Wimbledon 2016 discussion

[Fiero425]

Since there is nothing wrong with dreaming ............

Fed's draw is quite reasonable with a not too difficult path to Semifinals. The Novak - Fed match at Wimby may be different this year as

1) Fed will have less pressure than playing in the finals against Novak.
2) Fed may play more aggressive as he realizes that his movement is hampered and he cannot
hang-in with Novak in baseline rallies. The last two years also he was not able to hang in with
Novak in baseline rallies. But, the difference was he thought he could hang in and so did not
play as aggressively as he could which is the only way he can win against Novak.
3) Fed has almost no expectations going in to this Wimbledon and so this may let him play more freely.
4) Novak might be softened up vy Rosol/Kohly/Raonic before arriving at SF.

But, it is premature to do all these calculations right now. I will do them on middle sunday.

Makes sense to me! :clap

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Here are the latest odds about 12 hours after the draw is out.

1. Novak ---- 5/6
2. Andy --- 7/2
3. Fed ---- 16
4. Milos --- 20
5. Kyrgios & Stan --- 33
7. Kei & Thiem --- 66
9. Zevrev & JMDP --- 100

All others have odds worse than 120.

For comparison, here are the odds after Halle/Queens but before the draw . Novak's odd has deteriorated slightly (may be due to tough draw). Both Milos's and Fed's odds have deteriorated as well (may be due to being in Novak's half), Kyrgios's odds have deteriorated (may be because of landmines in his draw, not to mention being in Andy's Octet).

 

[Fiero425]

THE BOODLES TENNIS EVENT: David Goffin takes down Novak Djokovic in straight sets

- http://www.tennisworldusa.org/THE-BOODLES-TENNIS-EVENT-David-Goffin-takes-down-Novak-Djokovic-in-straight-sets-articolo33832.html -

Naturalized British tennis player, Slovenian born, Aljaz Bedene also got off to a great start as he handed a two sets defeat to Robin Haase, Netherlands, in first match of the day at the grass exhibition. Bedene, 26, earned his first singles win at The Boodles after he beat the 29-year-old Dutchman 6-4 6-4.

Second-best ranked Serbian player Viktor Troicki managed to collect second win of the tournament in same number of days as he successfully got through French challenge Lucas Pouille in a two sets battle. The holder of three ATP titles gained his second ever singles win in his third match ever at The Boodles event dismissing rising Frenchman 6-4 7-5.

Former ninth player in the world Janko Tipsarevic closed the day at the exhibition without losing a set against another former top-10 Juan Monaco. Experienced Serb beat fellow countryman 6-4 7-5.

(BEL) David Goffin - (SRB) Novak Djokovic 6-3 7-5
(GBR) Aljaz Bedene - (NED) Robin Haase 6-4 6-4
(SRB) Viktor Troicki - (FRA) Lucas Pouille 6-4 7-5
(SRB) Janko Tipsarevic - (ARG) Juan Monaco 6-4 7-5
---

Does this change anyone's mind about the odds?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Not a bit. :nono

 

[mrzz]

Since there is nothing wrong with dreaming ............

Fed's draw is quite reasonable with a not too difficult path to Semifinals. The Novak - Fed match at Wimby may be different this year as

1) Fed will have less pressure than playing in the finals against Novak as it will not be a #18 match.
2) Novak will face lot of pressure as he is in the run for CYGS.
3) Fed may play more aggressive as he realizes that his movement is hampered and he cannot
hang-in with Novak in baseline rallies. The last two years also he was not able to hang in with
Novak in baseline rallies. But, the difference was he thought he could hang in and so did not
play as aggressively as he could which is the only way he can win against Novak.
4) Fed has almost no expectations going in to this Wimbledon and so this may let him play more freely.
5) Novak might be softened up vy Rosol/Kohly/Raonic before arriving at SF.

But, it is premature to do all these calculations right now. I will do them on middle sunday.

Well... this time around is really hard to expect something. He had a great shot in 2014, a small but decent in 2015, but this time...

Off course, anyone has a shot, specially a guy who is #3 in the world and with 17 majors to his name. But if he pulls this off, it will be like quite hard to explain, a bit like an average player having the match of his life and taking down the world #1 out of the blue...

 

[lob]

Well... this time around is really hard to expect something. He had a great shot in 2014, a small but decent in 2015, but this time...

Something died in me after that 2014 final. I just couldn't believe that Roger had let that happen. After that, I haven't expected Roger to do much. It was Wimbledon and he was the favorite going into that final. He didn't have issues in the match-up. The match was over after the third set.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Well... this time around is really hard to expect something. He had a great shot in 2014, a small but decent in 2015, but this time...

Something died in me after that 2014 final. I just couldn't believe that Roger had let that happen. After that, I haven't expected Roger to do much. It was Wimbledon and he was the favorite going into that final. He didn't have issues in the match-up. The match was over after the third set.

If you look at the base line rally points that extends to 5 shots ore more, Novak wins about 75% or more them in a match between them. So, the only way Roger can win the match between them is by making sure that 75% or more points end in 5 strokes or less. For that, Roger needs to be aggressive from the beginning to the end without respite.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Andy Murray has the easiest draw of all. He should be able to reach the finals in sleep. He starts with somebody ranked outside 200 and has no land mines in the next two rounds either. The only round in which he could have got some easier opponent is 4th round where he will face one of Kyrgios/Stepanek/Deliciano/Brown. Among the four QF opponents possible, Gasquet is the most docile and Andy gets him.

Come to think of it this is the most unbalanced draw possible when you look at the placement of top 8 seeds. Here is the procedure. They begin by putting seeds 1 and 2 in the top half and bottom half. One of three or four is drawn for top half with the other automatically going to bottom half. Guess what, Andy got 4th seed. That is a 50% chance. That is not all.

They randomly pick two of the four seeds 5,6,7 and 8 and put two of them in the top half. The other two are automatically placed in the bottom half. Guess what? Novak got seeds 5 and 6 and Andy got seeds 7 and 8. There is a 16.66% chance of that happening.

Combining both, this is the worst possible unbalanced two halves. Seeds 1, 3, 5 and 6 in top half and seeds 2, 4, 7 and 8 in bottom half. You cannot create two halves more unbalanced than this even if you pick it in adversarial manner. There is only 8.33% chance of this worst case distribution of top 8 seeds arising in a random draw and Andy managed to hit it.

 

[Fiero425]

Andy Murray has the easiest draw of all. He should be able to reach the finals in sleep. He starts with somebody ranked outside 200 and has no land mines in the next two rounds either. The only round in which he could have got some easier opponent is 4th round where he will face one of Kyrgios/Stepanek/Deliciano/Brown. Among the four QF opponents possible, Gasquet is the most docile and Andy gets him.

Come to think of it this is the most unbalanced draw possible when you look at the placement of top 8 seeds. Here is the procedure. They begin by putting seeds 1 and 2 in the top half and bottom half. One of three or four is drawn for top half with the other automatically going to bottom half. Guess what, Andy got 4th seed. That is a 50% chance. That is not all.

They randomly pick two of the four seeds 5,6,7 and 8 and put two of them in the top half. The other two are automatically placed in the bottom half. Guess what? Novak got seeds 5 and 6 and Andy got seeds 7 and 8. There is a 16.66% chance of that happening.

Combining both, this is the worst possible unbalanced two halves. Seeds 1, 3, 5 and 6 in top half and seeds 2, 4, 7 and 8 in bottom half. You cannot create two halves more unbalanced than this even if you pick it in adversarial manner. There is only 8.33% chance of this worst case distribution of top 8 seeds arising in a random draw and Andy managed to hit it.

Oh ye of little faith! There's a reason Nole holds the record for defeating the most top 10'rs with 31 last season; takes on all comers! It just doesn't seem to matter; even getting someone like Rafa in the QF of the FO! He still smokes them! I think Andy's ready, but anything can happen; esp. if winning a warm-up event! Murray won Canada last year; what good did it do him at the USO? :eyepop :nono :cover

 

[10isfan]

Fed plays on Monday?

The ticket prices went berserk again when the draw came out. Murray's matches are no longer double the price of Djoke's, but not because people want to see Djoke. Poor guy. If only he had an exciting game.

 

[Fiero425]

Fed plays on Monday?

The ticket prices went berserk again when the draw came out. Murray's matches are no longer double the price of Djoke's, but not because people want to see Djoke. Poor guy. If only he had an exciting game.

Like Lendl, he's getting used to it! It obviously doesn't hurt his results! The Parisians backed him to the hilt though! They seemed to want him to win; a real rarity, but that final from last season made them empathize I guess! The same thing happened to Martina in '81 after losing the USO to Austin! They cheered her on in '83 even though Evert was the opponent! She had 6 titles so NO TEARS for Chrissie's plight! :angel:

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Fed plays on Monday?

In Wimbledon, as per the tradition, the very first match on the center court on the opening day is allocated to the defending champion (independent of who is his opponent). So, Novak will be playing at 1 p.m. on Center court. This is something that we could tell an year ago.

So, whichever half Novak belongs to, top half in this case, will be playing first. As Fed fell in the top half, Fed will be playing on Monday. This is guaranteed. While not guaranteed, most probably Fed will be playing his match in Center court and it will be the third match on center court following Novak's and a Ladies match.

The official schedule will be released only on sunday though.

p.s. On the second day, the defending ladies champion will play first on center court. So, this year the top half of women will be playing on the second day and the bottom half on first day.

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

Well... this time around is really hard to expect something. He had a great shot in 2014, a small but decent in 2015, but this time...

Something died in me after that 2014 final. I just couldn't believe that Roger had let that happen. After that, I haven't expected Roger to do much. It was Wimbledon and he was the favorite going into that final. He didn't have issues in the match-up. The match was over after the third set.

If you look at the base line rally points that extends to 5 shots ore more, Novak wins about 75% or more them in a match between them. So, the only way Roger can win the match between them is by making sure that 75% or more points end in 5 strokes or less. For that, Roger needs to be aggressive from the beginning to the end without respite.

Roger needs to have the best serving day to make that happen while not impossible it seems unlikely he can get by Novak if it goes more than 3.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Something died in me after that 2014 final. I just couldn't believe that Roger had let that happen. After that, I haven't expected Roger to do much. It was Wimbledon and he was the favorite going into that final. He didn't have issues in the match-up. The match was over after the third set.

If you look at the base line rally points that extends to 5 shots ore more, Novak wins about 75% or more them in a match between them. So, the only way Roger can win the match between them is by making sure that 75% or more points end in 5 strokes or less. For that, Roger needs to be aggressive from the beginning to the end without respite.

Roger needs to have the best serving day to make that happen while not impossible it seems unlikely he can get by Novak if it goes more than 3.

Yes, for sure without a good serving day, Roger cannot beat Novak.

Roger surely will not win in 5 over Novak in his dotage. However, he is capable of winning in 4.
But most importantly, he needs to win the first set. Otherwise, for sure he won't win the match.
OK. I should not be thinking so much about a match that may not even materialize.

 

[Fiero425]

If you look at the base line rally points that extends to 5 shots ore more, Novak wins about 75% or more them in a match between them. So, the only way Roger can win the match between them is by making sure that 75% or more points end in 5 strokes or less. For that, Roger needs to be aggressive from the beginning to the end without respite.

Roger needs to have the best serving day to make that happen while not impossible it seems unlikely he can get by Novak if it goes more than 3.

Yes, for sure without a good serving day, Roger cannot beat Novak.

Roger surely will not win in 5 over Novak in his dotage. However, he is capable of winning in 4.
But most importantly, he needs to win the first set. Otherwise, for sure he won't win the match.
OK. I should not be thinking so much about a match that may not even materialize.

Fed would need the 1st set, but back in his prime, what good did it do him against Rafa & Nole? Just saying! :angel:

 

[Sundaymorningguy]

Someone with a bad back and knee being able to serve at the level he needs to to win is asking a lot.

 

[Fiero425]

Someone with a bad back and knee being able to serve at the level he needs to to win is asking a lot.

Who you tellin'? :lolz: :snicker :laydownlaughing

 

[GameSetAndMath]

OK. Here are my predictions before a single ball is struck.

Quarterfinals:

1. Novak d. Milos
2. Federer d. Cilic
3. Zverev d. Verdasco
4. Murray d. Gasquet

Semifinals:

1. Novak d. Federer
2. Murray d. Zverev

Finals:

1. MURRAY d. Novak

 

[El Dude]

Front, you are spot on..but here's what bothers me. When Roger came along in 2004, the Sampras fans were crying foul that Sampras had to deal with a tougher generation in the 90s. We called their bs. So it seems a bit hypocritical to be doing the same when the shoe is on the other foot. We just have to accept how the games evolves and celebrate excellence...all excellence may not be magic.. but it is still excellence nevertheless.

Sent from my 6045O using Tapatalk

I don't think it is BS - the tour was much tougher when Sampras was coming into his own in the early 90s. When Pete came up, Edberg and Becker were in their prime, Lendl was still playing well, Muster and Stich were very good, and he was part of cohort of players that included Agassi, Courier, Chang, Ivanisevic, Bruguera, Krajicek, Rafter, Ferreira, Bjorkman, etc. Those guys were a tough crew, and with more variable courts, it was much harder to dominate in the 90s than in the mid-2000s and later.

Compare that to Roger. Pete was faded, although Agassi was still good. But the middle generation--including Kuerten, Kafelnikov, Moya, Rios, etc--was weaker, and Roger's cohort of Safin, Ferrero, Ferrer, Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Davydenko, Coria, etc, while strong, wasn't as strong as Pete's. I don't think Roger's generation was particularly weak, but it wasn't as strong as Pete's. On the other hand, Pete didn't have the equivalent of Rafa to deal with, and he following generation of players was weaker than what Roger has had to deal with in Rafa, Novak, and Andy.

Now Novak's situation is different. He had it very tough when he came up because Roger and Rafa were in their primes and utterly dominant. Consider that Novak didn't win his second Slam until he was 23 years old, three whole years after his first. This isn't unlike Pete, who won his second Slam almost three years after his first, because the competition was so fierce in the early 90s. Roger won his second Slam just half a year after his first, and Rafa just a year after.

Novak's situation is that he has it quite easy in his late prime. 2016 is to Novak what 2010 was to Roger or 2000 to Pete. Roger had to face a peaking Nadal, and a strong supporting cast that included Novak and Andy nearing their primes. Pete was already somewhat diminished in 2000, but had to face an upcoming young group in Safin, Hewitt, etc, with Kuerten in his prime form. But his decline was partially masked by a weaker tour. Novak's main competition now is his side-kick Andy Murray, a shadow-of-his-former-self Nadal, an erratic Wawrinka, and a 34-year old Roger Federer who has barely played all year. The generation that should be peaking and holding the reigns of the tour is the worst of the Open Era. Consider that the most accomplished players born from 1989 on are Kei Nishikori and Milos Raonic. The generation after those guys is still a year or two away from starting to enter peak form.

In summary, I'd say Novak and Pete had it tough when they first came up, while Roger had it a bit easier. But things got harder and harder for Roger as he aged, as Nadal and Djokovic got better, while the tour got easier for Pete in his later years, although he declined more quickly. Novak hasn't showed any signs of decline, yet the tour has gotten quite weak compared to a few years ago.

 

[Fiero425]

I already mused about how tough it was 20-30 years ago with a dozen different GS winners in the men's draw! You can't say that now, but not sure it's only because the "Big 4" are so good! Even with superior training and talent, psychologically the rest of the tour can't compete with them! The majors aren't the only thing being dominated; aren't even getting many odd Masters' winner outside of that small group of players! I say it's a little bit of both with the addition of how technology and homogenization of the courts makes it easier for them to survive the early rounds like no time in the past! :nono :angel: :dodgy: :cover