They broke up the band...the Fab Four are history

[brokenshoelace]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

OK, to start off: Cilic is NOT similar to Tsonga. He's taller, and has a much, MUCH better backhand. Tsonga's backhand is far more streaky and erratic. This is particularly important against Nadal because that's where the bulk of Rafa's shots are directed. Conversely, Tsonga has a better forehand on average, but what interests me about this version of Cilic (if he can sustain his level) is the fact that he tidied up his forehand.

As far as their H2H goes, well yeah, I expect Nadal to have a winning H2H with everyone (he almost does). I never said Cilic will be beating Nadal regularly. I said it's a problematic match-up. Hell, Djokovic is Nadal's most difficult match-up and yet Rafa leads the H2H.

BS

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?

Nadal.

 

[DarthFed]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

OK, to start off: Cilic is NOT similar to Tsonga. He's taller, and has a much, MUCH better backhand. Tsonga's backhand is far more streaky and erratic. This is particularly important against Nadal because that's where the bulk of Rafa's shots are directed. Conversely, Tsonga has a better forehand on average, but what interests me about this version of Cilic (if he can sustain his level) is the fact that he tidied up his forehand.

As far as their H2H goes, well yeah, I expect Nadal to have a winning H2H with everyone (he almost does). I never said Cilic will be beating Nadal regularly. I said it's a problematic match-up. Hell, Djokovic is Nadal's most difficult match-up and yet Rafa leads the H2H.

BS

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?

The way Cilic looked the last 2 matches I'd take him, I'd take him over anything I've seen at the USO since Roger was in his prime except maybe 2011 Djokovic.

 

[Kieran]

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?

The way Cilic looked the last 2 matches I'd take him, I'd take him over anything I've seen at the USO since Roger was in his prime except maybe 2011 Djokovic.

Well now, you were hardly going to say anything other than that, were you? :lolz: :lolz:

 

[DarthFed]

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?

The way Cilic looked the last 2 matches I'd take him, I'd take him over anything I've seen at the USO since Roger was in his prime except maybe 2011 Djokovic.

Well now, you were hardly going to say anything other than that, were you? :lolz: :lolz:

Don't like the lack of Rafa love? I will put it this way, I thought Cilic looked a lot like 2009 DP out there except he moves better and was serving out of his mind.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Cilic is a much, MUCH more problematic match-up for Nadal than Stan.

Cilic is similar to Tsonga.
And Nadal has won his last 5 outdoor hardcourt matches vs. Tsonga.
We should be careful not to overrate Cilic.
Let us realize that beating Federer is a lot different to beating Djokovic/Nadal.
Even Monfils had matchpoints to beat Federer in the 4th set!
Cilic didn't beat Djokovic/Nadal at this US Open.
So what has he proven?

Nadal has won his last 2 meetings vs Cilic:
2011 Rome: 6-1 6-3
2011 AO: 6-2 6-4 6-3

Cilic's only win was back in 2009 when Nadal lost SIX MATCHES in straight sets after US Open:
Nadal lost to Cilic at Beijing 6-1 6-3
Daydenko at Shanghai 7-6 6-3
Djokovic at Paris 6-2 6-3
and lost all 3 matches at World Tour Finals:
to Djokovic 7-6 6-3
to Davydenko 6-1 7-6
to Soderling 6-4 6-4

OK, to start off: Cilic is NOT similar to Tsonga. He's taller, and has a much, MUCH better backhand. Tsonga's backhand is far more streaky and erratic. This is particularly important against Nadal because that's where the bulk of Rafa's shots are directed. Conversely, Tsonga has a better forehand on average, but what interests me about this version of Cilic (if he can sustain his level) is the fact that he tidied up his forehand.

As far as their H2H goes, well yeah, I expect Nadal to have a winning H2H with everyone (he almost does). I never said Cilic will be beating Nadal regularly. I said it's a problematic match-up. Hell, Djokovic is Nadal's most difficult match-up and yet Rafa leads the H2H.

BS

Rafael USO 2013 vs Cilic USO 2014,.who wins BS?

The way Cilic looked the last 2 matches I'd take him, I'd take him over anything I've seen at the USO since Roger was in his prime except maybe 2011 Djokovic.

Cilic looked better than 2009 DP. The nature of DP's victory over Nadal (again, the nature, not the result itself) was obviously in large part due to Nadal's injury and crappy form back then (as in the result wouldn't have been so dominant otherwise), and he should have lost that final to Roger had Federer not taken his foot off the gas. I'm sure this might prove to be an unpopular opinion but really, it's not that debatable.

I think for as much as Cilic in his US Open form can be problematic for Nadal, the same can be said the other way around, and that's what we often overlook when talking about match-ups. For example, because Nadal in general, is favored over 95% of the players (or even more), whenever someone is suited to handle his groundies better than most, we label it as a bad match-up (for example, Andy Murray when he first broke through was labelled as a bad match-up for Nadal. Every big hitter is labelled as a bad match-up for Nadal. Yet look at the h2h even off of clay).

What we overlook is, despite the tricky match-up (and keep in mind I was the one who brought up Cilic being a problematic match-up for Nadal), what Nadal brings to the table IS a bad match-up for big hitters too. Since we're talking about 2010 or 2013 US Open Nadal, then we're conceding how effective his cross court forehand is (a forehand even Djokovic couldn't do much against). We're not talking about loopy sitters to Del Potro's backhand in 2009. Nevertheless, Cilic''s size and backhand will undoubtedly help him penetrate with CC backhands, which is generally the way to attack Nadal.

However, I'm pretty sure I saw Cilic struggle against Gilles Simon in the 4th round and go 5 sets. When you factor in Nadal's movement, counter-punching ability, defense, turning defense into attack, forcing his opponent to hit an extra shot, as well as his know-how and experience in these situations to make tactical adjustments that irritate his opponent, coupled with his offense and serve (reminder, he was serving unbelievable in both 2010 and 2013), then it's a whole new challenge. Then you have Nadal being able to move big hitters around, force them to hit on the run, etc... against Cilic, he'd use his CC backhand and inside out forehand to move Cilic on the forehand side, which is capable of breaking down. It's a pattern that actually suits Nadal.

With all due respect to Cilic and his opponents, but this isn't Tomas Berdych who loses to anyone who moves better than him and can move him around. This isn't granpa Federer who's been getting overpowered by big hitters for about four years now, and this isn't Kei Nishikori who's the size of Mr. Miyagi.

I've seen Nadal win way too many of these matches where his opponent is bringing an offensive onslaught to bet against him. It's not always simply about who's hitting bigger and cleaner. He knows how to navigate these matches. In fact, I'd say this has been his best and most obvious improvement since the 2009 FO loss to Soderling and subsequent injury layoff. Serious question: How many times in majors has a peak form Nadal lost to a big hitter (not counting being served off the court at Wimbledon)?

PS: The only true "bad" match-up Nadal has is an in form Djokovic. That's it. Everything else is either "tricky," "problematic," or a cakewalk in his favor.

PPS: The above is not true indoors or on the kind of hard courts used in the fall. That's a different issue and Nadal has more truly bad match-ups there.

 

[DarthFed]

^ Nobody accused Cilic of suddenly being a consistently great player. So yeah he struggled vs. Simon and heck he will probably lose before the quarters of AO but that doesn't change the fact he went on a crazy hot streak. It remains to be seen but I'd bet against him suddenly becoming a top player.

And I can turn this back on you and say who did Nadal beat at the USO playing even remotely as well. Let's remember that Djokovic on fast hards is way way different than slow-medium hards, and getting easily beaten by Kei shows that. There is a reason Djokovic has never won it aside from his amazing 2011. And that's the only good player Rafa's faced (if we want to call 2010 Djokovic good) at USO in his 2 wins.

I'm no fan (at least not anymore) of Cilic as I think the scum shouldn't even be allowed to play right now but it was incredible tennis the last 3 rounds.

 

[brokenshoelace]

^ Nobody accused Cilic of suddenly being a consistently great player. So yeah he struggled vs. Simon and heck he will probably lose before the quarters of AO but that doesn't change the fact he went on a crazy hot streak. It remains to be seen but I'd bet against him suddenly becoming a top player.

And I can turn this back on you and say who did Nadal beat at the USO playing even remotely as well. Let's remember that Djokovic on fast hards is way way different than slow-medium hards, and getting easily beaten by Kei shows that. There is a reason Djokovic has never won it aside from his amazing 2011. And that's the only good player Rafa's faced (if we want to call 2010 Djokovic good) at USO in his 2 wins.

I'm no fan (at least not anymore) of Cilic as I think the scum shouldn't even be allowed to play right now but it was incredible tennis the last 3 rounds.

In a conversation like this, the burden of proof is on the underdog. In other words, asking "who did Nadal beat" is pointless. He's won the tournament twice and reached the final once in the last 3 times he played there. The last time he won it included an entire North American hard court run in which he went undefeated and beat pretty much everyone along the way, from top ranked players to big hitters to promising up and comers. So he really has nothing to prove.

It's much more logical to ask "who did he really beat?" (which I didn't by the way, and I'll explain in a moment) when talking about a guy who suddenly caught fire out of nowhere. To be clear, I'm not accusing Cilic of not beating anyone of note. Berdych and Federer are no joke (especially the latter, obviously). We're talking about 2 top 10 players, in addition to beating Nishikori in the finals (and if a guy made it to the finals, he must have done something right). However, I was comparing Nadal to these guys not in terms of legacy (though Roger's legacy is somewhat impressive, lol), but from a match-up perspective, which is what we're debating here. Of course, nobody accused Cilic of being an all-time great (or even just "great"), but that's irrelevant. We're simply talking about his US Open form, which WAS great, and debating how it would match-up against Nadal's great US Open form from last year.

"If you want to call 2010 Djokovic good." Uh, please. Get real. He WAS good. Otherwise, what do you call Nishikori? And again, Nadal's level last year was not exclusive to the US Open. On the way there in Montreal and Cinci, he beat Janowicz, Djokovic, Raonic, Berdych, Dimitrov, Federer and Isner. I'm not saying all of them are great players, but they offer a wide variety of styles and most are pretty damn good. Plus, if you diminish them then that rules out pretty much the entire tour, doesn't it? Because unlike you, I'm not saying Cilic's opponents weren't "good," (of course Nishikori, Federer and Berdych ARE good) I'm saying they're irrelevant to the Nadal match-up.

As far as Cilic struggling with Simon, again, I'm well aware every player is prone to having a hiccup. But, once again, I brought that match-up up to highlight a point, that a player who can move extremely well, cover the court, counter-punch and turn defense into attack can trouble Cilic, even in the kind of form he was in. You add to that someone with offensive prowess, the ability to dictate points, an otherworldly forehand, and a better serve than Simon, not to mention, someone with the experience, mentality, and ability to navigate situations emotionally and tactically like Nadal, and you have an all different proposition.

Now I'll say this, Nadal playing anything less than very good would not cut it against Cilic in the kind of form he was in, but we are talking about Nadal playing the best hard court tennis of his career.

On a sidenote, if they play this fall, I expect Cilic to win.

 

[Bounce It !!]

With three new faces in the finals this year, and 2 taking a slam, it seems to me 2014 has been a qualifying round to see who will replace Ringo !

Andy Murray has not demonstrated the ability to come back quickly after his injury. I will be surprised if Murray makes it back to the top 4 anytime in 2015. His self destructive anger issues have reared their ugly head, and Mauresmo, nor anyone other than Lendl, may not be able to help him.

I see one slot opening up, Murray's, as Fed made a great showing at Wimbledon, and ran into a red hot Cilic in NY. With the young, and not so young guns seeing their time to move up, I think it's Andy that suffers the most in ranking. Delpo may be back, Stan, is on the verge of being a one hit wonder, despite his playing tough against the top 4. Cilic, I agree he might be the best of the big boys considering his movement. Milos, Kei, Grigor, Tsonga (his time has passed), Monfils ?, they all show signs of having the game, but have not demonstrated the intangibles to win week in and week out.

As on old friend liked to say, "More will be revealed" The rest of this year should provide some excellent tennis and shed some light on what's in store for 2015.

 

[Federberg]

^ I agree with this. Not sure about Andy at all.
I see Cilic, Nishikori and Dimitrov as being the biggest threat to the established order. I would include Del Potro as one of the big boys, purely because he certainly isn't going to wilt if he faces them. He's certainly there or there abouts when he's fit and played back into form. Tsonga, Monfils and Berdych are 3 guys with the tools to be great, and perhaps once in a blue moon they might get a slam, but you can't factor something as random as that in. As for the rest? Either not good enough and never will be, or just not ready yet. Folks like Krygios and Thiem might fit into that category. Remains to be seen.

But it does present a huge problem for Murray to get back into the reckoning. Anyone of those guys can stop him as he make his way through a draw. I don't think his old stuff is going to work now. Everyone knows all about it. So in a way, his attempt to change style a bit makes sense, but he has to do it all the way through, not sure he has that champions belief yet... or ever will

 

[brokenshoelace]

Murray will be fine in 2015, and do better than any of the above mentioned players. If he's in decent form, even his "old stuff" is still better than 95% of the tour. I honestly don't see how we're writing him off yet predicting marbles for Dimitrov and Nishikori. I'm pretty sure even in a sub-par year, Murray has done at least as well as Dimitrov this year, if not better. The guy reached 3 quarter finals and a semi in his four major appearances, even without ever playing good. 3 of his 4 losses were to Nadal, Djokovic and Federer (one was to Dimitrov, in order to give credit where credit is due). That's hardly a disaster. People are often so quick to write Murray off. Last I checked he's the one with the proven credentials. He's just had a relatively poor year, in which he's still done consistently good at the majors.

 

[Federberg]

^To be clear I'm not writing him off. I just see those 3 guys as a significant threat to the established order. The point I was trying to make is that it's not a shoo in for Murray to get back into the top 4. I have serious questions about his desire. His ability is not really in question, but I think if we're talking about the big 4 being challenged, Murray is the one who is most likely to be challenged in my view. He most certainly has big 4 ability, I'm questioning his execution not his talent

 

[brokenshoelace]

^ No I got your point and see what you mean, but I think it says a lot that in a year in which he was just coming off a serious injury, parted ways with a coach that led him to glory, was suffering from post-Wimbledon hangover, was out of sorts mentally and physically, and didn't play well in general at all, he was still able to get to at least the QF in every major.

 

[herios]

Murray was always the "weakest link" among the top 4. In case the rest of the field was going to improve and have a chance to match at least one of the 4, Murray was the most likely to be the one.
This year, so far, 7 players not named Djokovic, Nadal, Federer have perfomed better overall, thus he is 11 spot in the ATP race to London.
The big question is if Murray was going to play better from here on, will he able to play better than all of those 7 players?
I bet he could play better than some of them, but not all of them.
I ink he will be a top 8 player next year, but not a top 4.

 

[DarthFed]

I agree with BS here. It is one bad year but it has been a really bad year. The only decent slam result was the semi at RG and it came at the wrong slam as he has no prayer there against the big boys. And aside from slams he has been a complete no show, not even a semi at an MS event.

But Murray is only 27 and this poor year should motivate him to do better in 2015. I bet he is top 5 next year, 50-50 that he is top 4. It kind of depends on Dimitrov and whether he progresses and if Roger takes another step back.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ I wonder how long Dimitrov is going to stay with Roger Rasheed uzzled
Tsonga and Monfils were also sucked in by Rasheed.
Hewitt wasted valuable years with Rasheed (and never won a slam with him), instead of finding a TENNIS coach to help him play more aggressively.

Rasheed trains you hard and gets you fit.....but the emphasis on fitness doesn't make the player more aggressive/attacking. It is more likely to make them play more defensive and look to outlast their opponents. That is the last thing Dimitrov should be doing. If Dimitrov has any weapons at all, he needs a TENNIS coach that can help him utilize those weapons.

 

[herios]

I agree with BS here. It is one bad year but it has been a really bad year. The only decent slam result was the semi at RG and it came at the wrong slam as he has no prayer there against the big boys. And aside from slams he has been a complete no show, not even a semi at an MS event.

But Murray is only 27 and this poor year should motivate him to do better in 2015. I bet he is top 5 next year, 50-50 that he is top 4. It kind of depends on Dimitrov and whether he progresses and if Roger takes another step back.

I think there are other players beside the ones you mentioned, who will have a say in this.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

In 2014, Nishikori looked confident vs. Djokovic/Nadal (and has 2-2 record vs. Federer).
I'd say he could interfere if he can stay reasonably healthy :idea:

 

[DarthFed]

^ Stan is the only one I can think of. Let's just say Murray plays a little bit better and even just slightly resembles what he was before the back surgery. Aside from the top 3 I don't see anyone except maybe Stan and a much improved Dimitrov that could finish ahead of him. If we are putting Cilic and Nishi ahead of him I think that's way too soon...

 

[NADAL2005RG]

I agree about Cilic, definitely not the kind of game I'd bank on being consistent

 

[Front242]

Cilic lost in the 2nd round of the Paris masters to Del Potro last year. Not a hope he loses that early this year imo and in fact, given the previous history of surprise winners there, I'd have to put him well up there as a possible winner if his great form continues. If he won there he'd be up to number 5 in the rankings. I wouldn't rule it out. And of course there are quite a few tournaments left this year. Look for him to climb higher for sure before year end and by doing so the gap widens on Murray quite a bit.