Wimbledon SF: Cilic v Querrey

[britbox]

Who wins?

H2H: Cilic leads 4-0

2015 Washington R16 Hard Marin Cilic Sam Querrey 7-6(2) 7-6(3)
2012 Wimbledon R32 Grass Marin Cilic Sam Querrey 7-6(6) 6-4 6-7(2) 6-7(3) 17-15
2012 Queen's SF Grass Marin Cilic Sam Querrey 6-3 3-6 6-3
2009 Wimbledon R64 Grass Marin Cilic Sam Querrey 4-6 7-6(3) 6-3 6-7(4) 6-4

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Sam must be feeling confident but I don't think that is enough to beat Marin. Cilic in 5.

 

[Moxie]

I think Sam has 3 things going for him: the win today over Murray, the win last year over Djokovic (upset of the year,) and his generally relaxed (seeming) attitude. Cilic has got to be feeling he's got a good shot at the title and could get tight. That said, I picked Cilic in 4. I have been saying since early doors that Cilic was the non-big 4 guy with the best shot at this. And he's taken Roger at the business end of a Major.

 

[mrzz]

A repeat of the 2012 result wouldn´t hurt.

 

[Moxie]

A repeat of the 2012 result wouldn´t hurt.

That's mysterious...what would 2012 be different from any of the other wins? Also, aren't you rooting for Roger? Cilic has the best chance of beating him.

 

[mrzz]

I meant an exact repeat. 17-15 in the fifth...

 

[Moxie]

I meant an exact repeat. 17-15 in the fifth...

Ah, I see. Sorry. Wear him out to give Roger the easy pass. As if he needs one.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

This is more or less a toss-up with slight advantage going to Cilic, I picked him in 5 but Marin can do it in 4
It'll be a war.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The winner of this match is not in any doubt. Cilic will win it. He is super focused, has great serve and moves very well.

Some part of SQ's win must be attributable to Andy's Hip. So, you cannot read too much into that.

The only question is whether Cilic will win in 3, 4 or 5 sets. Muller made Cilic play five sets. SQ is also a big server and
Cilic is not a great returner and so I will give Sam one set. Cilic in 4 is my final projection.

 

[atttomole]

Cilic in 3 sets.

 

[mrzz]

The winner of this match is not in any doubt. Cilic will win it. He is super focused, has great serve and moves very well.

Some part of SQ's win must be attributable to Andy's Hip. So, you cannot read too much into that.

The only question is whether Cilic will win in 3, 4 or 5 sets. Muller made Cilic play five sets. SQ is also a big server and
Cilic is not a great returner and so I will give Sam one set. Cilic in 4 is my final projection.

If there only was one SQ fan in the world (but maybe we can find some anti-Cilic ones), perhaps one could compile a list of 10 motives why Querrey will beat Cilic ( ). I will help and start:


1. Muller showed that a big server can trouble Cilic. In the second set tie-break, while up a mini-break and serving at 4-3, Muller missed a volley for half an inch -- that was how close Cilic was to a 0-2 deficit.

2. Querrey, in a space of one year, has beat Djokovic (then #1), Murray (current #1) at majors, and Nadal in a final. How many guys have done that (or comparable things)? Guys with smaller achievements were touted as future #1´s...

3.... I said I would just start...


Obviously I think Cilic is the favorite. If you check in the early Wimbledon thread, I had him not only as a dark horse, but as one of the outright favorites. And he is there in the final in my draw. But we have a match here...

 

[isabelle]

Cilic in 4

 

[10isfan]

I'm picking Cilic, but hoping Sam wins. Sampras had high expectations for Sam, using him as his hitting partner and saying he would be the best American of his generation. It's good to see him have success after all the injuries.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I will only be happier if Sam wins this one. He is the least threat for Fed in finals. But, Uncle Sam has reached his ceiling.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

If there only was one SQ fan in the world (but maybe we can find some anti-Cilic ones), perhaps one could compile a list of 10 motives why Querrey will beat Cilic ( ). I will help and start:


1. Muller showed that a big server can trouble Cilic. In the second set tie-break, while up a mini-break and serving at 4-3, Muller missed a volley for half an inch -- that was how close Cilic was to a 0-2 deficit.

2. Querrey, in a space of one year, has beat Djokovic (then #1), Murray (current #1) at majors, and Nadal in a final. How many guys have done that (or comparable things)? Guys with smaller achievements were touted as future #1´s...

3.... I said I would just start...


Obviously I think Cilic is the favorite. If you check in the early Wimbledon thread, I had him not only as a dark horse, but as one of the outright favorites. And he is there in the final in my draw. But we have a match here...

Counterpoints are as follows.

1. Muller's serves are lot more painful to return. His wide slider serve from the ad court is so insane that is sure to annoy 99% of people.
Also, to return Muller's down the T slider serve from the deuce court, the opponent essentially has to be in the ad court. The difficulty with
Muller's serve is not so much the speed, but the placement and the disguise. On the other hand, SQ's serves have lot of pace, but not
too difficult to read. So, those are not comparable. Cilic would have easier time handling Uncle's serve than Muller's.

2. Sure, Querry took out Djokovic, Murray and Nadal all recently. But, the important point is that they are in different tourneys.
He can only cause one major upset in one tourney. Here, he has already caused one upset. I don't think he can cause two upsets
in a row. Last year, SQ was steady enough to handle Mahut after causing upset. But, he was supposed to win the match against Mahut.
Once he faced Milos, where win would mean another upset, he could not do it.

3. More points, more counterpoints.....

 

[GameSetAndMath]

The bookies are giving 1/3 odds to Cilic and 11/4 odds to Uncle Sam (just for wining this match).

Works out to 75% chances for Cilic and 25% chances for Uncle Sam.

 

[Moxie]

2. Querrey, in a space of one year, has beat Djokovic (then #1), Murray (current #1) at majors, and Nadal in a final. How many guys have done that (or comparable things)? Guys with smaller achievements were touted as future #1´s...

Very good point, Mrzz. And for the record, I like Big Sam. But I'll be awfully surprised if he wins tomorrow.

 

[Moxie]

Order of Play for tomorrow:

CENTRE COURT - 1:00PM

1. Sam Querrey (USA) [24] v Marin Cilic (CRO) [7]
2. Roger Federer (SUI) [3] v Tomas Berdych (CZE) [11]

 

[mrzz]

Counterpoints are as follows.

1. Muller's serves are lot more painful to return. His wide slider serve from the ad court is so insane that is sure to annoy 99% of people.
Also, to return Muller's down the T slider serve from the deuce court, the opponent essentially has to be in the ad court. The difficulty with
Muller's serve is not so much the speed, but the placement and the disguise. On the other hand, SQ's serves have lot of pace, but not
too difficult to read. So, those are not comparable. Cilic would have easier time handling Uncle's serve than Muller's.

2. Sure, Querry took out Djokovic, Murray and Nadal all recently. But, the important point is that they are in different tourneys.
He can only cause one major upset in one tourney. Here, he has already caused one upset. I don't think he can cause two upsets
in a row. Last year, SQ was steady enough to handle Mahut after causing upset. But, he was supposed to win the match against Mahut.
Once he faced Milos, where win would mean another upset, he could not do it.

3. More points, more counterpoints.....

Good counterpoints, GSM.

Regarding 1), even if I agree with you, I was checking the stats and SQ´s serve numbers are pretty high. In fact, if you check Wimbledon´s site, all 4 semi-finalists have impressive serve stats (and if I recall it correctly, Federer has the worst of the 4 in a few). SQ´s number of aces and percentage of points won on 1st serve are extremely high, and he just faced one of the best returners in the game. So, in you last phrase of 1), I would change "easier" for "a little less difficult".

Regarding 2): In Acapulco (I know, just a 500), he also beat Kyrgios. While I put much less stock on Kyrgios than the rest of the gang here, it still qualifies as an upset, so that´s 2 in one tournament.


New one, not a reason for SQ to win but at least to put the result in doubt:

3) All their previous matches were competitive.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Regarding 2, I double checked the Acapulco draw. Unlce Sam actually caused upsets in every one of the five rounds there.
He beat Kyle Edmund, David Goffin, Dominic Thiem, Nick Kyrgios and Rafa Nadal in succession. All of them were ranked better
than Uncle Sam. So, I either have to retract point 2 or claim that he cannot cause more than one upset in Slams. :scratch: