Pre-Gaming Roland Garros

[MargaretMcAleer]

Anyway hopefully there will be news later today if Sinner and his team think he will play RG, Sinner was practicing in Turin today when I saw him at practice via video.

 

[don_fabio]

Oh, and I forgot to remind people that you can change your picks in the poll. It means little, of course. But I just took Sinner off of my top 3 picks, because, either he withdraws, or, as @rafanoy1992 suggests above, he may want to test the hip, but it doesn't seem like he'll go all the way.

I just ditched Tsitsipas and put Zverev. Hard to choose between those Clown Princes. Actually I would like them to meet in RG and have a battle on terre battue. Hope my wishes come through.

I didn't mention Nadal, but obviously it will be very important for him to have a managable draw. His level after return just wasn't there where we expected to see him, but given that this might be his last RG he can't be counted out either. If he finds that "something" and starts to feel good on the court then anything is possible. I remember watching Tsonga in his last match in RG, it was very emotional, but at times Tsonga was playing as good as ever, he was giving everything he had on the court and even more. So if Rafa comes and plays with that kind of mindset, it makes me think that all is possible. For a start, he just need to serve without holding back anything and up the speed so it becomes a weapon again.

 

[El Dude]

Regardless of the outcome of today's match, I don't feel any more clear about Roland Garros than I did when this thread was started, before Rome. If anything, Rome just affirmed that Roland Garros is wide open, with a significant number of players with a real chance of winning it.

I suppose I'd group them as follows:

Favorite(s): None.

...At least unless Alcaraz is 100% healthy, which he's not, or Rafa shows up faster and close to full form; or Novak blows away Geneva and finds at least his B game. But until we see how they play in the first round or two, they belong in the next group...

Contenders: Alcaraz, Nadal, Djokovic, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Sinner - in no particular order.

You'd think the eventual winner would be in this group, but all have big question marks. I mean, based on current form, somehow Zverev and Tsitsipas have become the lead contenders. But...really? They should be the favorites, but are both head-cases. Still, this could be either's moment - they may not get a better opportunity, and if either wins RG, it makes them a serious Slam contender for the next few years (though Tsitsipas's backhand is a huge liability off-clay). I think Sinner is possibly making a catastrophic mistake by playing, and I'm guessing he withdraws sometime in the first week, but on the off chance that his doctors are being over-cautious, he's got a chance. Rafa...I'll never count him out, but I don't think we'll really have a sense of things until we see if he can ramp up his game during the first week.

Pretenders/Darkhorses: Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, Medvedev, De Minaur, Dimitrov, Rune, maybe one or two others.

Now it sounds like Medvedev is ailing, so given his lower level on clay, he's in this group. Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, etc...I mean, maybe. Even De Minaur gets thrown is a darkhorse. I like Grigor as a true darkhorse - is nice little late career form--and the fact that no one expects him to win it--might actually make him relevant. I don't think Rune is ready to win a Slam, but the talent is there and the breakthrough moment has to come sometime. But these guys and everyone else not mentioned above are varying shades of darkhorse, but given the uncertainty of everybody above, you just never know.

 

[PhiEaglesfan712]

To me, until Rune and Tsitsipas show improvements in their games, they should be considered pretenders. They don't work hard on their weaknesses, and it shows on the court. They will continue to get exposed in the Best of 5 format, and sometimes even by lesser talented players.

Ruud not even being in the contenders category is disrespectful. He is a healthy, in-form player that has made the last 2 French Open finals. Unless you are overly concerned about the early exit at Rome (I'm not), he should be in the short list of favorites.

I picked Ruud, Zverev, and Nadal at the beginning, and I'm not changing my picks. Ruud and Zverev on form, and Nadal at the chance he pulls off another 2022 French Open. This wide open tournament may be the opportunity a player like Ruud or Zverev needs.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

To me, until Rune and Tsitsipas show improvements in their games, they should be considered pretenders. They don't work hard on their weaknesses, and it shows on the court. They will continue to get exposed in the Best of 5 format, and sometimes even by lesser talented players.

Ruud not even being in the contenders category is disrespectful. He is a healthy, in-form player that has made the last 2 French Open finals. Unless you are overly concerned about the early exit at Rome (I'm not), he should be in the short list of favorites.

I picked Ruud, Zverev, and Nadal at the beginning, and I'm not changing my picks. Ruud and Zverev on form, and Nadal at the chance he pulls off another 2022 French Open. This wide open tournament may be the opportunity a player like Ruud or Zverev needs.

Speaking of weaknesses Ruud and his Bhand? come on, players expose it with ease! also he hasnt got the 'killer instinct;' to me on court.Go back and watch what happened to Ruud in the finals he had appeared at RG.

 

[El Dude]

I just don't think Ruud has the weapons to win a Slam. He is good enough to help someone lose, but he's going to need someone to blow it - unless he's faced with some other darkhorse, like De Minaur. All of the contenders I listed are more talented, and most of the darkhorses as well. This is no knock on Ruud - he's a very good player, but his A game seems like the B game of the most talented players on tour.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Zverev will probably go into RG with added confidence now he has won his 2nd Rome title, his first since title 2021, he will be seeded No 4 and have his own quarter, though to put this win into context his opponent Jarry has never won a ATP title higher than a 250., I know you can only play an opponent regardless of their ranking, on how a draw pans out?. This tournament in Rome has been 'quite unpredictable' to say the least.

 

[El Dude]

To shorten my post above, here's my post-Rome Roland Garros rankings:

1. Alcaraz
2. Zverev
3. Djokovic
4. Tsitsipas
5. Nadal
6. Sinner
7. Ruud
8. Rublev
9. Medvedev
10. Dimitrov
11. Hurkacz
12. Rune
13. De Minaur

Other than fiddling, I'll re-adjust after I see how Novak plays in Geneva (If Novak doesn't improve, he probably goes down below Rafa; if he does, he'll go up 1 or 2 slots, depending)

 

[rafanoy1992]

Regardless of the outcome of today's match, I don't feel any more clear about Roland Garros than I did when this thread was started, before Rome. If anything, Rome just affirmed that Roland Garros is wide open, with a significant number of players with a real chance of winning it.

I suppose I'd group them as follows:

Favorite(s): None.

...At least unless Alcaraz is 100% healthy, which he's not, or Rafa shows up faster and close to full form; or Novak blows away Geneva and finds at least his B game. But until we see how they play in the first round or two, they belong in the next group...

Contenders: Alcaraz, Nadal, Djokovic, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Sinner - in no particular order.

You'd think the eventual winner would be in this group, but all have big question marks. I mean, based on current form, somehow Zverev and Tsitsipas have become the lead contenders. But...really? They should be the favorites, but are both head-cases. Still, this could be either's moment - they may not get a better opportunity, and if either wins RG, it makes them a serious Slam contender for the next few years (though Tsitsipas's backhand is a huge liability off-clay). I think Sinner is possibly making a catastrophic mistake by playing, and I'm guessing he withdraws sometime in the first week, but on the off chance that his doctors are being over-cautious, he's got a chance. Rafa...I'll never count him out, but I don't think we'll really have a sense of things until we see if he can ramp up his game during the first week.

Pretenders/Darkhorses: Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, Medvedev, De Minaur, Dimitrov, Rune, maybe one or two others.

Now it sounds like Medvedev is ailing, so given his lower level on clay, he's in this group. Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, etc...I mean, maybe. Even De Minaur gets thrown is a darkhorse. I like Grigor as a true darkhorse - is nice little late career form--and the fact that no one expects him to win it--might actually make him relevant. I don't think Rune is ready to win a Slam, but the talent is there and the breakthrough moment has to come sometime. But these guys and everyone else not mentioned above are varying shades of darkhorse, but given the uncertainty of everybody above, you just never know.

I have to defend Sinner regarding his decision to potentially playing RG. He is not playing RG to win the title (in my opinion), he is playing RG to test his hip. And if he feels something about his hip, then he will withdraw from the tournament, that’s just simple.

Also, I doubt that he will be practicing right now if he feels the hip is in a very bad place.

If he skips RG, then no big deal either. Me personally, just him being confident enough to at least play RG will be a relief knowing that at least his injury is not super serious in which he can derail his season or career.

 

[Moxie]

Regardless of the outcome of today's match, I don't feel any more clear about Roland Garros than I did when this thread was started, before Rome. If anything, Rome just affirmed that Roland Garros is wide open, with a significant number of players with a real chance of winning it.

I suppose I'd group them as follows:

Favorite(s): None.

...At least unless Alcaraz is 100% healthy, which he's not, or Rafa shows up faster and close to full form; or Novak blows away Geneva and finds at least his B game. But until we see how they play in the first round or two, they belong in the next group...

Contenders: Alcaraz, Nadal, Djokovic, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Sinner - in no particular order.

You'd think the eventual winner would be in this group, but all have big question marks. I mean, based on current form, somehow Zverev and Tsitsipas have become the lead contenders. But...really? They should be the favorites, but are both head-cases. Still, this could be either's moment - they may not get a better opportunity, and if either wins RG, it makes them a serious Slam contender for the next few years (though Tsitsipas's backhand is a huge liability off-clay). I think Sinner is possibly making a catastrophic mistake by playing, and I'm guessing he withdraws sometime in the first week, but on the off chance that his doctors are being over-cautious, he's got a chance. Rafa...I'll never count him out, but I don't think we'll really have a sense of things until we see if he can ramp up his game during the first week.

Pretenders/Darkhorses: Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, Medvedev, De Minaur, Dimitrov, Rune, maybe one or two others.

Now it sounds like Medvedev is ailing, so given his lower level on clay, he's in this group. Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, etc...I mean, maybe. Even De Minaur gets thrown is a darkhorse. I like Grigor as a true darkhorse - is nice little late career form--and the fact that no one expects him to win it--might actually make him relevant. I don't think Rune is ready to win a Slam, but the talent is there and the breakthrough moment has to come sometime. But these guys and everyone else not mentioned above are varying shades of darkhorse, but given the uncertainty of everybody above, you just never know.

I like all of this, starting with the notion that there is no favorite. Fair point. And I agree with all of your Contenders.

As to the Dark Horse, I hate to say it, but my top would be Dimitrov. If everyone else falls by the wayside, and they could easily, I do think he he has the game. Second choice, Medvedev. I guess THAT tells you something about the state of this RG!

 

[Fiero425]

To shorten my post above, here's my post-Rome Roland Garros rankings:

1. Alcaraz
2. Zverev
3. Djokovic
4. Tsitsipas
5. Nadal
6. Sinner
7. Ruud
8. Rublev
9. Medvedev
10. Dimitrov
11. Hurkacz
12. Rune
13. De Minaur

Other than fiddling, I'll re-adjust after I see how Novak plays in Geneva (If Novak doesn't improve, he probably goes down below Rafa; if he does, he'll go up 1 or 2 slots, depending)

Well I hope Novak snaps out of it! He has looked rather shaky so far this season! This is his last chance at OGM so I'm sure he wants to get in a good performance at FO! Odds are against him winning! Today's players are still quite fragile dealing w/ the speed of the game breaking them down phsysically & mentally! This will be a topic of conversation & posts; "who'll show up to any given event & how fit are they to even compete?" Add on Novak being "klunked" on the head, who really knows what'll happen?!

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

According to Italian Media,

Sinner is practicing right now to see if the pain he has been experiencing in his hip, is tolerable? as I posted before when he has a MRI the scan was worse than was first thought.
After practice sessions I would think he would be able to gauge if the pain is tolerable or not,. though I saw a video practice session earlier today and he seemed to be moving okay. Of course a practice session is different to playing a match.
Still no word as yet if he will play RG.

 

[Moxie]

Well I hope Novak snaps out of it! He has looked rather shaky so far this season!

Yeah, he's looked "shaky" so far this season. I'm not sure that "snapping out of it" is something you can just do. You can't "snap out" of being 37 years old.

This is his last chance at OGM so I'm sure he wants to get in a good performance at FO! Odds are against him winning!

I know that Novak wants all the hardware, but is he still gunning for the Olympic Gold Medal? Let's see how the season goes, but if he prioritizes it, I'd be surprised.

Add on Novak being "klunked" on the head, who really knows what'll happen?!

I believe we have to get over the water bottle.

 

[Moxie]

Regardless of the outcome of today's match, I don't feel any more clear about Roland Garros than I did when this thread was started, before Rome. If anything, Rome just affirmed that Roland Garros is wide open, with a significant number of players with a real chance of winning it.

I suppose I'd group them as follows:

Favorite(s): None.

...At least unless Alcaraz is 100% healthy, which he's not, or Rafa shows up faster and close to full form; or Novak blows away Geneva and finds at least his B game. But until we see how they play in the first round or two, they belong in the next group...

I meant to give your post a better response, because it is so well-thought out. I think you're right about the above, i.e., that there kind of really aren't any favorites, in the usual and obvious sense.

One thing I wonder about is if Novak will bow out of Geneva gracefully, once he gets to feeling like he's found his form, if that happens? He may not want to expend extra effort before RG to win the title? Or, maybe he'll feel like winning a title, finally, this year, will give him some mojo. The Geneva field is not weak.

Contenders: Alcaraz, Nadal, Djokovic, Zverev, Tsitsipas, Sinner - in no particular order.

You'd think the eventual winner would be in this group, but all have big question marks. I mean, based on current form, somehow Zverev and Tsitsipas have become the lead contenders. But...really? They should be the favorites, but are both head-cases. Still, this could be either's moment - they may not get a better opportunity, and if either wins RG, it makes them a serious Slam contender for the next few years (though Tsitsipas's backhand is a huge liability off-clay). I think Sinner is possibly making a catastrophic mistake by playing, and I'm guessing he withdraws sometime in the first week, but on the off chance that his doctors are being over-cautious, he's got a chance. Rafa...I'll never count him out, but I don't think we'll really have a sense of things until we see if he can ramp up his game during the first week.

Rafa has said that he'd been holding back, but he couldn't raise the level v. Hurkacz, so that's a concern. But I appreciate that, from the Rafa fans thread, you're still hoping for the Cinderella story for him.

I hear what you're saying about Zverev and Tsitsipas. Each could already have a Slam in their pockets, so it's hard to count on them. I also agree with your list above putting Zverev higher than the Greek.

Pretenders/Darkhorses: Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, Medvedev, De Minaur, Dimitrov, Rune, maybe one or two others.

Now it sounds like Medvedev is ailing, so given his lower level on clay, he's in this group. Ruud, Rublev, Hurkacz, etc...I mean, maybe. Even De Minaur gets thrown is a darkhorse. I like Grigor as a true darkhorse - is nice little late career form--and the fact that no one expects him to win it--might actually make him relevant. I don't think Rune is ready to win a Slam, but the talent is there and the breakthrough moment has to come sometime. But these guys and everyone else not mentioned above are varying shades of darkhorse, but given the uncertainty of everybody above, you just never know.

@mrzz also made a good list of potential spoilers, which I should give a bump. There are lots of them! Meaning that, I don't think any of the top contenders are going to get away with an easy draw.

 

[El Dude]

I meant to give your post a better response, because it is so well-thought out. I think you're right about the above, i.e., that there kind of really aren't any favorites, in the usual and obvious sense.

One thing I wonder about is if Novak will bow out of Geneva gracefully, once he gets to feeling like he's found his form, if that happens? He may not want to expend extra effort before RG to win the title? Or, maybe he'll feel like winning a title, finally, this year, will give him some mojo. The Geneva field is not weak.

Yeah, who knows. I could see it both ways. I think he just needs to find his B game at Geneva - which would be good enough sail through the early rounds of Roland Garros, where he can refine and gain momentum. But of course the big question for Novak and Rafa is whether they can play well enough early on so as not to be upset by some rando.

Rafa has said that he'd been holding back, but he couldn't raise the level v. Hurkacz, so that's a concern. But I appreciate that, from the Rafa fans thread, you're still hoping for the Cinderella story for him.

My sense is that he's telling the truth, but I also think you're right to be concerned - that he might just not have that higher octave anymore. But again, we can look to Pete Sampras in 2002 - he was a shadow of his former self, but was able to rise just enough to win Wimbledon one more time. I think Rafa in 2024 is further from his peak level than Pete was in 2002, but that doesn't mean he can't muster enough to win it...especially given the field.

But we're pretty much witnessing what we talked about several months ago - Rafa trying to get on a moving train, after over a year off (and two years from clay).

I hear what you're saying about Zverev and Tsitsipas. Each could already have a Slam in their pockets, so it's hard to count on them. I also agree with your list above putting Zverev higher than the Greek.

@mrzz also made a good list of potential spoilers, which I should give a bump. There are lots of them! Meaning that, I don't think any of the top contenders are going to get away with an easy draw.

Yep. From a purely tennis fan perspective, it is a very exciting Slam - more open than any I can remember.

 

[Moxie]

One factor to add to the uncertainty is that this year maybe we have more very dangerous floaters and low seeded players than usual. Nadal is a floater to begin with. Apart from that, chilean Tabilo (fresh from takin out Djokovic) is a low seed, so is Baez, Cerundolo, Navone and Etcheverry (all Argentinians who grew up on clay). I bet that at the very very least one of those reaches R4 (therefore likely upsetting a higher seed in R3).

Other floaters we have Fils, Maroszan (who already got Alcaraz), Struf (playing super well), Machac, Borges, Darderi, Zhang, Wild (who took out #2 Medvedev last year), not to mention Murray (hope he loses 0x6 0x6 0x6, but you get my point), Stanimal (who can always catch fire out of the blue), and, last but not least, Monteiro (who will have to play qualies, but recently took out Tsitsipas plus other 5 top 50s in Rome and Madri combined).


Given the current state of affairs, I can see any of those floaters taking out any of the top 4 in round 1 (not saying they will, but it sounds way more credible than in years past).

We could reach the second week with a parade of dark horses. Wouldn't it be fun?

I'm giving this post a *bump*, as I promised @El Dude.

Not mentioned here are Jarry, even Fritz and Tommy Paul, Americans who went deep in Rome. All potential spoilers. Does Jarry make it into the Dark Horse category? If De Minaur is, I think Jarry should be.

 

[El Dude]

I'm giving this post a *bump*, as I promised @El Dude.

Not mentioned here are Jarry, even Fritz and Tommy Paul, Americans who went deep in Rome. All potential spoilers. Does Jarry make it into the Dark Horse category? If De Minaur is, I think Jarry should be.

Yeah, lots of good names - though mrzz dug a bit deeper than I would have...most of those guys aren't "darkhorses" as much as "so you're telling me there's a chance," and then you might as well list half the top 100.

I have a hard time seeing Taylor Fritz winning Roland Garros. He's too one-dimensional, and a dimension that might make him a darkhorse at Wimbledon, but not Roland freakin Garros. I mean, maybe someone like Baez or even Tabilo, but Fritz?

EDIT: To be fair, I see now that mrzz used the word "floater." I suppose that is the next category down from darkhorse - really almost zero chance of winning, but could upset a name, and help a darkhorse (e.g. Dimitrov) go deep.

 

[Moxie]

Yeah, lots of good names - though mrzz dug a bit deeper than I would have...most of those guys aren't "darkhorses" as much as "so you're telling me there's a chance," and then you might as well list half the top 100.

I have a hard time seeing Taylor Fritz winning Roland Garros. He's too one-dimensional, and a dimension that might make him a darkhorse at Wimbledon, but not Roland freakin Garros. I mean, maybe someone like Baez or even Tabilo, but Fritz?

EDIT: To be fair, I see now that mrzz used the word "floater." I suppose that is the next category down from darkhorse - really almost zero chance of winning, but could upset a name, and help a darkhorse (e.g. Dimitrov) go deep.

Yes, I think you have forgotten about the category of "spoiler." These are not guys that he expects to win the French Open. We're talking about guys that can ruin the day for a guy with better chances. That's all I mean by Fritz and Paul, too. I don't give them a snowball's chance of winning the French Open, nor does Mrzz of his mentions. But I would say a lot of them might spoil someone else's.

I see you edited to recognized "floater." It's sort of the same, but not exactly. Rafa is a dangerous floater, because he has the game, and the pedigree, but not the ranking. Del Potro spent a certain amount of his career as a "dangerous floater." Spoilers are guys that are never going to win the title, but could be game for the upset on any given day.

 

[El Dude]

Yes, I think you have forgotten about the category of "spoiler." These are not guys that he expects to win the French Open. We're talking about guys that can ruin the day for a guy with better chances. That's all I mean by Fritz and Paul, too. I don't give them a snowball's chance of winning the French Open, nor does Mrzz of his mentions. But I would say a lot of them might spoil someone else's.

I see you edited to recognized "floater." It's sort of the same, but not exactly. Rafa is a dangerous floater, because he has the game, and the pedigree, but not the ranking. Del Potro spent a certain amount of his career as a "dangerous floater." Spoilers are guys that are never going to win the title, but could be game for the upset on any given day.

So if we want to be anal retentive (and being a stats guy, I'll go there) we can make a hierarchy:

1. Favorites: The top candidates to win the tournament - this was the Big Four, or the elite of the game that does well on a particular surface.
2. Contenders: Serious contenders, but not favorites; generally elite players, but not the very top and/or elite players peaking.
3. Floaters: Sort of "x-factor" players who have the game to be contenders, but are darkhorses due to major concerns.
4. Darkhorses: Long-shot contenders - could win if things go just right.
5. Spoilers: Dangerous players you want to avoid in your draw, but very unlikely to contend

Or something like that. From how you describe them, floaters don't quite fit into the hierarchy...they float around, generally somewhere between serious contenders and darkhorses.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Are people actually voting for Pushovic?

Nadal will win.