Internazionali BNL d'Italia - Rome ATP Masters 1000, 2019

[The_Grand_Slam]

The masters leader became a race when Roger and Rafa were trading it, so it pre-dates the Rafa-Nole race. I'm surprised you don't remember that. I think Agassi was the previous leader. But, yes, it's a fairly young race, as the ATP did consolidate tournaments in the last 30 years, or whatever. The tournaments used to be all over the place, and players chased the money at will. That's why we argue the value of Connors having more titles than Roger, or Vilas' titles on clay, before Rafa passed him overall. When they consolidated 9 tournaments into MS 1000s, and made them mandatory, (except for MC,) they made them more valuable and difficult.

I don't expect the finally tally of one of the big 3 to be any game changer. I was just pointing out the relative difficulty of winning them, and also how no one so much cares, in terms of those at the upper-echelons. It's funny, because one MS or YEC or Major makes a career for some guys, and we argue between Roger/Rafa/Novak how many they have of each. Even as they age, it's astonishing how little they've left for others to get. But the tide is changing, ever so slowly.

Which happened in 2009

 

[Moxie]

When Roger isn't playing I usually root for the underdog, but in this case I'm glad Novak won as I want that Rafa-Novak final. Should be epic. This is the first time in quite awhile that both have been playing on a roughly similar level.

So far not epic.

 

[tenisplayrla08]

I was coming over here to say that Rafa excised every demon he's had over this clay season so far today and put on a clinic. Novak did look tired. Slow. Off the mark. Timing off. Footwork off. Rome seriously effed everyone over in the way they handle the rain this week. But. Rafa made Novak look bad too. It wasn't just Novak being exhausted.

But, I think if you're Novak or anyone really. You eventually have to say if you're going to play Rafa a lot and a good bit of those on clay, sometimes, you're just going to get schooled. Novak has made himself the second best clay player of his generation. His game was always good for it anyways. But Rafa's entire game and playing style was built on, around and for clay and it will always be second nature for him and he can do it in his sleep. He got 4 bagel sets this week. That's nuts. Good on Novak for showing Rafa he can put it out of his mind and play him tight and come out with a set. He's still the second favorite with Nadal to win the French. He still won Madrid. He's still the man who has won the last 3 slams even if he's struggled since the AO.
Until Novak took the second set, it looked like even though he lost in straights, Tsitsipas was again going to be the man who pushed Rafa the most on clay the last two weeks. And, while I still have other young guns I'm more a fan of, it's hard not to be a fan of Tsitsipas because he's quickly showing just how good he is and how eager he is to show that he's got the mental fortitude to hang with the big 3 and become the next great. Moreso than even Zverev or Coric or any of these other guys. And he looks like he can do it. Roger, exhausted from two matches in one day at 37, was smart enough to not even put himself through playing 6'5", young, spring chicken, has already beaten him in a slam, Tsitsipas.

But I was also coming over to say that I'm so tired of hearing about these record breaking masters wins when we all know that they've only been around since the 90s. Now. Even in the Grand Prix's or the other predecessors to the Masters events, no one ever won 34 or 30 or even the 28(?) that Roger has. So Rafa, Novak and Roger do get credit for winning more than anyone else. But at the same time.... it's ALMOST like all these fake stats we see today in football and basketball or whatever. Someone picks a timeframe. Restricts the stats to that time frame and makes someone look like a god or a dominant force because in a particular time frame or in this particular sub set against this particular team they have been this dominant. I love stats. I think they have been good overall for every sport. But in an effort to create content basically, on tv or in an article, these people come up with so much that just isn't all that important or significant.
And of course when we look at Rafa's dominance on clay, everywhere, it's astonishing. And Roger and Novak on hard courts at the respective peaks. But it's also still so important to say that the courts are different than they were in he 70s, 80s, 90s. In general even the fast ones are slower. And Roger has excelled on the faster ones and Novak on the slower ones. IF there was even 1 masters 1000 on grass Roger would probably have 5 to 10 more masters titles under his belt. I don't think there were 9 that had been raised to the level of masters or grand prix or whatever until the 90s. So that's less opportunity for everyone as well. It's like the AO. It used to be at the end of the year and with travel so expensive a lot of guys just didn't go down there so some guys and gals tallies are inflated because they won more AOs and some are not as high as they could be because they only played the AO 3 times or once. Connors and McEnroe and Borg being 3 great examples of that.

But of course I show up to see that discussion is already happening a little and I was like, "Of course I'm not the only one thinking about this and someone else has already mentioned it on the tennisfrontier forums." Lol. Always good to know I'm not alone or crazy. I did not, however go back and read the posts. Just saw that someone quoted one that looked like this had already been brought up.

 

[Fiero425]

I was coming over here to say that Rafa excised every demon he's had over this clay season so far today and put on a clinic. Novak did look tired. Slow. Off the mark. Timing off. Footwork off. Rome seriously effed everyone over in the way they handle the rain this week. But. Rafa made Novak look bad too. It wasn't just Novak being exhausted.

But, I think if you're Novak or anyone really. You eventually have to say if you're going to play Rafa a lot and a good bit of those on clay, sometimes, you're just going to get schooled. Novak has made himself the second best clay player of his generation. His game was always good for it anyways. But Rafa's entire game and playing style was built on, around and for clay and it will always be second nature for him and he can do it in his sleep. He got 4 bagel sets this week. That's nuts. Good on Novak for showing Rafa he can put it out of his mind and play him tight and come out with a set. He's still the second favorite with Nadal to win the French. He still won Madrid. He's still the man who has won the last 3 slams even if he's struggled since the AO.
Until Novak took the second set, it looked like even though he lost in straights, Tsitsipas was again going to be the man who pushed Rafa the most on clay the last two weeks. And, while I still have other young guns I'm more a fan of, it's hard not to be a fan of Tsitsipas because he's quickly showing just how good he is and how eager he is to show that he's got the mental fortitude to hang with the big 3 and become the next great. Moreso than even Zverev or Coric or any of these other guys. And he looks like he can do it. Roger, exhausted from two matches in one day at 37, was smart enough to not even put himself through playing 6'5", young, spring chicken, has already beaten him in a slam, Tsitsipas.

But I was also coming over to say that I'm so tired of hearing about these record breaking masters wins when we all know that they've only been around since the 90s. Now. Even in the Grand Prix's or the other predecessors to the Masters events, no one ever won 34 or 30 or even the 28(?) that Roger has. So Rafa, Novak and Roger do get credit for winning more than anyone else. But at the same time.... it's ALMOST like all these fake stats we see today in football and basketball or whatever. Someone picks a timeframe. Restricts the stats to that time frame and makes someone look like a god or a dominant force because in a particular time frame or in this particular sub set against this particular team they have been this dominant. I love stats. I think they have been good overall for every sport. But in an effort to create content basically, on tv or in an article, these people come up with so much that just isn't all that important or significant.
And of course when we look at Rafa's dominance on clay, everywhere, it's astonishing. And Roger and Novak on hard courts at the respective peaks. But it's also still so important to say that the courts are different than they were in he 70s, 80s, 90s. In general even the fast ones are slower. And Roger has excelled on the faster ones and Novak on the slower ones. IF there was even 1 masters 1000 on grass Roger would probably have 5 to 10 more masters titles under his belt. I don't think there were 9 that had been raised to the level of masters or grand prix or whatever until the 90s. So that's less opportunity for everyone as well. It's like the AO. It used to be at the end of the year and with travel so expensive a lot of guys just didn't go down there so some guys and gals tallies are inflated because they won more AOs and some are not as high as they could be because they only played the AO 3 times or once. Connors and McEnroe and Borg being 3 great examples of that.

But of course I show up to see that discussion is already happening a little and I was like, "Of course I'm not the only one thinking about this and someone else has already mentioned it on the tennisfrontier forums." Lol. Always good to know I'm not alone or crazy. I did not, however go back and read the posts. Just saw that someone quoted one that looked like this had already been brought up.

Even though the Masters 1000 events have been elevated to near "MAJOR" status, this era is an anomaly due to changes in surface speed, the technology of rackets and strings, the seeding of 32 players, and of course the prowess of these 3 GREAT Champions! All those things contributed to their unprecedent success and near domination for 15+ years! Even with these changes, we won't see someone take over like Fedalovic has for the last 2-3 gens of players being held at bay! :whistle:

 

[the AntiPusher]

When he loses like that I definitely consider it a beatdown. Would you consider this AO a beatdown at 6-3, 6-2, 6-3? I definitely would.

This is why I was hoping when Rafa had love 40 at 4-4 in the 2nd set , that he would have converted to serve for the match...BeatDown or tough 3set match..a W is a Win...all the rest is just conjecture which can lead to endless banter.

 

[tented]

When he loses like that I definitely consider it a beatdown. Would you consider this AO a beatdown at 6-3, 6-2, 6-3? I definitely would.

Yes. Especially in the context of Rafa having not dropped a set before the final (on hard courts, no less).

 

[Fiero425]

Yes. Especially in the context of Rafa having not dropped a set before the final (on hard courts, no less).

They were also touting his serving as he hadn't been broken in 66 games he held! Nole broke him right off the bat; "record squashed!" :whistle:

 

[MikeOne]

I would argue this is best possible scenario going into French:

1. New challengers. Fognini won MC and even though he couldn't keep up his amazing play, he will be dangerous at French, on any given day. Thiem won a title, so he will be one of the fouvourites. Tsitsipas made two SFs, so he will be tough. Medvedev made a final, beat Djoker along the way.
2. Djokovic and Nadal won a title each when it seemed they might enter FO w/o winning a title on clay. Nadal, for his standards, did poorly on clay until Rome. It's very important for him to enter FO with a big win and he played fantastic. Djokovic was in a funk after AO but won Madrid and made finals of Rome.
3. Federer is playing FO and playing pretty good on clay.
4. Del Potro is back and playing at a high level. He's one of the most exciting players and can beat anyone on clay.

I did not want to see Nole and Rafa enter FO being wounded and vulnerable so glad to see they won last two masters on clay. At the same time, i didn't want to go into FO with a weak cast of challengers who didn't believe in themselves. There are new threats to top 2 this year, makes it more intriguing. Federer playing and Del Po back are just big bonuses!

 

[isabelle]

hope Delpo can make some waves in Paris