Mercedes Cup, Stuttgart Open 2018, ATP 250

[DarthFed]

Nah..it’s not my style to complain about court surfaces..I will moan if they close the roof when it’s not needed.

You would complain if there was anything to complain about. Also aren't you like our dear friend Moxie about how the YEC should rotate surfaces so your precious can win one?

 

[the AntiPusher]

Before I woke up on a lazy sunday morning, everything is over.

Congrats to Fed on winning the Stuttgart title (and making the number of answers to the trivia question "name a grass tourney that Rafa has won and Fed has not won" from 2 to 1).

But, this is really really brutal draw he can get. Mischa, Nick and Milos are three tough players, especially on grass. Facing them right after three month long hiatus makes it even more dangerous. But, he survived them all.

Now, all I want for July 15th is #100.

3 tough players..are any of them in the top 20 for 2018

 

[DarthFed]

3 tough players..are any of them in the top 20 for 2018

Surface brotha, surface. That's why I strongly disagree with people including Fed fans that talk about last Wimbledon being an easy draw. He played probably 5 of the top 15 players on grass last year

 

[atttomole]

Surface brotha, surface. That's why I strongly disagree with people including Fed fans that talk about last Wimbledon being an easy draw. He played probably 5 of the top 15 players on grass last year

I am one of those who thought his Wimbledon draw was not easy. People were even comparing his draw to Nadal's at RG weeks earlier. Roger played close matches against Berdych and Raonic, with tiebreaks. I think some people watched those matches already knowing the result, but they seemed tight when I watched them live on TV. With tiebreak losses for Federer, the matches could have been different.

 

[DarthFed]

Fact of the matter is Mischa, Grigor, Raonic, Berd, and Cilic is not easy. It isn't just about rank it's the fact that every one of them counts grass as their best surface.

This week Stuttgart was mostly hard due to the semi. Mischa isn't a great first match back either of course.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

So ? Does Rog keep this Benz or does he give it to a beloved family member? B-)

I wonder if that merc statutory value counts in the official prize money he receives or is it an extra?
Not that it matters much for him but out of general curiosity. If he e.g. treats it as "unwanted gift" and has to sell it, will he get as much money as the income he must declare for his taxes? Or maybe write it off to charity would be his best financial strategy in this case?

 

[britbox]

Roger Federer d. Milos Raonic 6-4 7-6(3)





It’s been a lot of fun this week. I played great in the in the big moments. I was there especially against Kyrgios and Raonic so I’m very pleased you know.

The fans were absolutely amazing – they came up in big numbers and really supported me all week and at the end.

I played some of my best tennis already right away you know on my comeback so it’s a great feeling.

I’m first of all very pleased that I can go as a world number one to Halle, a place where I’ve enjoyed so much success and where I have such a close relationship to the tournament and the family and the fans over there. So I’ll be travelling there tomorrow and then get ready for my match. I think I’m playing already on Tuesday so only one day off with the travelling so it’s gonna be quite hectic you know from now till then. But no problem, I signed up for it and I can’t I can’t wait to play again actually.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

You got what you wanted. That match w/ Nicky yesterday really tuned him up and he should be good to go for the next few weeks.

Yes. I think the brat was the most difficult opponent for the King here. Not only because he's very good against top players but also his unpredictability up to including point tanking in the middle of the match, throws opponents off. Predictably, that was the closest match in King's campaign here. Raonic, even though he looks better when on fire, has always been easier for Roger to read. Big serves and big forehands give no trouble to Fed if he can read them and use their power to deflect returns. The outcome of this final was precisely like that.

 

[kskate2]

Don't they give the winner a car at Halle too? I think he's doing alright in that department.

I don't know if Mercedes sponsors Halle

 

[kskate2]

I wonder if that merc statutory value counts in the official prize money he receives or is it an extra?
Not that it matters much for him but out of general curiosity. If he e.g. treats it as "unwanted gift" and has to sell it, will he get as much money as the income he must declare for his taxes? Or maybe write it off to charity would be his best financial strategy in this case?

I don't think the car counts towards the prize $$ he receives in his check

 

[britbox]

I wonder if that merc statutory value counts in the official prize money he receives or is it an extra?
Not that it matters much for him but out of general curiosity. If he e.g. treats it as "unwanted gift" and has to sell it, will he get as much money as the income he must declare for his taxes? Or maybe write it off to charity would be his best financial strategy in this case?

I think it's an extra. Not sure about the tax implications for resale.

 

[Moxie]

I think it's an extra. Not sure about the tax implications for resale.

I bet Roger doesn't know, either. He has "people" to worry about that for him.

 

[Moxie]

Fact of the matter is Mischa, Grigor, Raonic, Berd, and Cilic is not easy. It isn't just about rank it's the fact that every one of them counts grass as their best surface.

This week Stuttgart was mostly hard due to the semi. Mischa isn't a great first match back either of course.

I'm awfully tired of this new fashion for denigrating Fedal draws by the opposition faction. Roger's draw at Stuttgart was undeniably tough. I didn't get to see any matches, but it seems that he navigated it beautifully.

 

[Moxie]

I thought it talks about the change in court. The second one discusses that it may have even played slower than USO because of the extremely heavy ball. Either way, we can stop the talk, sorry I brought it up. It's a sore subject but it's up to Roger to get 10 Wimbledon's anyways. Put an end to his underachieving there and the bastard's chase.

I'm sure you're sorry you brought it up, because neither article supports your theory, as I can tell. The second article says this:

Conclusion

Comparing the speed of the courts depends on a lot of factors: spin, bounce, and the type of balls used being the most important. The greater use of topspin at Wimbledon makes the courts appear relatively slower than the ones at the U.S. But the spin and bounce does not take away from the fact that Wimbledon is still the fastest surface around, at least in the majors.

Is it as fast as it was in ’99? No. Is it still faster than the surfaces used at the other majors? Yes.

And even with today’s speed, if players are able to hit more than 10 aces per match (and hence more service winners), why would you want to further enhance the speed and convert it into an ace fest?

_______

It also points out that the most aces served at Majors over recent years has been at Wimbledon, again proving pace of the surface.

These are your examples and they don't prove your point. I don't mean to be a pill about it, but you do go on an on about it, and even your articles don't bear it out. Maybe we can stop moaning over what "might have been," especially without proof of any kind, and just deal with what is.

 

[DarthFed]

I'm sure you're sorry you brought it up, because neither article supports your theory, as I can tell. The second article says this:

Conclusion

Comparing the speed of the courts depends on a lot of factors: spin, bounce, and the type of balls used being the most important. The greater use of topspin at Wimbledon makes the courts appear relatively slower than the ones at the U.S. But the spin and bounce does not take away from the fact that Wimbledon is still the fastest surface around, at least in the majors.

Is it as fast as it was in ’99? No. Is it still faster than the surfaces used at the other majors? Yes.

And even with today’s speed, if players are able to hit more than 10 aces per match (and hence more service winners), why would you want to further enhance the speed and convert it into an ace fest?

_______

It also points out that the most aces served at Majors over recent years has been at Wimbledon, again proving pace of the surface.

These are your examples and they don't prove your point. I don't mean to be a pill about it, but you do go on an on about it, and even your articles don't bear it out. Maybe we can stop moaning over what "might have been," especially without proof of any kind, and just deal with what is.

How's it disprove anything? My point is it's obnoxiously slow compared to what Wimbledon used to be. It is the black sheep surface-wise of grass court tennis. And the general thought is the surface is still somewhat fast but the ball is so heavy that conditions make it so that it is arguably no longer the fastest major, especially by week 2

 

[the AntiPusher]

How's it disprove anything? My point is it's obnoxiously slow compared to what Wimbledon used to be. It is the black sheep surface-wise of grass court tennis. And the general thought is the surface is still somewhat fast but the ball is so heavy that conditions make it so that it is arguably no longer the fastest major, especially by week 2

I'm sure you're sorry you brought it up, because neither article supports your theory, as I can tell. The second article says this:

Conclusion

Comparing the speed of the courts depends on a lot of factors: spin, bounce, and the type of balls used being the most important. The greater use of topspin at Wimbledon makes the courts appear relatively slower than the ones at the U.S. But the spin and bounce does not take away from the fact that Wimbledon is still the fastest surface around, at least in the majors.

Is it as fast as it was in ’99? No. Is it still faster than the surfaces used at the other majors? Yes.

And even with today’s speed, if players are able to hit more than 10 aces per match (and hence more service winners), why would you want to further enhance the speed and convert it into an ace fest?

_______

It also points out that the most aces served at Majors over recent years has been at Wimbledon, again proving pace of the surface.

These are your examples and they don't prove your point. I don't mean to be a pill about it, but you do go on an on about it, and even your articles don't bear it out. Maybe we can stop moaning over what "might have been," especially without proof of any kind, and just deal with what is.

This time of the year, i just pour Darth either straight bourbon or vodka.the inconvenience Truth. ..providing Darth with rational court hypothesis is like adding soda water to alcoholic beverages ..

 

[Moxie]

How's it disprove anything? My point is it's obnoxiously slow compared to what Wimbledon used to be. It is the black sheep surface-wise of grass court tennis. And the general thought is the surface is still somewhat fast but the ball is so heavy that conditions make it so that it is arguably no longer the fastest major, especially by week 2

I think it has been said that the grass courts are slower NOW, which we've all said, but that was pre-2001. I don't find anything to back up your claim about the balls. Do re-read your own links. They still call Wimbledon the fastest Major. Those links are yours.

To me, it seems that the grass was changed in 2001. That was before anyone in the Big 4 mattered. I can't find any validation for your notion that the balls were changed in 2006. So, it seems, that the Big 4 and all relevant players on tour are playing under the same circumstances at Wimbledon, and have been their whole careers.

 

[DarthFed]

I think it has been said that the grass courts are slower NOW, which we've all said, but that was pre-2001. I don't find anything to back up your claim about the balls. Do re-read your own links. They still call Wimbledon the fastest Major. Those links are yours.

To me, it seems that the grass was changed in 2001. That was before anyone in the Big 4 mattered. I can't find any validation for your notion that the balls were changed in 2006. So, it seems, that the Big 4 and all relevant players on tour are playing under the same circumstances at Wimbledon, and have been their whole careers.

I think the general consensus is it has slowed down quite a bit since they changed the surface too. Some things in tennis aren't always going to have articles such as Wimbledon stating they are going to use a heavier ball than prior years. The tournament director clearly has a thing for long rallies and that's why everything was changed to begin with. This article shows a lot of player's thoughts on grass.

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2012-06-20/10022.php

 

[monfed]

I think it has been said that the grass courts are slower NOW, which we've all said, but that was pre-2001. I don't find anything to back up your claim about the balls. Do re-read your own links. They still call Wimbledon the fastest Major. Those links are yours.

To me, it seems that the grass was changed in 2001. That was before anyone in the Big 4 mattered. I can't find any validation for your notion that the balls were changed in 2006. So, it seems, that the Big 4 and all relevant players on tour are playing under the same circumstances at Wimbledon, and have been their whole careers.

The main change happened in 2002 when the grass composition itself was changed. After that they've been using heavier balls to slow down the overall conditions of play. The grass being slow or fast depends on the weather too but overall there has been a slowdown from 2003 to around 2007ish.

 

[monfed]

We also have to consider that since this slam is in England and they will want to slow it down to help Murray who is their darling boy and is also a pusher. So ofcourse they will keep slowing it down.