Miami Open, Florida, USA, ATP Masters 2017

[El Dude]

Carol, 2013 was four years ago. I don't see how that is relevant to the question of whether Rafa can, right now, beat Novak. Novak has beaten Rafa seven matches in a row going back to mid-2013, and generally quite easily. But we don't know how the 2017 versions of these two players will match-up.

As for Andy, he beat Rafa on clay last year when Rafa was surging a bit, having just won Monte Carlo and Barcelona. That was hardly the "worst version of his whole career." There was a general feeling that he was playing the best tennis he had played in two years, since clay season in 2014, although clearly not at his 2013 level.

The point being, I'm not sure that Rafa, right now, is significantly better than he was a year ago, when he was good enough to win Monte Carlo and Barcelona. He might be a bit better, but he hasn't been tested enough. So far this year he's lost to Roger twice, Milos and a surging Querrey. But he's also beaten some good players: Cilic, Raonic, Monfils, Dimitrov, Zverev. Overall his level seems good enough to beat the 2nd and 3rd tier most of the time, but he's lost to players that were really hot. What we don't know is how he'll match up against Novak and Andy, and of course if he'll be able to re-balance with Roger.

This is why I'm speculating that he could be the new Ferrer. Until he proves that he can beat Roger again, and also take down Andy and Novak, and of course Wawrinka, he might be the guy that usually beats the 2nd tier but usually loses to the elite - like Ferrer. That said, even at his best Ferrer almost always lost to the Big Four; I think Rafa will at least win some of the time.

 

[Federberg]

Would it convince you if I said I contacted Samson on this matter and he said it's the best HC for Rafa's game?

All joking aside I am just giving my opinion, and on this matter a strong opinion. Speed of the court isn't as important to Rafa as the height of the bounce and of all the HC tournaments I watch during the year I think Miami has the highest bounce easily. Again I am not stating that as though it's fact, just going off what I'm seeing. I think it's lazy thinking to go off of what a player has won and not won and automatically say that his game is better on the surface he's won on. I think with Nadal that his game is better on the HC's of Australia compared to the USO even though he's won 1 title at AO and 2 at USO. It's just one of those things. I definitely think Roger's game is much more suited towards the first indoor masters event of the Fall (Madrid previously and now Shanghai) than it is at IW but he's had much more success at the latter.

That's a good point. I mean.. if you think about it.. Roger has been more consistent at the AO than any slam in his career, but no one would say that's his best slam. I think sometimes karma is a b1tch. It still amazes me that Roger has had the success he's had at Hamburg which was slow clay, but Monte Carlo and Rome have eluded him. It's just the way it goes, and trying to come up with a rational reason is pointless sometimes

 

[the AntiPusher]

Andy beat Nadal on clay when this last one was playing his worse version of his whole career losing not just against Muzz but against anyone. And against Novak I see that someone forgot 2013 when Novak was still playing his best but Nadal stopped him because he was playing his best too

Rafa can defeat Novak if he is coming forward and being aggressive. Its the RIGHT way to play.. Rafa issues is he sometimes try to let the game come to him instead of taking the bull by the horn. However, last night he played aggressively from the very first point vs Sock.. He needs to play that way until the day he retires.. Its the only way, IMO

I agree with he has to play more aggressive but also to keep a good serve, but again, the mind has to do a lot with the game and unfortunately it has not worked too well on him for awhile, same it's happening now with Novak and also with Muzz for years otherwise he could have more titles

Against Sock last night Rafa mixed more flat serves with his WTA spin serves.,i would hope he would keep that mindset going forward

 

[the AntiPusher]

If I were Berdych I would get tired of being Roger's pigeon

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

Federer wants to be kicking skeletor's sorry bottom right out of the stadium.

 

[Nekro]

It still amazes me that Roger has had the success he's had at Hamburg which was slow clay, but Monte Carlo and Rome have eluded him. It's just the way it goes, and trying to come up with a rational reason is pointless sometimes

Slow and low bouncing clay always favoured Roger. He always sucked on southern courts. Where's the irrationality?

In Hamburg the clay is slow: Fed has more time to prepare for his strokes. Low bounce too--- obviously favours Roger.

if wet and bad weather = lower bounce Favours Roger. If roof is closed=Indoor, favours Roger.

Actually in Hamburg everything favours Roger.

Southern courts and conditions are dry and fast, bad for Roger.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Haven't watched, but maybe give some credit to Rafa? ...

I did watch it. It is not that I am not giving credit to Rafa. If you actually watched it, you will know how terrible it was. Jack was up 2-0 and Rafa was serving and Jack had break point opportunity at least three times and every time he missed due to an unforced error on his part as opposed to Rafa hitting a winner or forcing him to an error. In particular, in one point, Jack played brilliantly and constructed the point and moved forward and botched an easy volley. If Jack could break Rafa in that game, that would be 3-0 with a double break lead and practically the set is in the book.

However, once he got out of the difficult situation in the third game, Rafa really played well and deserves full credit.

The point is that when you are playing top players you are going to get some chances here and there and if you fail to take them it is history. That is exactly what happened to Jack Sock.

The poster is correct, gsm, you are not giving Rafa credit forcing the ufes..Yes Sock had a easy put away but it was at the end of a rally where they were exchanging baseline strokes..he pulled Rafa out of position and rushed the net, Rafa retrieved and returned the ball which was a floater and Sock ran through his volley forgot tennis 101, take your split step before you approached the volley and he missed..the rest was Rafa stepped up his game..Even if he would have converted the break Rafa was breaking Sock serve without much difficulty and outplayed Sock because he is just a higher level tennis player when he is on. Sock hit some forehand winners that only a few players in the top ten would even attempt..

In the third game of the second set, the errors by Sock were not forced at all. Come on, he missed his chance to go up double break up after brilliant play all by himself.

I had already said that this is almost always the case when an average player plays against a top notch player. When you are getting the chances, if you don't make use of them, it is history.

Also, I do agree that even if Rafa lost the second set, he would have come back up in the third.
But, to claim that Rafa forced Jack to errors in that third game is ridiculous. It is plain sight for those who watched the game and are unbiased.

 

[DarthFed]

^ Faster courts favors Roger in a big way, I think that's obvious given he's clearly strongest on grass and fast hard courts. Hamburg and Madrid are lower bouncing than the other big clay events which is why Roger has had more success there. Madrid also plays faster than the other ones so it's not surprising he's had more success there.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

lol..skeletor broken.

 

[the AntiPusher]

I did watch it. It is not that I am not giving credit to Rafa. If you actually watched it, you will know how terrible it was. Jack was up 2-0 and Rafa was serving and Jack had break point opportunity at least three times and every time he missed due to an unforced error on his part as opposed to Rafa hitting a winner or forcing him to an error. In particular, in one point, Jack played brilliantly and constructed the point and moved forward and botched an easy volley. If Jack could break Rafa in that game, that would be 3-0 with a double break lead and practically the set is in the book.

However, once he got out of the difficult situation in the third game, Rafa really played well and deserves full credit.

The point is that when you are playing top players you are going to get some chances here and there and if you fail to take them it is history. That is exactly what happened to Jack Sock.

The poster is correct, gsm, you are not giving Rafa credit forcing the ufes..Yes Sock had a easy put away but it was at the end of a rally where they were exchanging baseline strokes..he pulled Rafa out of position and rushed the net, Rafa retrieved and returned the ball which was a floater and Sock ran through his volley forgot tennis 101, take your split step before you approached the volley and he missed..the rest was Rafa stepped up his game..Even if he would have converted the break Rafa was breaking Sock serve without much difficulty and outplayed Sock because he is just a higher level tennis player when he is on. Sock hit some forehand winners that only a few players in the top ten would even attempt..

In the third game of the second set, the errors by Sock were not forced at all. Come on, he missed his chance to go up double break up after brilliant play all by himself.

I had already said that this is almost always the case when an average player plays against a top notch player. When you are getting the chances, if you don't make use of them, it is history.

Also, I do agree that even if Rafa lost the second set, he would have come back up in the third.
But, to claim that Rafa forced Jack to errors in that third game is ridiculous. It is plain sight for those who watched the game and are unbiased.

GSM..whenever a ball is kept in play anything can happen ..Sock thought he had the point won..it wasn't

 

[Nekro]

^ Faster courts favors Roger in a big way, I think that's obvious given he's clearly strongest on grass and fast hard courts. Hamburg and Madrid are lower bouncing than the other big clay events which is why Roger has had more success there. Madrid also plays faster than the other ones so it's not surprising he's had more success there.

Obviously i was talking about the difference between fast clay and slow clay. The slowness of the Hamburg court was always a huge advantage for him.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

essence of McEnroe half volley....

 

[the AntiPusher]

This isn't nothing but a glorified practice session for Roger..Excellent play in the front court by him

 

[Nekro]

I remembered Roger even said the slower clay was better for him, this is what a quick search brought up, i'm sure you can find a lot more on it:

"He's said in interviews in the past, maybe in Paris one year, that the clay in Hamburg gives him time to generate more spin on the ball and create the angles that Domino mentions above; he needs to put work on the ball and surprisingly enough, this means a slower claycourt is better for him. I'm not sure he would feel that way if he ever had to play Nadal in Hamburg, but it seems to me a lot of his problems on clay come when the court is too fast and the ball zips through at pace, leading to a lot of bad bounces as it rears off the lines and destroying his timing. I remember the clinic of appalling returning he displayed two years ago against Mantilla in the final in Rome, a tournament where he's had one exceptional result in 2003 and little else besides.

Didn't he complain about the court not being watered after one set when he lost to Gasquet in Monte Carlo this year? That makes sense considering his dislike of claycourts that are too fast and more to the point, Gasquet's extremely aggressive, shot-making style of play. And he has nightmares when the opponent gets a ball to his baseline on Court Chatrier at RG, that much was obvious even this year when he made it as far as the semis."

 

[Busted]

This isn't nothing but a glorified practice session for Roger..Excellent play in the front court by him

:laydownlaughing Well, he's going to need the extra practice for Kyrgios or Zverev, right? Cuz he didn't play that great against RBA the other day...:nono

 

[Federberg]

I stand corrected then

 

[the AntiPusher]

This isn't nothing but a glorified practice session for Roger..Excellent play in the front court by him

:laydownlaughing Well, he's going to need the extra practice for Kyrgios or Zverev, right? Cuz he didn't play that great against RBA the other day...:nono

Berdych should stop and concede the match and ask Roger if he could massage his back for the next round vs the super youngsters

 

[bajana]

This isn't nothing but a glorified practice session for Roger..Excellent play in the front court by him

:laydownlaughing Well, he's going to need the extra practice for Kyrgios or Zverev, right? Cuz he didn't play that great against RBA the other day...:nono

Berdych should stop and concede the match and ask Roger if he could massage his back for the next round vs the super youngsters

Ouch! That's cruel :lolz:

 

[DarthFed]

Obviously i was talking about the difference between fast clay and slow clay. The slowness of the Hamburg court was always a huge advantage for him.

The low bounce of the court compared to other clay tournaments is the advantage he had. Nowhere in that interview does he say he's better on slow clay courts. If the clay was both fast and low bouncing he'd dominate like it was grass.

Also he's made the Rome final 4 times and that is faster than MC and RG, it's also the only time he was close to beating Rafa in best of 5 on clay.

 

[the AntiPusher]

:laydownlaughing Well, he's going to need the extra practice for Kyrgios or Zverev, right? Cuz he didn't play that great against RBA the other day...:nono

Berdych should stop and concede the match and ask Roger if he could massage his back for the next round vs the super youngsters

Ouch! That's cruel :lolz:

I meant groin:nono