Roland Garros Day 8: Sunday, June 1 - Order of Play

[Moxie]

^ Even still, Ferrer has rather just a prayer, I think. He's playing well, but he won't do it in best of 5 scenario. I'll be a little surprised if Murray makes it past Verdasco, tbh. And even still, he won't be taking down Rafa this year. He barely got past Kohlscreiber.

Surprised if he gets past Verdasco? The same Verdasco we are thinking of??

I've made my case. Verdasco was up 2 sets to love in Wimbledon last summer v. Andy in the QF. (Hugely unexpected, I'll give you that.) Murray was tight, but pulled it all the way back. Verdasco will be thinking of that match when they meet tomorrow. That was grass, and this is clay. If Fernando gets ahead of Andy, I won't be surprised if Murray starts thinking about grass and pulls the plug. However, as I said to Iona, Murray can right the ship. And Verdasco could pull a "Verdasco." I'm not saying it's a given upset, but Andy has to pull it together. Verdasco will be fancying his chances.

 

[crystalfire]

Looking at tomorrow, what are the chances of a Serb (not named Djokovic) beating Rafa at the French?

wait we have another serb

 

[Moxie]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Commentators today did mention that when he'd come back to win a in 5th set the last 2 years, he went on to lose in the subsequent match.

 

[crystalfire]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Commentators today did mention that when he'd come back to win a in 5th set the last 2 years, he went on to lose in the subsequent match.

i think most recent was aus open. not sure whether this year or last. he played tsonga in a tough 5 setter and lost to murray in the next round. but honestly its usually been in the business end of a slam and hes meeting quality opponents who are no pushovers so playing 5 setters at this stage of his career certainly doesnt help. in my opinion his slam days are over as much as i hate to say that. he can still produce top tennis but only enough to win in best of 3 sets

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Commentators today did mention that when he'd come back to win a in 5th set the last 2 years, he went on to lose in the subsequent match.

Recovery time is a b&%h as you get older.

 

[DarthFed]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

 

[herios]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

Mentally, Gulbis used to be one of the most volatiles, but he seems to be more and more able to refocus, when things do not go well. That is where I find him mainly improved, thus breaking out to knew heights.
Even if he would have lost today. he would have had achieved a new career high, being for the first time in the top 15.
Now, a top 10 looks like could be in the cards in his future.

 

[the AntiPusher]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

Safin a two time grand slam champion a mental midget? explain

 

[brokenshoelace]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

Safin a two time grand slam champion a mental midget? explain

Easy: He should have done much more.

 

[Federberg]

^ Even still, Ferrer has rather just a prayer, I think. He's playing well, but he won't do it in best of 5 scenario. I'll be a little surprised if Murray makes it past Verdasco, tbh. And even still, he won't be taking down Rafa this year. He barely got past Kohlscreiber.

Surprised if he gets past Verdasco? The same Verdasco we are thinking of??

I wouldn't discount Verdasco. When that guy is on, he is a serious talent. He's a strange cat... he has potentially one of the biggest serves on the tour, but generally serves puff... very irritating. Would be great to see him really cut loose. It's tough to see out of Ferrer, Verdasco and Murray who has the best chance against Rafa. But strangely.. if we were to guarantee they played the clay at their best? I might actually go with Nando

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

I don't think we are disagreeing. What I mean is, Roger is a much better player than the likes of Tsonga or Gulbis. So if he is in a 5 setter with them, his level cannot be where it should be and at that point it is anybody's game.

 

[DarthFed]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

Safin a two time grand slam champion a mental midget? explain

Do I really have to? I know you saw him play a lot in his day and that should explain it very well!

 

[DarthFed]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

I don't think we are disagreeing. What I mean is, Roger is a much better player than the likes of Tsonga or Gulbis. So if he is in a 5 setter with them, his level cannot be where it should be and at that point it is anybody's game.

Yes but there is the whole concept of the much better player stepping up in the 5th and winning. Rafa and Djokovic have way better records in 5 set matches and you can say the same thing in regards to their level not being where it should have been the first 4 sets.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I think Verdasco will trouble Murray. He hits bigger on clay and his forehand is a better shot than any of Andy's groundies on this surface. Murray needs to be aggressive with his CC backhand and have the down the line backhand firing. If he can move Verdasco around with the forehand he'll be in good shape, but I expect the forehand-to-backhand exchanges to be somewhat neutral without either guy going for much.

 

[herios]

I think Verdasco will trouble Murray. He hits bigger on clay and his forehand is a better shot than any of Andy's groundies on this surface. Murray needs to be aggressive with his CC backhand and have the down the line backhand firing. If he can move Verdasco around with the forehand he'll be in good shape, but I expect the forehand-to-backhand exchanges to be somewhat neutral without either guy going for much.

Murray may lead the H2H with 9-1, but they never played on clay.

 

[the AntiPusher]

^Fed playing a 5th set pretty much means things are not going according to his liking anyways so him having a 22-17 record or something like that is not too shabby.

Agree to disagree there. In a lot of those matches he had just won the 4th set and would figure to have some momentum. Many of them have been against mental midgets like Gulbis, Tsonga, Safin, etc. There is no sugarcoating it IMO.

Safin a two time grand slam champion a mental midget? explain

Easy: He should have done much more.

BS, Safin had too many vices(women, drinking, smoking and party lifestyle) but that doesn't make you a mental midget nut a player who wasn't committed to be the best he could be.

 

[the AntiPusher]

That's it. Fed out.

Hi, Can someone put the Federer Gulbis match on this post. The match was carried by NBC\Tennis Channel, obviously there is no replay available on ESPN3.

thanks

 

[masterclass]

Gulbis says he does not like to take MTOs but he had to do it and he did not want to do it in the 5th. and he definitely did not want to take it before Roger's serve but it was necessary.

Roger says rules are what they are and one might as well take advantage of it. He was pretty calm about it. Roger knows he lost fair and square.

Because he knows he should have had the match just about wrapped up before that MTO happened.

A poor decision and ugly smash cost him a 2 set to 0 lead, and one doubts that Gulbis would have come back from that. So that's why Roger was disappointed.

Not sure why he went out of his way to hit the very awkward smash having to twist his body to do it, to hit it weakly right back to Gulbis. A Sampras like smash dunk to the deuce court would have been the far easier and more powerful smash. Maybe he imagined Gulbis would be running to the forehand side?

But tactically it was the wrong shot as well. If he hits a smash to the Gulbis forehand side, even if Gulbis managed to get it, he was in the right position to defend a likely weak running forehand. When he hit to the Gulbis backhand from so close to the net on his backhand side, 3/4 of the court was wide open. So playing an awful shot like that, he almost deserved to lose, and it's no surprise that he lost the plot after that for over a set.

Even Gulbis said that he was very lucky on that point not to lose the set, and most likely the match.

The MTO situation in tennis is out of hand, and not just this incident. The rules are what they are, and players will learn to take advantage of any loophole they can, but the MTO and toilet break exception rules should never have been introduced, and should be eliminated so that the intended principle of Continuous Play in tennis is upheld. It's there for a reason, so that players are not given extra free time to recover condition, since one of the things you are trying to do on the court is to weaken an opponent any way you can. Allowing treatment beyond the existing basic time rules (20/25 sec/points, 90 sec. end change, 120 sec. set) without penalty is just wrong in so many ways, and prone to abuse. Existing time restrictions must be enforced 100%, or else just eliminate them and then all the players can do whatever they want.

Respectfully,
masterclass