Shanghai Rolex Masters 2015

[calitennis127]

Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
MikeOne wrote:
hmm… is this the time when Nadal once again, starts to shut his critics up? just like he did in 2010 and 2013 after injuries sidelined him for months? he’s had a touch draw – Ivo, Raonic, Wawrkina and now Tsonga! If he gets past tsonga it would be pretty impressive given this is not Nadal’s best surface.

I was not one of those critics in the first half of 2013. It was clear that everything was fine during the Golden Swing. That doesn’t change the unfortunate reality that the 2013 US Open loss was one of the worst of Djokovic’s career…..he gave that one away.</blockquote>
He gave it away by losing to a player in better form who played better for the majority of the match? (Novak was better in the second half of the second set and first half of the third. That’s not enough). He only “gave it away” in the sense that he’s a superior hard court player in general, whose best on the surface beats Nadal’s best on most days. But Djokovic wasn’t that impressive that summer, at all. Nadal was, and he had beaten Djokovic the two times they played before that, which includes Montreal a few weeks earlier. Novak’s performance in that final was no worse than much of his play that summer and not nearly as bad as his performance against Murray at Wimbledon, which you almost never bring up, as the loss doesn’t bother you as much. Off the top of my head, losing to Safin and Haas at Wimbledon, Kohlschreiber and Melzer at RG, Roddick in Australia, Tsonga in Australia (that was a god awful performance), Berdych at Wimbledon, and both Murray at the US Open (again, watch how bad Novak was for the majority of that match) and Murray at Wimbledon (easily Novak’s worst ever grand slam final performance) were easily worse losses than losing to the Nadal at the US Open, especially when Nadal was the best player in the world at that point. And that’s only counting the major losses.

Your narrative conveniently omits that Djokovic was up 2-0 in the third set of the 2013 US Open final as well as 0-40 at 4-4 on Nadal's serve. In those moments, he did not play aggressively enough, point blank. You can dance around this all you want but Djokovic did not elevate his game in those moments and take the match when it was there. The lopsided nature of the 4th set is a testament to just how close Djokovic was in the third set to taking the match. Both players knew the third set was going to determine the winner, and Djokovic was in command almost the whole way through. He failed to seize the match and then what happened in the 4th set was an inevitable collapse.

I would also like to point out that the first set of that match was disturbingly subpar from Djokovic. I think he only hit 6 winners before exploding in sets 2 and 3. Why was he so tentative and so reactive? What took him so long to get going? It was as if he simply allowed Nadal a foothold without resistance.

When I say that the 2013 US Open final loss was one of the worst of Djokovic's career, what I mean is that when you take into account all factors, including the stage and the opportunity, that loss stands out as uniquely woeful. All he had to do was win 3 sets on a player who he clearly has a higher level than on hardcourts. He was also experienced against the opponent and knew what to expect.

When you mention that he had early-round losses at other Slams, I don't disagree that they were bad losses. However, I distinguish between losses when someone is in poor form versus losses on the biggest stage when someone is close to winning a title. When I look back at Nalbandian's career, for instance, I place more value on his losses to Baghdatis and Federer in the GS semifinals that season than I do, say, his 3rd round loss to Monfils in 2008 at the US Open. They were all bad losses, but in the case of the former two, Nalbandian was on the cusp of victory at the biggest events. (And I do think Nalbandian would have beaten Nadal in the 2006 French final. It may have been ugly too.)

As for the 2013 Wimbledon final, yes, Djokovic was poor, but he had a long and physical 5-set match with Delpo on Friday and I just saw that as Murray's moment more than anything else. It is unfortunate that Murray stunk it up in the 2011 semis after that overhead against Nadal and simply cannot beat Federer on the big stage, but Murray always gives Djokovic some nagging match-up problems that make their matches sticky. Murray was bound to win one and it happened that day. It got the damn thing over with so we didn't have to hear about a Brit winning Wimbledon for the first time since the Great Depression.

 

[Mastoor]

Suddenly Rafa's chance to win this looks very good. He is back to his best form and will probably beat gassed Tsonga easily like he destroyed gassed Wawrinka. He also starts his semi 4 hours before the other one that is likely to be more even, longer and more grueling, so he will likely get some 5 or 6 hours more rest than his opponent in the final and after one much easier win.

 

 

 

[Moxie]

isabelle wrote:
<blockquote>
britbox wrote:
Nadal destroys Wawrinka 6-2 6-2. Wawrinka looked flat, but Nadal played as well as I’ve seen him play all year.

Stan was shoulder injured but Nadal played great</blockquote>
I miss it isabelle i sorry that stan was injured and not fight better but good wishes to nadal

I was going to mention the shoulder as well, in fairness.  @britbox:  He took a MTO after winning his serve v. Cilic...I think in the first set.  I was watching at the time.  I'm going to watch the replay of Nadal v. Wawrinka now, and I'm glad all think Rafa played well, but there may have been a lingering issue with Stan's shoulder.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

and so murray starts his mission to claim the world no1 rank in 2016. beating Djokovic in the sf here would be a start, not sure if andy will be the victor though,

and good old tsonga v good old rafa ?...zero idea have I. :scratch: someone will win in 2 or 3 sets. you heard it here last. B-)

 

[Moxie]

Suddenly Rafa’s chance to win this looks very good. He is back to his best form and will probably beat gassed Tsonga easily like he destroyed gassed Wawrinka. He also starts his semi 4 hours before the other one that is likely to be more even, longer and more grueling, so he will likely get some 5 or 6 hours more rest than his opponent in the final and after one much easier win.

I don't know how much Wawrinka and Tsonga were "gassed."  I will say Stan may have had a bum shoulder, as I mentioned above.  But both guys are veterans of some great Slam 5-setters, and Stan has 2 majors.  They aren't that fragile, or shouldn't be.  You sound like you're setting up an excuse in case Rafa takes the title.  Don't worry...if he meets Djokovic, he won't.

 

[Moxie]

Broken_shoelace wrote:
<blockquote>
Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
MikeOne wrote:
hmm… is this the time when Nadal once again, starts to shut his critics up? just like he did in 2010 and 2013 after injuries sidelined him for months? he’s had a touch draw – Ivo, Raonic, Wawrkina and now Tsonga! If he gets past tsonga it would be pretty impressive given this is not Nadal’s best surface.

I was not one of those critics in the first half of 2013. It was clear that everything was fine during the Golden Swing. That doesn’t change the unfortunate reality that the 2013 US Open loss was one of the worst of Djokovic’s career…..he gave that one away.</blockquote>
He gave it away by losing to a player in better form who played better for the majority of the match? (Novak was better in the second half of the second set and first half of the third. That’s not enough). He only “gave it away” in the sense that he’s a superior hard court player in general, whose best on the surface beats Nadal’s best on most days. But Djokovic wasn’t that impressive that summer, at all. Nadal was, and he had beaten Djokovic the two times they played before that, which includes Montreal a few weeks earlier. Novak’s performance in that final was no worse than much of his play that summer and not nearly as bad as his performance against Murray at Wimbledon, which you almost never bring up, as the loss doesn’t bother you as much. Off the top of my head, losing to Safin and Haas at Wimbledon, Kohlschreiber and Melzer at RG, Roddick in Australia, Tsonga in Australia (that was a god awful performance), Berdych at Wimbledon, and both Murray at the US Open (again, watch how bad Novak was for the majority of that match) and Murray at Wimbledon (easily Novak’s worst ever grand slam final performance) were easily worse losses than losing to the Nadal at the US Open, especially when Nadal was the best player in the world at that point. And that’s only counting the major losses.</blockquote>
Your narrative conveniently omits that Djokovic was up 2-0 in the third set of the 2013 US Open final as well as 0-40 at 4-4 on Nadal’s serve. In those moments, he did not play aggressively enough, point blank. You can dance around this all you want but Djokovic did not elevate his game in those moments and take the match when it was there. The lopsided nature of the 4th set is a testament to just how close Djokovic was in the third set to taking the match. Both players knew the third set was going to determine the winner, and Djokovic was in command almost the whole way through. He failed to seize the match and then what happened in the 4th set was an inevitable collapse. I would also like to point out that the first set of that match was disturbingly subpar from Djokovic. I think he only hit 6 winners before exploding in sets 2 and 3. Why was he so tentative and so reactive? What took him so long to get going? It was as if he simply allowed Nadal a foothold without resistance. When I say that the 2013 US Open final loss was one of the worst of Djokovic’s career, what I mean is that when you take into account all factors, including the stage and the opportunity, that loss stands out as uniquely woeful. All he had to do was win 3 sets on a player who he clearly has a higher level than on hardcourts. He was also experienced against the opponent and knew what to expect. When you mention that he had early-round losses at other Slams, I don’t disagree that they were bad losses. However, I distinguish between losses when someone is in poor form versus losses on the biggest stage when someone is close to winning a title. When I look back at Nalbandian’s career, for instance, I place more value on his losses to Baghdatis and Federer in the GS semifinals that season than I do, say, his 3rd round loss to Monfils in 2008 at the US Open. They were all bad losses, but in the case of the former two, Nalbandian was on the cusp of victory at the biggest events. (And I do think Nalbandian would have beaten Nadal in the 2006 French final. It may have been ugly too.) As for the 2013 Wimbledon final, yes, Djokovic was poor, but he had a long and physical 5-set match with Delpo on Friday and I just saw that as Murray’s moment more than anything else. It is unfortunate that Murray stunk it up in the 2011 semis after that overhead against Nadal and simply cannot beat Federer on the big stage, but Murray always gives Djokovic some nagging match-up problems that make their matches sticky. Murray was bound to win one and it happened that day. It got the damn thing over with so we didn’t have to hear about a Brit winning Wimbledon for the first time since the Great Depression.

Actually he didn't omit anything about Djokovic being up in the 3rd, he merely didn't detail it.  What he said was "Novak was better in the second half of the second set and first half of the third. That’s not enough."  This is true.  I bolded your point above, that Djokovic didn't play aggressively enough.  That may be so, since you will never agree that Nadal took it to him, but I don't agree with the notion that the third set, while critical, negated Djokovic mounting a response in the fourth and taking it to a fifth, which he didn't.  Mike makes the point that the better HC player at that time was Nadal, even if the better HC player by resume is Djokovic. You can't really ignore that, though clearly, you will always be irritated by it.  Nadal at that point hadn't lost a HC match all year, and he won the North American HC swing, beating Djokovic and Federer along the way.  Nadal was the better player on that day, and across that 3 tournament span.  And as much as you want to say that Djokovic "should" have won it, I would think that only valid if he'd taken it to 5 sets, and made the 4th and the last (which never happen) much closer.  A loss at 4 sets in a final, with a 1-6 in the fourth is not really that close, as much as I'll give you that the 3rd was critical.

 

[britbox]

lucyliu wrote:
<blockquote>
isabelle wrote:
<blockquote>
britbox wrote:
Nadal destroys Wawrinka 6-2 6-2. Wawrinka looked flat, but Nadal played as well as I’ve seen him play all year.

Stan was shoulder injured but Nadal played great</blockquote>
I miss it isabelle

i sorry that stan was injured and not fight better but good wishes to nadal</blockquote>
I was going to mention the shoulder as well, in fairness. @britbox: He took a MTO after winning his serve v. Cilic…I think in the first set. I was watching at the time. I’m going to watch the replay of Nadal v. Wawrinka now, and I’m glad all think Rafa played well, but there may have been a lingering issue with Stan’s shoulder.

Thanks for that - I only saw the second set but Wawrinka didn't visually look too hampered physically. Your man Rafa did look very sharp. I think he'll beat Tsonga if he carries on in this vein of form.

 

[Moxie]

Moxie wrote:
<blockquote>
lucyliu wrote:
<blockquote>
isabelle wrote:
<blockquote>
britbox wrote:
Nadal destroys Wawrinka 6-2 6-2. Wawrinka looked flat, but Nadal played as well as I’ve seen him play all year.

Stan was shoulder injured but Nadal played great</blockquote>
I miss it isabelle

i sorry that stan was injured and not fight better but good wishes to nadal</blockquote>
I was going to mention the shoulder as well, in fairness. @britbox: He took a MTO after winning his serve v. Cilic…I think in the first set. I was watching at the time. I’m going to watch the replay of Nadal v. Wawrinka now, and I’m glad all think Rafa played well, but there may have been a lingering issue with Stan’s shoulder.</blockquote>
Thanks for that – I only saw the second set but Wawrinka didn’t visually look too hampered physically. Your man Rafa did look very sharp. I think he’ll beat Tsonga if he carries on in this vein of form.

TBH, he never seemed hampered after that.  But I'm in the club that believes if you were feeling something worrying, get it looked to.  He got his shoulder rubbed, and then he seemed fine, though I didn't watch the match to the end.

 

[teddytennisfan]

yay -- i finally found how to follow the updates from everyone -- on the current shanghai!

 

i agree that nadal seems to be getting back some of that old mojo..but first we have to see how much more he keeps it up - and if he reaches finals again with nole - see how closely he matches up with nole again.

 

but it IS nice to see them , both, playing quite well. nole obviously - but nadal too even if a bit late in the year.

 

i think andy m too is playing rather well.

 

[teddytennisfan]

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/10/making-and-taking-his-own-luck/56608/#.ViG5S25Wk4E

 

===============

 

TIGNOR'S assessment of the match with stanley -- what do you all think -- do you agree with the general assessment?

 

[brokenshoelace]

Broken_shoelace wrote:
<blockquote>
Calitennis127 wrote:
<blockquote>
MikeOne wrote:
hmm… is this the time when Nadal once again, starts to shut his critics up? just like he did in 2010 and 2013 after injuries sidelined him for months? he’s had a touch draw – Ivo, Raonic, Wawrkina and now Tsonga! If he gets past tsonga it would be pretty impressive given this is not Nadal’s best surface.

I was not one of those critics in the first half of 2013. It was clear that everything was fine during the Golden Swing. That doesn’t change the unfortunate reality that the 2013 US Open loss was one of the worst of Djokovic’s career…..he gave that one away.</blockquote>
He gave it away by losing to a player in better form who played better for the majority of the match? (Novak was better in the second half of the second set and first half of the third. That’s not enough). He only “gave it away” in the sense that he’s a superior hard court player in general, whose best on the surface beats Nadal’s best on most days. But Djokovic wasn’t that impressive that summer, at all. Nadal was, and he had beaten Djokovic the two times they played before that, which includes Montreal a few weeks earlier. Novak’s performance in that final was no worse than much of his play that summer and not nearly as bad as his performance against Murray at Wimbledon, which you almost never bring up, as the loss doesn’t bother you as much. Off the top of my head, losing to Safin and Haas at Wimbledon, Kohlschreiber and Melzer at RG, Roddick in Australia, Tsonga in Australia (that was a god awful performance), Berdych at Wimbledon, and both Murray at the US Open (again, watch how bad Novak was for the majority of that match) and Murray at Wimbledon (easily Novak’s worst ever grand slam final performance) were easily worse losses than losing to the Nadal at the US Open, especially when Nadal was the best player in the world at that point. And that’s only counting the major losses.</blockquote>
Your narrative conveniently omits that Djokovic was up 2-0 in the third set of the 2013 US Open final as well as 0-40 at 4-4 on Nadal’s serve. In those moments, he did not play aggressively enough, point blank. You can dance around this all you want but Djokovic did not elevate his game in those moments and take the match when it was there. The lopsided nature of the 4th set is a testament to just how close Djokovic was in the third set to taking the match. Both players knew the third set was going to determine the winner, and Djokovic was in command almost the whole way through. He failed to seize the match and then what happened in the 4th set was an inevitable collapse. I would also like to point out that the first set of that match was disturbingly subpar from Djokovic. I think he only hit 6 winners before exploding in sets 2 and 3. Why was he so tentative and so reactive? What took him so long to get going? It was as if he simply allowed Nadal a foothold without resistance. When I say that the 2013 US Open final loss was one of the worst of Djokovic’s career, what I mean is that when you take into account all factors, including the stage and the opportunity, that loss stands out as uniquely woeful. All he had to do was win 3 sets on a player who he clearly has a higher level than on hardcourts. He was also experienced against the opponent and knew what to expect. When you mention that he had early-round losses at other Slams, I don’t disagree that they were bad losses. However, I distinguish between losses when someone is in poor form versus losses on the biggest stage when someone is close to winning a title. When I look back at Nalbandian’s career, for instance, I place more value on his losses to Baghdatis and Federer in the GS semifinals that season than I do, say, his 3rd round loss to Monfils in 2008 at the US Open. They were all bad losses, but in the case of the former two, Nalbandian was on the cusp of victory at the biggest events. (And I do think Nalbandian would have beaten Nadal in the 2006 French final. It may have been ugly too.) As for the 2013 Wimbledon final, yes, Djokovic was poor, but he had a long and physical 5-set match with Delpo on Friday and I just saw that as Murray’s moment more than anything else. It is unfortunate that Murray stunk it up in the 2011 semis after that overhead against Nadal and simply cannot beat Federer on the big stage, but Murray always gives Djokovic some nagging match-up problems that make their matches sticky. Murray was bound to win one and it happened that day. It got the damn thing over with so we didn’t have to hear about a Brit winning Wimbledon for the first time since the Great Depression.

I don't conveniently omit Novak being up a break early in the third, I just think it makes sense he couldn't hold on. That's what happens when you're not playing your best tennis and haven't been for a while, and that's what happens when winning stops becoming a habit for you, and you're playing against a guy who was winning everything in sight. Again, you have narrow-minded outlooks on certain things. The match was competitive and Novak absolutely had chances to go up two sets to one. But there's a reason he didn't. And those reasons I've highlighted in my earlier post re: Novak and Nadal's respective results that year. Yeah, the more in form, fitter player will be more match-tough and that makes a difference in key moments. We've seen it a thousand times.

Please, Nalbandian was not going to win a best of 5 set match against Nadal at Roland Garros at a time when literally nobody did. I'm sure he would have made it interesting but you don't even believe "it could have been ugly." You just have the luxury to make this grandiose claim because it can't be disproven...well other from the fact that Nalbandian never came close to doing such a thing.

 

[Moxie]

Jo-Willie comes through.  It was a good match, and lots of positives for Rafa, so can't complain.  I'm happy to see Tsonga back playing well, too.  Now let's see who he gets in the final.   B-)

 

[britbox]

Missed the match unfortunately.  Good win for Tsonga. I expected Rafa to win today.

 

[britbox]

Tsonga defeats Nadal 6-4, 0-6, 7-5.

Didn't see the match, but the scores on the doors seems odd! Tsonga bagelled in the second?

 

[Billie]

This was some kind of performance from Nole against Andy.   I know how good he is, but he sometimes surprises me, this was a master class display of tennis.

 

[mikecase]

Djokovic is nearly unplayable.

 

[Billie]

Congratulations to Tsonga as well, it was too early for me to get up and watch this.   Tsonga can play some inspired and really great tennis from time to time.

And thumbs down to Sportsnet for not showing Andy-Nole match live on TV.

 

[calitennis127]

Actually he didn’t omit anything about Djokovic being up in the 3rd, he merely didn’t detail it. What he said was “Novak was better in the second half of the second set and first half of the third. That’s not enough.” This is true. I bolded your point above, that Djokovic didn’t play aggressively enough. That may be so, since you will never agree that Nadal took it to him, but I don’t agree with the notion that the third set, while critical, negated Djokovic mounting a response in the fourth and taking it to a fifth, which he didn’t. 

 

Well this just  shows you possess little semblance of understanding of the psychological and fitness aspects of intensive athletic competition or training. This isn't just a tennis-specific issue but a sport-wide issue. Both players knew the third set was going to be decisive based on the intensive rallies of the first 3 sets. Coming back from 2 sets to 1 down was going to be close to physically impossible given how long most of the rallies had been in sets 1 and 2. In order to understand this, you need to have engaged in intensive training and competition at some point in your life so that you can relate to someone pushing themselves to their physical limits.

 

 

[MikeOne]

what's strange about Djokovic is that i really don't see him playing at his top form, he still is able to dominate guys like Murray. Djokovic is just playing consistent, doing everything well but i feel he can still go for more winners..  I think Murray was a bit off and this explains the scoreline.

 

[mikecase]

what’s strange about Djokovic is that i really don’t see him playing at his top form, he still is able to dominate guys like Murray. Djokovic is just playing consistent, doing everything well but i feel he can still go for more winners.. I think Murray was a bit off and this explains the scoreline.

Why change a winning strategy?  He plays percentages better than anyone else on the tour