork, proper identification of where the ball is, but the movement itself is stunted and doesn't really mesh together timing wise. At the end of the day, you can see he has no confidence in the shot, so his form breaks down. He sorta gets to the correct trophy position most of the time but from there its a disaster. Its probably a mystery to his team as well.

 

[Haelfix]

I watched Novaks match, Federer's match and Zverev and they all looked terrible. The court was playing really slow and bouncy and I think people were struggling to find a rhythm out there.

If conditions don't improve, I think its likely a grinder will win this.