US Open, Flushing Meadows, NY USA - Grand Slam (Men)

[The Strokes]

Are you #fatshaming? Actually, they are the same, just a bit shorter. I don't know what is with the women on these boards giving other women a hard time! Where is the sisterhood?

Chill! You have totally misunderstood! If you knew me personally you would know what an incorrect read you just made.
This is the problem with posting, you can be misunderstood, so to be clear:

It was a compliment! It's not fat, it's muscle, and i think it's great she has such impressive quads.
I don't fat shame ever.
More history with the sisterhood than you can imagine.

 

[The Strokes]

What I have trouble imagining is why Murray would leave it to two days before! He's been off since Wimb, my god he knows the state of his body/hip.
Very different with an injury you just got, maybe on the practice court, or a flare-up of an old injury.
I think there should be a wollop of a fine. It would pose a problem distinguishing between a recent injury and one you already had for some time though ...
Still not happy about the draw! Well the tournament will start tomorrow and we'll start to forget ... until ... in the eventuality Fed and Rafa do meet in the semi, have some epic affair that takes it out of both of them, and whoever goes through loses to less-tested victor of the much much weaker bottom half.
But in tennis things rarely go as planned.

I can't wait to see Shap/Medvedev.

 

[MartyB]

OK folks. Everything was done as per predetermined rules. I am posting the official rules below taken directly from the "grand slam rule book". But, first let me explain it in easy to understand manner.

1. Only if at least two of the top 8 seeds have withdrawn after the draw is made, the tournament is allowed (but not required) to remake the draw. As only Andy withdrew, the USO does not have the ability to remake the draw.

2. Obviously if an LL is directly placed into the slot of a high seed (who has withdrawn), the draw will be highly unbalanced. As a result, there are well defined rules of how to rebalance the draw when a seeded player withdraws. When a top four seed withdraws, the #5 seed gets into the slot created by the withdrawal. That is why Cilic got into Murray's spot. Then the #17 seed gets into the spot created by the movement of #5 seed. That is why Sam Querry who was seeded #17 got into Cilic's spot. The player who just missed the cut for being seeded (#33 guy) is moved into the spot created by the movement of #17 seed. Kohlschrbrier (#33 seed) moved into the spot vacated by Uncle Sam. Finally, the lucky loser is inserted into the spot created by movement of #33 guy. Lukas Lacko (incidentally his initials also match that of a Lucky Loser) got into Kohly's spot.

3. Everything is done as per pre-specified rules. There is no conspiracy to give advantage to any particular players.

4. While not ideal, the rules and rebalancing procedure are fairly sensible as well.

5. The rebalancing rules are three different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-4, 5-16 and 16-32. If only, they came in five different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-16 and 16-32, the rebalancing rules would have been fairer than it is now.

---------------------------------------Relevant Sections from Official Rule Book ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seedings will not be official until the final draw is made. If two or more of the top eight seeds withdraw more than forty-eight (48) hours before the start of the tournament, the tournament may choose either to remake the draw or let the draw stand. Notwithstanding anything else contained herein, if a Wild Card withdraws after the original draw and the draw is to be remade, the vacancy created may be filled at the tournament’s option by a substitute Wild Card; if the tournament elects not to use a
substitute Wild Card, the vacancy shall be treated as any other vacancy below.

Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed prior to the release of the Order of Play for the first day of Main Draw shall be filled as follows:

- If the withdrawal is among seeds 1 to 4, the 5th seed is moved into then open position, the 5th position shall be filled by the 17th seed, and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 5 to 16, the 17th seed is moved into the open position and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 17 to 32 it shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded.
The position vacated by that next highest ranked player shall then be filled by the next player on the original entry list if prior to the commencement of the Qualifying competition or by the eligible Lucky Loser if after the commencement of the Qualifying competition.
Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed which occurs after the release of the Order of Play for the first day of the Main Draw shall be filled by eligible Lucky Losers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK folks. Everything was done as per predetermined rules. I am posting the official rules below taken directly from the "grand slam rule book". But, first let me explain it in easy to understand manner.

1. Only if at least two of the top 8 seeds have withdrawn after the draw is made, the tournament is allowed (but not required) to remake the draw. As only Andy withdrew, the USO does not have the ability to remake the draw.

2. Obviously if an LL is directly placed into the slot of a high seed (who has withdrawn), the draw will be highly unbalanced. As a result, there are well defined rules of how to rebalance the draw when a seeded player withdraws. When a top four seed withdraws, the #5 seed gets into the slot created by the withdrawal. That is why Cilic got into Murray's spot. Then the #17 seed gets into the spot created by the movement of #5 seed. That is why Sam Querry who was seeded #17 got into Cilic's spot. The player who just missed the cut for being seeded (#33 guy) is moved into the spot created by the movement of #17 seed. Kohlschrbrier (#33 seed) moved into the spot vacated by Uncle Sam. Finally, the lucky loser is inserted into the spot created by movement of #33 guy. Lukas Lacko (incidentally his initials also match that of a Lucky Loser) got into Kohly's spot.

3. Everything is done as per pre-specified rules. There is no conspiracy to give advantage to any particular players.

4. While not ideal, the rules and rebalancing procedure are fairly sensible as well.

5. The rebalancing rules are three different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-4, 5-16 and 16-32. If only, they came in five different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-16 and 16-32, the rebalancing rules would have been fairer than it is now.

---------------------------------------Relevant Sections from Official Rule Book ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seedings will not be official until the final draw is made. If two or more of the top eight seeds withdraw more than forty-eight (48) hours before the start of the tournament, the tournament may choose either to remake the draw or let the draw stand. Notwithstanding anything else contained herein, if a Wild Card withdraws after the original draw and the draw is to be remade, the vacancy created may be filled at the tournament’s option by a substitute Wild Card; if the tournament elects not to use a
substitute Wild Card, the vacancy shall be treated as any other vacancy below.

Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed prior to the release of the Order of Play for the first day of Main Draw shall be filled as follows:

- If the withdrawal is among seeds 1 to 4, the 5th seed is moved into then open position, the 5th position shall be filled by the 17th seed, and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 5 to 16, the 17th seed is moved into the open position and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 17 to 32 it shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded.
The position vacated by that next highest ranked player shall then be filled by the next player on the original entry list if prior to the commencement of the Qualifying competition or by the eligible Lucky Loser if after the commencement of the Qualifying competition.
Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed which occurs after the release of the Order of Play for the first day of the Main Draw shall be filled by eligible Lucky Losers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK folks. Everything was done as per predetermined rules. I am posting the official rules below taken directly from the "grand slam rule book". But, first let me explain it in easy to understand manner.

1. Only if at least two of the top 8 seeds have withdrawn after the draw is made, the tournament is allowed (but not required) to remake the draw. As only Andy withdrew, the USO does not have the ability to remake the draw.

2. Obviously if an LL is directly placed into the slot of a high seed (who has withdrawn), the draw will be highly unbalanced. As a result, there are well defined rules of how to rebalance the draw when a seeded player withdraws. When a top four seed withdraws, the #5 seed gets into the slot created by the withdrawal. That is why Cilic got into Murray's spot. Then the #17 seed gets into the spot created by the movement of #5 seed. That is why Sam Querry who was seeded #17 got into Cilic's spot. The player who just missed the cut for being seeded (#33 guy) is moved into the spot created by the movement of #17 seed. Kohlschrbrier (#33 seed) moved into the spot vacated by Uncle Sam. Finally, the lucky loser is inserted into the spot created by movement of #33 guy. Lukas Lacko (incidentally his initials also match that of a Lucky Loser) got into Kohly's spot.

3. Everything is done as per pre-specified rules. There is no conspiracy to give advantage to any particular players.

4. While not ideal, the rules and rebalancing procedure are fairly sensible as well.

5. The rebalancing rules are three different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-4, 5-16 and 16-32. If only, they came in five different procedures based on whether the seed who dropped out is in the range 1-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-16 and 16-32, the rebalancing rules would have been fairer than it is now.

---------------------------------------Relevant Sections from Official Rule Book ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seedings will not be official until the final draw is made. If two or more of the top eight seeds withdraw more than forty-eight (48) hours before the start of the tournament, the tournament may choose either to remake the draw or let the draw stand. Notwithstanding anything else contained herein, if a Wild Card withdraws after the original draw and the draw is to be remade, the vacancy created may be filled at the tournament’s option by a substitute Wild Card; if the tournament elects not to use a
substitute Wild Card, the vacancy shall be treated as any other vacancy below.

Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed prior to the release of the Order of Play for the first day of Main Draw shall be filled as follows:

- If the withdrawal is among seeds 1 to 4, the 5th seed is moved into then open position, the 5th position shall be filled by the 17th seed, and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 5 to 16, the 17th seed is moved into the open position and the 17th position shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded. - If the withdrawal is among seeds 17 to 32 it shall be filled by the next highest ranked player eligible to be seeded.
The position vacated by that next highest ranked player shall then be filled by the next player on the original entry list if prior to the commencement of the Qualifying competition or by the eligible Lucky Loser if after the commencement of the Qualifying competition.
Any vacancy created by the withdrawal of a seed which occurs after the release of the Order of Play for the first day of the Main Draw shall be filled by eligible Lucky Losers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This just reinforces how much I detest what Murray did here. How selfish stupid and arrogant. He had no chance here and he knew that plus he knew what the consequences would be to the draw and tournament. As a New Yorker the prospect of potentially seeing Fed and Nadal in a final here was eradicated by this guy. Dope

 

[kskate2]

USO Order of Play for First Round Monday, August 28, 2017

 

[britbox]

This just reinforces how much I detest what Murray did here. How selfish stupid and arrogant. He had no chance here and he knew that plus he knew what the consequences would be to the draw and tournament. As a New Yorker the prospect of potentially seeing Fed and Nadal in a final here was eradicated by this guy. Dope

Agreed but I don't think he was worrying about the consequences... just himself.

 

[herios]

I don't dislike Raonic; I like Milos personally, but I don't like his game--I don't enjoy watching him play. I find him kind of ungainly, and I don't like big servers. But I feel great gratitude towards him for what he did for tennis in Canada.
I don't like being called not objective after just writing a post to MRzz talking about how we all have that tendency , and how I examine my own.
His ROS is notoriously poor.
I thought he was on a downward slope since MOya left. I also think he was floating near the top five due to a kind of lull in rapidly-improving young players. Now he's going to be passed by AZ (already has been) maybe Thiem, and maybe even Kyrgios and Dimi (same age as Raonic) as well.
Your reply to me accuses me of not being objective, but these are very objective observations. I like the guy, and I think his game is maxed out. I think he may do well to stay top ten when he comes back. He's already fallen out of top ten, and he will fall still further.

How objective are you?

Fair enough, as far as current state of Milos game and place is concerned. I also think that the replacements he sought for Moya did not help him at all, and his game has suffered this year, aside his injuries.
But I am still not buying a minute that Kyrgios is a better volleyer than him.

 

[The Strokes]

Fair enough, as far as current state of Milos game and place is concerned. I also think that the replacements he sought for Moya did not help him at all, and his game has suffered this year, aside his injuries.
But I am still not buying a minute that Kyrgios is a better volleyer than him.

Believe me, personally, I think Milos is one of the most likable. He's smart, a hard worker, and he's never been a brat, even for one minute.
And It's possible Milos can still improve.
I just think there's more competition now, from below (i.e. younger) than when he rose to top 5. Rafa and Fed resurgent also pushed him back down.
It's true he did beat Big 4 now and again (though not Djok right?). He beat Rafa in Rafa's slump when a lot of unlikely players were beating him. At first he was beating Murray alot, then when Murray reached another level that stopped.
True Milos beat AZ at Wimb this year. Maybe Milos will be better than AZ on grass ...not on clay or HC though.

 

[The Strokes]

Fair enough, as far as current state of Milos game and place is concerned. I also think that the replacements he sought for Moya did not help him at all, and his game has suffered this year, aside his injuries.
But I am still not buying a minute that Kyrgios is a better volleyer than him.

Maybe you're right re Kyrios volleys, I'm going to watch him for that and give it more consideration.
BTW, the Canadian I really really like--but who has been so disappointing in the past two years--is Pospisil. His game appeals to me way more than Milos. But he's got some kind of huge mental block. Many had him tagged for top ten in 2014 (that glorious year of Canadian tennis) but he got worse, not better. Well there were some injuries, and a huge rankings drop of about 50 places just by having a terrible Wimb after a great Wimb.
I'm still hoping he can get it together, at least top 50 and stay there.
He also gets terrible draws, He often wins first round then has to play Fed or Djok etc.

 

[El Dude]

I don't know about volleys, but overall Kyrgios is a more talented player - capable of reaching explosive heights that we haven't seen from Raonic. Milos is more in the Berdych/Tsonga mold: a very good player, but someone who will only win a Slam if the right conditions emerge. Kyrgios can win a Slam (or three) on his own power. It is also a classic case of one player (Raonic) having a higher floor but lower ceiling.

As for Andy, it is a lame stunt but I'm not sure what he gains from it. I mean, I guess he could theoretically be taking away a few points from one of Fedal, as if they meet in SF, one can only earn 720 rather than 1200. If he really did that for points it is beyond pathetic, but I'd rather assume innocent until guilty and that he was thinking, "I'll give it one more day" and when he woke up still sore and stiff, he pulled out.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

It is time to check the odds again after Andy dropping out and the consequent rebalancing of the draw.

1. Roger 15/8
2. Rafa 7/2
3. Sasha 11/2
4. Grigor / Cilic 18
6. Nick 22
7. Thiem 33
8. JMDP 40
9. Tsonga 60
10. Isner 66
11. Berdych 80
12. Ferrer / Uncle Sam 100

Fedal 63% and field 37%, in terms of %s.

 

[shawnbm]

The redo the draw? Does that mean a potential Fedal final?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The redo the draw? Does that mean a potential Fedal final?

There is no remaking or redoing the draw. It is not allowed as per the rules. Only rebalancing is allowed. It is already done.
Fedal will be an Sf, if it happens.

 

[herios]

Regarding Sasha Zverev in his new position, as the favorited in the bottom half, thus the best chances to reach the final, I have hard time believing it, until I am seeing it.
He has progressed only once in the second week of a slam, at the most recent Wimbledon, where he was eliminated in the round of 16.
I think there will be a lot of pressure to live up to his ranking and although this is a depleted field he will face, he might come up short.
A QF is definitely in his reach this time around, but beyond that could be tough.
He may prove me wrong and go all the way to the final, but I am not entirely convinced.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Fair enough, as far as current state of Milos game and place is concerned. I also think that the replacements he sought for Moya did not help him at all, and his game has suffered this year, aside his injuries.
But I am still not buying a minute that Kyrgios is a better volleyer than him.

No way Milos has better net game than Krygios. Krygrios is not as talented or skilled as Rafa around the net but he is more athletic than Nick.

 

[herios]

I don't know about volleys, but overall Kyrgios is a more talented player - capable of reaching explosive heights that we haven't seen from Raonic. Milos is more in the Berdych/Tsonga mold: a very good player, but someone who will only win a Slam if the right conditions emerge. Kyrgios can win a Slam (or three) on his own power. It is also a classic case of one player (Raonic) having a higher floor but lower ceiling.

As for Andy, it is a lame stunt but I'm not sure what he gains from it. I mean, I guess he could theoretically be taking away a few points from one of Fedal, as if they meet in SF, one can only earn 720 rather than 1200. If he really did that for points it is beyond pathetic, but I'd rather assume innocent until guilty and that he was thinking, "I'll give it one more day" and when he woke up still sore and stiff, he pulled out.

Not saying that Kyrgios is not talented, but you make it sound like the matches are on his racquet, and he could win a slam on his own will.
The guy has some weaknesses, and they were exploited well by Grigor in Cincy. He was not able for example to handle well the slices, making UE.

No way Milos has better net game than Krygios. Krygrios is not as talented or skilled as Rafa around the net but he is more athletic than Nick.

No way Milos has better net game than Krygios. Krygrios is not as talented or skilled as Rafa around the net but he is more athletic than Nick.

I had enough of this debate. If you want to prove me wrong you need to come up with actual stats proving that Nick is the better player.

 

[Carol]

Does someone know why Patrick McEnroe says something about Roger's back issue but also the Rafa's knee issue? and meanwhile three of the experts are seeing Rafa as favorite

http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...erts-pick-their-winners-year-final-grand-slam

 

[the AntiPusher]

Not saying that Kyrgios is not talented, but you make it sound like the matches are on his racquet, and he could win a slam on his own will.
The guy has some weaknesses, and they were exploited well by Grigor in Cincy. He was not able for example to handle well the slices, making UE.


I had enough of this debate. If you want to prove me wrong you need to come up with actual stats proving that Nick is the better player.

Are you looking for some type of net points efficiency ratio to validate what everyone is telling you..it won't make a difference because you are always bias and have never admitted when you're wrong.

 

[herios]

Are you looking for some type of net points efficiency ratio to validate what everyone is telling you..it won't make a difference because you are always bias and have never admitted when you're wrong.

I will admit that I am wrong for sure, but you have to demonstrate that with clear factual numbers.
Not just X player is better than Y in this skill, because that is how I think it is.

 

[El Dude]

Not saying that Kyrgios is not talented, but you make it sound like the matches are on his racquet, and he could win a slam on his own will.
The guy has some weaknesses, and they were exploited well by Grigor in Cincy. He was not able for example to handle well the slices, making UE.

Yes, he has weaknesses - most notably his mentality, which is a huge stumbling block. And I don't think the matches are always on his racquet, just more so than Milos. I have seen Kyrgios reach a higher level than Milos - one that can challenge the Big Four. Milos doesn't have that higher level; when he's at his best, he can beat one of the Big Four, but only if they aren't playing their best.

Again, it is a floor/ceiling thing. Milos has a much higher floor than Nick - he doesn't give up on matches, doesn't disappear, just looks wooden and one-dimensional. But I've never seen him play a truly elite game, whereas Nick at his best is simply explosive and truly elite.

 

[mrzz]

I am with @herios here... sorry, but have you guys actually ever watched Kyrgios volleying? This is an obvious, gigantic flaw in his game. He will get one or two tricky volleys in and miss or just put back in play a ton of others. Raonic not only volleys better than him, he volleys MUCH better than him. He has a lot of wins on grass -- where he actually goes to the net and volleys as an offensive option -- to show for it. I don't even understand how can we try to compare an opportunistic volleyer against one guy that attacks the net on purpose.

While I agree that Kyrgios has that something that makes you believe that he will win big, actually it is Raonic that already shown that he could keep up with the big boys at the slams. In Wimbledon 2016 he beat Federer, went to the final where he lost in three tight sets. Kyrgios has not even reach the semis of a slam... so, objectively speaking you can not say Kyrgios has a higher ceiling. At least not yet.

And, again, I don't think Kyrgios mentality is a problem -- much to the contrary. It is not beautiful when he gives up on matches, but he never does that on a tight match. His ability to stay on tight matches is a huge asset, and one of the main reasons he has a decent record against the big 3 + 1.