Who will surprise and disappoint us at Wimbledon?

[herios]

he could face back to back to back the other top 3.

Admit it: the only man in the top 4 who could pull off that schedule successfully is Nadal. Looking forward to the draw before I rubber stamp my predictions...

ah, Br. Kieran--me thinks the Serbian Slayer is capable of the same as well. Nadal will not be seeded fifth; I just can't see the AELTC doing that in light of his record there and being top dog this year with an 8th FO.

In 2010 Federer was the No. 1 seed for Wimbledon ahead of Nadal in a reverse of their world rankings. Nadal moved into the top spot after winning the French Open, while Federer slipped to No. 2 after losing in the quarterfinals in Paris.

I'm afraid all that is relevant is Rafa's ranking when the draw is made and his grass-court record over the past 2 years. His 8th French Open title isn't a factor in his seeding for Wimbledon and neither is his Wimbledon record over the past 6-7 years.

Yes, but, isn't Ferrer's grass court record also a factor? Rafa is only 325 points behind David, and Ferrer has never featured hugely at Wimbledon, whereas, two years ago, if that's the measure, Nadal was in the final. It'll be interesting to see where they put Nadal.

They will place Nadal #5, unless they make an exception and won't apply the formula, which i highly doubt.
I posted before, for Kieran, ho the numbers are working out and Rafa gets more bonus points by David, but not enough to close the gap.
Same situation for Roger vs Andy, Roger gets more than Andy, but he falls short too and won't move up

---

I hope Roddick surprises this year. Good to see him playing and listed on the Wimbledon site

That's a mistake on their part. Someone hasn't updated their website in a while, because Andy is definitely retired.

We caught the IBM'ers with their pants down, and a BUG in the system. It lists Roddick as ranked 39:laydownlaughing

 

[Iona16]

he could face back to back to back the other top 3.

Admit it: the only man in the top 4 who could pull off that schedule successfully is Nadal. Looking forward to the draw before I rubber stamp my predictions...

ah, Br. Kieran--me thinks the Serbian Slayer is capable of the same as well. Nadal will not be seeded fifth; I just can't see the AELTC doing that in light of his record there and being top dog this year with an 8th FO.

In 2010 Federer was the No. 1 seed for Wimbledon ahead of Nadal in a reverse of their world rankings. Nadal moved into the top spot after winning the French Open, while Federer slipped to No. 2 after losing in the quarterfinals in Paris.

I'm afraid all that is relevant is Rafa's ranking when the draw is made and his grass-court record over the past 2 years. His 8th French Open title isn't a factor in his seeding for Wimbledon and neither is his Wimbledon record over the past 6-7 years.

Yes, but, isn't Ferrer's grass court record also a factor? Rafa is only 325 points behind David, and Ferrer has never featured hugely at Wimbledon, whereas, two years ago, if that's the measure, Nadal was in the final. It'll be interesting to see where they put Nadal.

hey Moxie

As far as I'm aware they will base the men's seedings on the ATP rankings and a formula which takes into account a player's performance on grass in the past two seasons, with added weighting on the most recent year. I think Ferrer reached the quarters last year + I think he won a grass title. Not sure how he did the year before. As far as I'm aware the seeding will be out in less than 7 hrs so we don't have long to wait. I'm pretty sure he will be 5 though.

I honestly think that Wimbledon should just use the world rankings.

I'm curious to know just what seed people think Rafa should be. Would you put him as no. 4 if you could?

 

[Moxie]

As usual, Bodo's not a fan of Rafa's chances at Wimbledon:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/06/uncomfortable-questions/47950/#.UcBSZJzuxOk

I'm going to have to outright disagree with him and say Rafa's the favorite. I'd rank them in this order:

1. Rafa
2. Novak
3. Roger
4. Andy
5. Jo-Wilfried
6. David

---

As for the original question, its all relative to expectations. For instance, do you expect that Roger Federer will defend his title? Then you might say he disappoints if he goes out in the SF. In a way I'd say it will be disappointing for any of the Big Four not to win it, or at least make the final.

For any of the Young Guns - at least the three seeded ones, Raonic, Janowicz, and Dimitrov - it will be disappointing to finish any lower than the 3R and a surprise if any make the QF. For me the over/under on disappointment/surprise is the 3R/4R. 3R is OK but a bit disappointing in that it is still in the first half of the tournament, while 4R is an accomplishment because it is where the men start getting separated from the boys, so to speak. If you make the 4R at a Slam you're playing pretty good.

When is the draw out? Friday?

---

Always Friday's for slams. As far as rafa's chances, his seeding being 5, it is less likely to get through and win it all, as he could face back to back to back the other top 3.
BTW, did you guys know that the smart money (betters) point to a most likely Nole win:clap

---

I don't see why the gamblers know more than those that follow tennis. Rafa wins the most recent Slam, Murray and Federer win the big tune-ups. What makes Djokovic, who's worst surface is grass, the odds-on favorite? The fact that he's #1? That's just lazy thinking. I agree with those that say that this is a pretty open Slam, at least for the Big 4, with maybe Tsonga, in the mix...Haas for a QF?

And as far as seeding Nadal at 4, that wouldn't be outrageous for Wimbledon, since they do grade on a curve.

 

[Moxie]

Admit it: the only man in the top 4 who could pull off that schedule successfully is Nadal. Looking forward to the draw before I rubber stamp my predictions...

ah, Br. Kieran--me thinks the Serbian Slayer is capable of the same as well. Nadal will not be seeded fifth; I just can't see the AELTC doing that in light of his record there and being top dog this year with an 8th FO.

In 2010 Federer was the No. 1 seed for Wimbledon ahead of Nadal in a reverse of their world rankings. Nadal moved into the top spot after winning the French Open, while Federer slipped to No. 2 after losing in the quarterfinals in Paris.

I'm afraid all that is relevant is Rafa's ranking when the draw is made and his grass-court record over the past 2 years. His 8th French Open title isn't a factor in his seeding for Wimbledon and neither is his Wimbledon record over the past 6-7 years.

Yes, but, isn't Ferrer's grass court record also a factor? Rafa is only 325 points behind David, and Ferrer has never featured hugely at Wimbledon, whereas, two years ago, if that's the measure, Nadal was in the final. It'll be interesting to see where they put Nadal.

hey Moxie

As far as I'm aware they will base the men's seedings on the ATP rankings and a formula which takes into account a player's performance on grass in the past two seasons, with added weighting on the most recent year. I think Ferrer reached the quarters last year + I think he won a grass title. Not sure how he did the year before. As far as I'm aware the seeding will be out in less than 7 hrs so we don't have long to wait. I'm pretty sure he will be 5 though.

I honestly think that Wimbledon should just use the world rankings.

I'm curious to know just what seed people think Rafa should be. Would you put him as no. 4 if you could?

I don't have any problem going with rankings. Frankly, I think it's the fairest way. Straight-forward, and no politics. Plus, as we've said before, in many ways the ones who would like a "preferred seeding" for Rafa are the top seeds. Who wants to see Nadal in their QFs? Tough luck. I think Rafa can beat his way to the finals, anyway.

 

[BalaryKar]

I am completely split with no clear choices.

For Djokovic: Anything less that finals is disappointing.
For Murray: If its less than finals, well!!! OTOH, I think if and when he meets Nadal, I see Nadal winning it.
For Fed: Anything better than SF, I would be happy. At this moment, his playing tennis itself is a bonus. Results don't matter, at least for me.
For Nadal: This guy confuses me the most. I blame all the chaos on him. Seriously, there is nothing I can say for sure about him. At the moment, I believe that Nadal's only worry should be the first week. If he meets Nole, I have him as the favorite over Nole, and believe that he won't allow Nole to get a second win over him at wimby.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

he could face back to back to back the other top 3.

Admit it: the only man in the top 4 who could pull off that schedule successfully is Nadal. Looking forward to the draw before I rubber stamp my predictions...

that's just wrong, murray could too.

:laydownlaughing :snigger :clap

and nadal is not in the top 4 anyway uzzled

he can win if he has bottles of Blue Strattos and Old Mice aftershave lined up under his smelly seat.

 

[Moxie]

he could face back to back to back the other top 3.

Admit it: the only man in the top 4 who could pull off that schedule successfully is Nadal. Looking forward to the draw before I rubber stamp my predictions...

that's just wrong, murray could too.

:laydownlaughing :snigger :clap

and nadal is not in the top 4 anyway uzzled

he can win if he has bottles of Blue Strattos and Old Mice aftershave lined up under his smelly seat.

Whatever that means. If he wins, it will likely be from muscling the other players across the grass. Which is completely likely. And if he wins, he'll surely come up smelling like a rose.

 

[Mastoor]

I have no idea what would be disappointments and surprises, but I want to inform you that the final will be between the top two seeds.

No1e will beat Murray in straight sets, then he will eat some grass before licking his fingers one by one.

---

I don't see why the gamblers know more than those that follow tennis. Rafa wins the most recent Slam, Murray and Federer win the big tune-ups. What makes Djokovic, who's worst surface is grass, the odds-on favorite? The fact that he's #1? That's just lazy thinking. I agree with those that say that this is a pretty open Slam, at least for the Big 4, with maybe Tsonga, in the mix...Haas for a QF?

And as far as seeding Nadal at 4, that wouldn't be outrageous for Wimbledon, since they do grade on a curve.

Any logic can be disqualified as lazy, but lets try with this. Murray had some back problems in last couple of months, Fed barely won a title in 10 months, Rafa is probably expected to go out in week 1 and even if he doesn't they don't expect him to beat No1e on grass.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

talking about the gambler's and the "clever" money on Nole - yeah, i think they're too easily misled by the #1 and the fact that he Has won it before, ignoring that this came in a year of ridiculous form, with a level and results he hasn't matched ever since. the simple fact of the matter is that grass does not suit Novak. it doesn't play to his strengths, often leaves him unsure of his footing (planting doubt into his greatest ability of them all), whereas it's right up the alley of two of the others and, once we're in the second week, it works perfectly for the third one as well. just check the "Reliability Zone" thingy - it's a little messy, but it's a great reminder of who excels on grass and who doesn't. (talking of reminder - i wasn't even aware that the one Wimby in '11 was Novak's only grass court title ever. granted, he doesn't play Halle/Queens that often, but still...)

mind you, i still see Novak with great chances. it's just that the odds are quite off on most sites, because as Moxie said, the gamblers don't necessarily know as much as those who actually follow the sport closely do. so if you want a good deal, you should look to Murray. or go with "Cliff Richard to sing live during a rain delay". oh, you britons!

No1e will beat Murray in straight sets, then he will eat some grass before licking his fingers one by one.

weirdest trash talk ever

 

[Kieran]

I have no idea what would be disappointments and surprises, but I want to inform you that the final will be between the top two seeds.

No1e will beat Murray in straight sets, then he will eat some grass before licking his fingers one by one.

Any logic can be disqualified as lazy, but lets try with this. Murray had some back problems in last couple of months, Fed barely won a title in 10 months, Rafa is probably expected to go out in week 1 and even if he doesn't they don't expect him to beat No1e on grass.

Ah great to have you back, Mastoor, wounds undoubtably well-licked. I love the way everyone wants to believe Rafa won't be in London for more than a couple of days. I understand the obvious attraction for Roger's fans, but I'm amused to see this mantra lodge itself so easily into the brains of Camp Monte Carlo.

Novak is world #1, so he's going to be expected to step up, which he failed miserably to do last year. He did very well in Paris, because though he shoulda been dispatched in 4, he played valiantly to get it to five. I did predict this, Mastoor, when I told you that because of Rafa's enforced sojourn, Novak had a huge opportunity to take him to five sets this year.

The first arrows in the battle will fly in the morning, when we see the draw. Honestly, it'll be what it is and they're all going to be scrapping like thirsty hounds this year. I expect it to be the bloodiest Wimbo in years...

 

[Denis]

The Rafa fans still seem a bit drunk over the RG victory. There is no way he should be considered the absolute no 1 favorite here. He 'struggled' the whole first week at RG and barely defeated Nole in the semis. Nobody since Soderling has ever come that close to beating Nadal at RG. Plus he is seeded 5 which means he and the unlucky top seed that ends up in his quarter will have a tough route ahead of them.

Notwithstanding the draw, No1e and Murray are the favorites here. Then the Fedster and Nadal.

 

[Kieran]

The Rafa fans still seem a bit drunk over the RG victory. There is no way he should be considered the absolute no 1 favorite here. He 'struggled' the whole first week at RG and barely defeated Nole in the semis. Nobody since Soderling has ever come that close to beating Nadal at RG. Plus he is seeded 5 which means he and the unlucky top seed that ends up in his quarter will have a tough route ahead of them.

Notwithstanding the draw, No1e and Murray are the favorites here. Then the Fedster and Nadal.

No, not drunk - vindicated.

If Rafa is well at Wimbo and isn't knackered after his recent schedule, then he's obviously higher than Murray in the pecking order. He's better than Murray, he has a great record at W, so there's no real criteria to make Murray more a favourite.

The way I'd see it is Nole and Ralph are the favourites, and Roger next, followed by Murray. I go for pedigree and form ahead of sentiment, and although Murray won Queens and Roger won Halle, these tournaments are not indicators of who'll win Wimbledon. But in Murray's favour - and Roger's - they got the right practice in, which is the sole purpose of those events...

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

Denis - of course seeding will be important. that said, the number 5 dilemma could affect anyone, so it doesn't limit Rafa more than it does the others - especially since the meeting will still be in the second week.

that said - who exactly made Rafa the "absolute no 1 favorite" here? yeah, some Rafanatics are quite optimistic, but they have every right to be. and they aren't blowing things out of proportion all that much, if you ask me (especially when pointing out that the "first week factor" is getting stressed a little much considering his actual results in the past).

the main point around here is that the odds on who's the favorite are a bit, well, odd - Novak is head and shoulders above the rest on many sites, and some (me included) just don't think that reflects the situation accurately.

Kieran - regarding Murray, i'm not so sure. the problem with Murray lies between his ears, still. of course, in the individual matchup, Rafa should be a favorite. but for the overall tournament - i know you like to dismiss Andy's chances in general. as do i, often, because he just keeps disappointing us, time and again. i guess it's due to the latest disappointment (AO final performance and in ability to get a cleaner win in the semi) is already 5 months past by now, but i'm kind of ready to believe again. and this isn't even based on Queen's - tbh, i didn't really like what i saw from him there, even if it was enough to win.

so i guess back to the original question, to me it'll probably Murray who'll disappoint, because once again i do think he can do it (and once again, he probably won't).

 

[Kieran]

^^ Well put. Nobody is bragging that Nadal will win Wimbo, but we're hopeful. Why not? We spent a long time waiting for this and we had to suffer a lot of tosh being written about Nole on clay, as if his best was the best there is.

Well, guess what.

But as I said, I'll wait for the draw to come out before I make a prediction. Though you prolly know what that'll be...

---

Kieran - regarding Murray, i'm not so sure. the problem with Murray lies between his ears, still. of course, in the individual matchup, Rafa should be a favorite. but for the overall tournament - i know you like to dismiss Andy's chances in general. as do i, often, because he just keeps disappointing us, time and again. i guess it's due to the latest disappointment (AO final performance and in ability to get a cleaner win in the semi) is already 5 months past by now, but i'm kind of ready to believe again. and this isn't even based on Queen's - tbh, i didn't really like what i saw from him there, even if it was enough to win.

so i guess back to the original question, to me it'll probably Murray who'll disappoint, because once again i do think he can do it (and once again, he probably won't).

That's right about Murray, totally agree, except with the 'disappoint' part. I still separate him from the top 3, and think he's doing great. A semi or final again by Murray wouldn't be a disappointment, imho...

 

[herios]

Because I still see folks struggling to undeerstand how the formula works, I will post the details one more time:
Only the results within the last 2 years (24 months) are taken into consideration combined with the current ranking points:

Total points for each = Current points + 100% for the grass points in the last 12 months + 75% for the BEST result in the previous year to last, 2011 repectively.
Anything before 2011 does not count. Period.

Here are the actual numbers for David and Rafa:

David: 7220+360+250+70+.75(180)=8035
Rafa: 6895+45+.75(1200)=7840

David has 680 from last year for his QF at Wimbledon and win at s'Hertogenbosch and also 70 for olympics.
and Rafa only 45 for R2 at Wimbledon.
For 2011 Rafa gets 800 points which is 75% of his 1200 for Wimbledon and David gets 135.

---

As usual, Bodo's not a fan of Rafa's chances at Wimbledon:

http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/06/uncomfortable-questions/47950/#.UcBSZJzuxOk

I'm going to have to outright disagree with him and say Rafa's the favorite. I'd rank them in this order:

1. Rafa
2. Novak
3. Roger
4. Andy
5. Jo-Wilfried
6. David

---

As for the original question, its all relative to expectations. For instance, do you expect that Roger Federer will defend his title? Then you might say he disappoints if he goes out in the SF. In a way I'd say it will be disappointing for any of the Big Four not to win it, or at least make the final.

For any of the Young Guns - at least the three seeded ones, Raonic, Janowicz, and Dimitrov - it will be disappointing to finish any lower than the 3R and a surprise if any make the QF. For me the over/under on disappointment/surprise is the 3R/4R. 3R is OK but a bit disappointing in that it is still in the first half of the tournament, while 4R is an accomplishment because it is where the men start getting separated from the boys, so to speak. If you make the 4R at a Slam you're playing pretty good.

When is the draw out? Friday?

---

Always Friday's for slams. As far as rafa's chances, his seeding being 5, it is less likely to get through and win it all, as he could face back to back to back the other top 3.
BTW, did you guys know that the smart money (betters) point to a most likely Nole win:clap

---

I don't see why the gamblers know more than those that follow tennis. Rafa wins the most recent Slam, Murray and Federer win the big tune-ups. What makes Djokovic, who's worst surface is grass, the odds-on favorite? The fact that he's #1? That's just lazy thinking. I agree with those that say that this is a pretty open Slam, at least for the Big 4, with maybe Tsonga, in the mix...Haas for a QF?

And as far as seeding Nadal at 4, that wouldn't be outrageous for Wimbledon, since they do grade on a curve.

---

I don't really understand why you think that the gamblers do not follow tennis? Do you think people are just gambling for the sake of it on whatever comes their way?
I have seen someone here, posting that he was putting money on certain matches.
As far as what would be the logic placing Nole ahead of the others to win Wimby, there are potential reasons for that, as each of the other 3 had some issues:
1. Roger his poor results and form this year.
2. Andy never won Wimbledon and pressure might be a factor plus recent back problems
3. Rafa has no good results on grass in sometime and he enters with no preparation this year

 

[Denis]

@ Kieran and John S. I didn't mean to use a strawman re Nadal's fans assessing his chances. It was the impression I got from the posts (especially the one where Rafa was the 'only' guy who could defeat the other 3 of the big 4). Thought the posts by Rafa fans sounded a bit too confident.

@herios, thanks for the explanation!

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

I don't really understand why you think that the gamblers do not follow tennis? Do you think people are just gambling for the sake of it on whatever comes their way?
I have seen someone here, posting that he was putting money on certain matches.
As far as what would be the logic placing Nole ahead of the others to win Wimby, there are potential reasons for that, as each of the other 3 had some issues:
1. Roger his poor results and form this year.
2. Andy never won Wimbledon and pressure might be a factor plus recent back problems
3. Rafa has no good results on grass in sometime and he enters with no preparation this year

you got good points there - the main argument against Andy being the pressure, of course; as for Rafa - it's rather easy to have "no good results on grass in some time" when the grass season is just two tournaments per year for the top. it wasn't good in '12 - end of story. he was in the final in '11 and won it in '10. btw, i'm not even strictly against putting Novak as the favorite, it's just the odds on him are ridiculously, disproportionately low.

which leads me to my main point, to answer the question (even though i wasn't the one you asked): yes, i believe so. if we're talking volume, the vast majority of bets is made by regular players who have rather limited interest in tennis. they'll put some money on Novak to win Wimbledon, some on Spain to take the Confed Cup, and some on Lebron to make more than 10 but less than 16 points in the last quarter of Game 7. they play combos, systems etc. yes, gamblers are betting for the sake of betting, and don't really care what comes their way. i have friends who are passionate gamblers, playing everything from formula One to college basketball. i see others when i have an early lunch break to watch the AO at a betting café. some of it is downright pathological. it's always the same people you see... they'll check what's on for the day, and then go by the numbers mostly. what most of them don't do is follow each sport all year and discuss it to the point of redundancy the way we do here. this is not to say that we know so much more than they do - it's mainly to say that they sure don't know something we don't.

btw, i only bet money once so far. 2011 AO Semis. Roger was a rather heavy favorite over Novak, and i knew that was silly. i made 4 times of what i'd wagered. not that i was *that* sure of the outcome, i just knew that the odds were absolutely off (and were influenced mainly by paper factors like ranking and past results, as opposed to the matchup on AO courts, Novak's DC momentum, etc) and that going with Novak was a big bang for the buck.

---

@ Kieran and John S. I didn't mean to use a strawman re Nadal's fans assessing his chances. It was the impression I got from the posts (especially the one where Rafa was the 'only' guy who could defeat the other 3 of the big 4). Thought the posts by Rafa fans sounded a bit too confident.

well, i agree that the "only" bit is quite over the top. but to be honest, at Wimbledon, i would believe he's the most likely to beat all three if faced with the task (because after all it'd mean that he's gone past the first week which seems to be such an insurmountable hurdle ).

 

[Front242]

What rather than who will disappoint us at Wimbledon the most? The grass and maybe the weather. I really wish the grass didn't get so mangled in the 2nd week that they're basically playing on clay. Grass is meant to favour aggressive, attacking play and the trodden, rock hard muddy baselines and patches of rock hard soil on the courts is just like clay by the time week 1 is over. By week 2 gone is the low bounce rewarding old school aggression and imo vasly superior viewing and all we're left with is basically clay. The ball bounces much higher, flat shots barely skimming over the net are less effective, balls can be more easily run down, too many rallies. I like rallying but not every damn point. While I'd hate to see 90's speed grass with today's racquet head technology (it'd be unwatchable actually), they could surely speed the damn courts up a bit. It's way too slow now. Halle was a breath of fresh air and those courts are by no means too fast and still allow for entertaining rallies but also reward the attacking players. Wish Wimbledon would speed up akin to that.

 

[Kieran]

Yeah, the weather. That's the usual culprit who disappoints us mightily. I was opposed to there being essentially an indoors final last year, but the weather never plays ball at Wimbo...

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

^ well, i think you're might be wishing for some near-impossible stuff. i'm all for lamenting the slowing down of the grass. but remember, the new grass was actually introduced because it's sturdier. so when you're talking about the problem that the grass gets mangled so much - the old grass actually got mangled as well. and with today's prevalence of the power baseline game, and the action centering so strictly on the baseline, i think that the second week issue wouldn't be that much