Your expectations from Dimitrov in USO series?

[Fastgrass]

After SF showing at Wimbledon (crushed Murray in QF, Almost took Djokovic to fifth set), I think it's reasonable to expect from Dimitrov to improve his Masters results in Cincy/Toronto since conditions are favorable to him since courts are fast, he could use all court abilities better.
I believe Dimitrov will reach SF/F of one the Masters may win it if refuses to choke with one great victory over Current big 4. (He may routine Murray again, but it doesn't have any significance).

At USO QF is looking obvious if since he could get Top 8 seeding after that it vastly dependent on whom he faces, I think he could beat Nadal there but taking ultra consistent Djokovic, God mode Wawa, or Jesus Fed in BO5 is still looking outside of realm of possibilities.

What you guys think?

IMO 360+180+ 360= 900 points he'll add and certainly qualify for WTF.

 

[Kieran]

I'm not setting too much store over his win against Murray. To me, that was more about Murray being absent than Grigor being present. I don't take away from him either, because he held his end up, but it didn't require much that day to defeat Andy, who went away surprisingly feebly. It's a good win for Grigor, but it's not an indicator of anything, you know what I mean? It doesn't tell me that he's that good, and next time they face, he'll be favourite against Murray.

But he did his stuff, and that's all we can ask for. He had situation against Dolgo and he handled that one, too. Oz is maybe a better indicator of things for him, and I think hards might be where we see the best of Grigor. I'm definitely expecting him to make some noise. I don't want to see him disappear, perform below the levels he's set at Wimbo and Oz, or defer to older players, as if they have more rights than him.

It'll be interesting to see, and you're right; he can more or less secure a spot in the WTF by the time the US Open is finished...

 

[herios]

I'm not setting too much store over his win against Murray. To me, that was more about Murray being absent than Grigor being present. I don't take away from him either, because he held his end up, but it didn't require much that day to defeat Andy, who went away surprisingly feebly. It's a good win for Grigor, but it's not an indicator of anything, you know what I mean? It doesn't tell me that he's that good, and next time they face, he'll be favourite against Murray.

But he did his stuff, and that's all we can ask for. He had situation against Dolgo and he handled that one, too. Oz is maybe a better indicator of things for him, and I think hards might be where we see the best of Grigor. I'm definitely expecting him to make some noise. I don't want to see him disappear, perform below the levels he's set at Wimbo and Oz, or defer to older players, as if they have more rights than him.

It'll be interesting to see, and you're right; he can more or less secure a spot in the WTF by the time the US Open is finished...

Once again I am reiterating, the WTF bottom spots are secured usually around the post Shanghai events and not the USO series. I don't see why this year would be different.
As fas as Dimi, he aint disappearing. I am expecting more solid results this summer and a consolidation of a top 10 spot.

 

[Kieran]

"More or less", herios. I'm not saying he will, but he can place himself very favourably if he has a great run on the hards...

 

[El Dude]

What makes a top 10 player is routinely beating lesser ranked players and occasionally beating higher ranked players. I think that's what we're seeing with Grigor and what we'll continue to see for the next half a year or so - as herios put it, a consolidation of a top 10 spot. He still needs to stabilize in the top 10 - again, routinely beating lower ranked players and occasionally beating other top 10 players.

Here's the list of players he's lost to this year, going back in chronological order:

Djokovic (Wimbledon)
Karlovic (Roland Garros)
Nadal (Rome)
Berdych (Madrid)
Ferrer (Monte Carlo)
Nishikori (Miami)
Gulbis (Indian Wells)
Gulbis (Rotterdam)
Nadal (Australian Open)
Cilic (Brisbane)

Not a lot (any, really) of push-overs in that list. The lowest ranked player is Karlovic, but he's known to upset higher ranked players with his serve. Cilic, Gulbis and Nishikori have had strong years and there's no shame to losing to the others - Berdych, Ferrer, Nadal, Djokovic. So to me that's a good sign for Grigor - it means that he's stabilizing in the top 10.

As for actual results, I suspect that he'll go deep in all, or most, tournaments. I'm not betting on him winning any of the big three, but at some point he's going to do it - and a Masters is more likely than a Slam. I'd consider him a dark horse candidate, not far from what Del Potro was a year ago or what Berdych is now.

 

[Riotbeard]

I would expect at least a semis in a masters. Anything less than the quarters at the USO should be a disappointment. That said, outside of the draw opening up in surprising ways, I don't see him making the semis. I think we will see a continuance of the form he has had all year, which is top 10, but not top 5. I think if he doesn't make the wtf, it is a disappointment. He really does need to win a masters to put himself in serious conversation for a slam.

 

[Moxie]

^ I can't remember what we learned when we discussed Stan, but I think most do win a MS before winning a Slam. Rather than start a separate thread, I wonder what many people would consider the first MS that Grigor is likely to win. Roger's Cup and Cincy are really competitive, but the ones after the USO can be a little more up for grabs. What about Shanghai or Paris this year?

I'm with those that expect him to hold form through the USO series, but not break through there.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

All of the quarter finals and at least one semi final.

 

[Riotbeard]

^ I can't remember what we learned when we discussed Stan, but I think most do win a MS before winning a Slam. Rather than start a separate thread, I wonder what many people would consider the first MS that Grigor is likely to win. Roger's Cup and Cincy are really competitive, but the ones after the USO can be a little more up for grabs. What about Shanghai or Paris this year?

I'm with those that expect him to hold form through the USO series, but not break through there.

Bercy would be a good opportunity as that has a history of surprise winners.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

sir grigor has an outside chance of winning a masters and/or the usopen.

lets face reality here..he is improving all the while so he must be close to being in a big final pretty soon I think.

 

[herios]

^ I can't remember what we learned when we discussed Stan, but I think most do win a MS before winning a Slam. Rather than start a separate thread, I wonder what many people would consider the first MS that Grigor is likely to win. Roger's Cup and Cincy are really competitive, but the ones after the USO can be a little more up for grabs. What about Shanghai or Paris this year?

I'm with those that expect him to hold form through the USO series, but not break through there.

Bercy would be a good opportunity as that has a history of surprise winners.

While I like Grigor a lot, I hope Milos takes Paris first

 

[Moxie]

^ I can't remember what we learned when we discussed Stan, but I think most do win a MS before winning a Slam. Rather than start a separate thread, I wonder what many people would consider the first MS that Grigor is likely to win. Roger's Cup and Cincy are really competitive, but the ones after the USO can be a little more up for grabs. What about Shanghai or Paris this year?

I'm with those that expect him to hold form through the USO series, but not break through there.

Bercy would be a good opportunity as that has a history of surprise winners.

This is what I'm thinking. Everyone is all gassed by then. There's a reason that Safin won it twice. (And Nalbandian had such a great triumph there.) And, frankly, why Bercy wants to move to earlier in the calendar. A good chance to slip in a MS win, and Dimitrov would be silly not to aim for it.

 

[nehmeth]

sir grigor has an outside chance of winning a masters and/or the usopen.

lets face reality here..he is improving all the while so he must be close to being in a big final pretty soon I think.

Roger Rasheed has been diligently working on his fitness, and (imo) it seems he's added a few pounds of muscle to his frame. My biggest concern is whether the young man has that killer instinct that the champions have. While I feel that it is more innate than learned, nothing nurtures winning like, winning. I like what I am seeing and think he will have quite a good run this summer. In the other thread, I picked him to make at least the quarters of the Open.

 

[Riotbeard]

^ I can't remember what we learned when we discussed Stan, but I think most do win a MS before winning a Slam. Rather than start a separate thread, I wonder what many people would consider the first MS that Grigor is likely to win. Roger's Cup and Cincy are really competitive, but the ones after the USO can be a little more up for grabs. What about Shanghai or Paris this year?

I'm with those that expect him to hold form through the USO series, but not break through there.

Bercy would be a good opportunity as that has a history of surprise winners.

This is what I'm thinking. Everyone is all gassed by then. There's a reason that Safin won it twice. (And Nalbandian had such a great triumph there.) And, frankly, why Bercy wants to move to earlier in the calendar. A good chance to slip in a MS win, and Dimitrov would be silly not to aim for it.

I agree, I think he should be planning for a fall push to set up for next season. I however doubt they are thinking that way, admitting he isn't quite to slam winning level (without 3 major upsets), but that he is very close, so he should set himself for huge things next year. I think Wimbledon both showed how far he has come, but also that he still has a little further to go. The Murray win proved that he can play well even when tons of mental pressure is on. It did not really prove that he can beat one of the big four at their best.

 

[Fastgrass]

I'm not setting too much store over his win against Murray. To me, that was more about Murray being absent than Grigor being present. I don't take away from him either, because he held his end up, but it didn't require much that day to defeat Andy, who went away surprisingly feebly. It's a good win for Grigor, but it's not an indicator of anything, you know what I mean? It doesn't tell me that he's that good, and next time they face, he'll be favourite against Murray.

Excuses flowing full, you're not separate from delusional British media monkeys who systematically planted seeds of "45 minutes before match excuse." I think you've logical fallacy or you purposefully making those excuses so it will be valid after constant whining. Dimitrov was just too good for Murray on grass since he's unquestionably more complete player than Murray.. Grass rewards all courters since they are more skilful. I know you'll bring Murray wasn't that good (2013 level excuse) so don't forget "that Murray" also 2-0 down against Verdasco (lol), I am pretty sure 2014 Dimitrov would've finished him in straights or if choker Verdasco would've taken 2-0 lead this year again I'm pretty sure it would have proven another Historic Comeback for legend Andrew Murray! :lol: So don't live in media created bubble, and never try to discredit wins achieved by young guys through wearing humble and objective mask. I could easily prove Murray's Olympic Win over Fed fluke but winning matters don't go through that way. 6-1 7-6 6-2 and clear beat down to media hype job! face it!

But he did his stuff, and that's all we can ask for. He had situation against Dolgo and he handled that one, too. Oz is maybe a better indicator of things for him, and I think hards might be where we see the best of Grigor. I'm definitely expecting him to make some noise. I don't want to see him disappear, perform below the levels he's set at Wimbo and Oz, or defer to older players, as if they have more rights than him.

It'll be interesting to see, and you're right; he can more or less secure a spot in the WTF by the time the US Open is finished...
[/quote]

Dimitrov is still not his best as his coach, let's see how it goes!

 

[Riotbeard]

^^
Well, we all know you are a big murray fan and don't have any axe to grind, so I think we can take your analysis as gospel.

 

[Kieran]

I'm not setting too much store over his win against Murray. To me, that was more about Murray being absent than Grigor being present. I don't take away from him either, because he held his end up, but it didn't require much that day to defeat Andy, who went away surprisingly feebly. It's a good win for Grigor, but it's not an indicator of anything, you know what I mean? It doesn't tell me that he's that good, and next time they face, he'll be favourite against Murray.

Excuses flowing full, you're not separate from delusional British media monkeys who systematically planted seeds of "45 minutes before match excuse." I think you've logical fallacy or you purposefully making those excuses so it will be valid after constant whining. Dimitrov was just too good for Murray on grass since he's unquestionably more complete player than Murray.. Grass rewards all courters since they are more skilful. I know you'll bring Murray wasn't that good (2013 level excuse) so don't forget "that Murray" also 2-0 down against Verdasco (lol), I am pretty sure 2014 Dimitrov would've finished him in straights or if choker Verdasco would've taken 2-0 lead this year again I'm pretty sure it would have proven another Historic Comeback for legend Andrew Murray! :lol: So don't live in media created bubble, and never try to discredit wins achieved by young guys through wearing humble and objective mask. I could easily prove Murray's Olympic Win over Fed fluke but winning matters don't go through that way. 6-1 7-6 6-2 and clear beat down to media hype job! face it!

But he did his stuff, and that's all we can ask for. He had situation against Dolgo and he handled that one, too. Oz is maybe a better indicator of things for him, and I think hards might be where we see the best of Grigor. I'm definitely expecting him to make some noise. I don't want to see him disappear, perform below the levels he's set at Wimbo and Oz, or defer to older players, as if they have more rights than him.

It'll be interesting to see, and you're right; he can more or less secure a spot in the WTF by the time the US Open is finished...

Dimitrov is still not his best as his coach, let's see how it goes!

Cool rant. Illogical, but fairly cool.

Murray was tripe against Grigor. He didn't put up as much as a whimper of opposition. No need for you to be defensive - it wasn't Grigor's fault. He may still have won, but I doubt he'd have won so easily. In fact, had Murray played his best - and fought like he used to under Lendl - I doubt Grigor would have won more than a single set.

It has nothing to do with whatever Murray moaned about on court. It has to do with watching the match objectively.

And I'm not sure you help your argument by describing Murray's Olympics win over Federer as a "fluke" - in fact, you may have hindered it...

 

[Riotbeard]

I'm not setting too much store over his win against Murray. To me, that was more about Murray being absent than Grigor being present. I don't take away from him either, because he held his end up, but it didn't require much that day to defeat Andy, who went away surprisingly feebly. It's a good win for Grigor, but it's not an indicator of anything, you know what I mean? It doesn't tell me that he's that good, and next time they face, he'll be favourite against Murray.

Excuses flowing full, you're not separate from delusional British media monkeys who systematically planted seeds of "45 minutes before match excuse." I think you've logical fallacy or you purposefully making those excuses so it will be valid after constant whining. Dimitrov was just too good for Murray on grass since he's unquestionably more complete player than Murray.. Grass rewards all courters since they are more skilful. I know you'll bring Murray wasn't that good (2013 level excuse) so don't forget "that Murray" also 2-0 down against Verdasco (lol), I am pretty sure 2014 Dimitrov would've finished him in straights or if choker Verdasco would've taken 2-0 lead this year again I'm pretty sure it would have proven another Historic Comeback for legend Andrew Murray! :lol: So don't live in media created bubble, and never try to discredit wins achieved by young guys through wearing humble and objective mask. I could easily prove Murray's Olympic Win over Fed fluke but winning matters don't go through that way. 6-1 7-6 6-2 and clear beat down to media hype job! face it!

But he did his stuff, and that's all we can ask for. He had situation against Dolgo and he handled that one, too. Oz is maybe a better indicator of things for him, and I think hards might be where we see the best of Grigor. I'm definitely expecting him to make some noise. I don't want to see him disappear, perform below the levels he's set at Wimbo and Oz, or defer to older players, as if they have more rights than him.

It'll be interesting to see, and you're right; he can more or less secure a spot in the WTF by the time the US Open is finished...

Dimitrov is still not his best as his coach, let's see how it goes!

Cool rant. Illogical, but fairly cool.

Murray was tripe against Grigor. He didn't put up as much as a whimper of opposition. No need for you to be defensive - it wasn't Grigor's fault. He may still have won, but I doubt he'd have won so easily. In fact, had Murray played his best - and fought like he used to under Lendl - I doubt Grigor would have won more than a single set.

It has nothing to do with whatever Murray moaned about on court. It has to do with watching the match objectively.

And I'm not sure you help your argument by describing Murray's Olympics win over Federer as a "fluke" - in fact, you may have hindered it...

Everyone knows Murray has fluked at like 10 masters titles, 2 slams, and 1 Olympics. What blows my mind is that Andy has so many flukes against Federer that he has a h2h advantage.

 

[Kieran]

And I'm not sure you help your argument by describing Murray's Olympics win over Federer as a "fluke" - in fact, you may have hindered it...

Everyone knows Murray has fluked at like 10 masters titles, 2 slams, and 1 Olympics. What blows my mind is that Andy has so many flukes against Federer that he has a h2h advantage.

^^ :snigger :laydownlaughing

 

[El Dude]

Why is it that whenever a great player loses, people come out of the woodwork to make excuses as to why it happened? Must be injury, not on his game, struggling, etc. It can't possibly be because one player out-played another. This happened with Rafa at the AO and Andy at Wimbledon. I know, I know, Rafa was injured and Andy has struggled this year - but that's all part of the sport, all part of a player's record. We can't separate out all a player's best matches and say "This is who they really are" and make excuses for the rest; we end up with an extremely partial and skewed view of said player. This is why we should thank Cali for giving us an example of how far this can go into absurdity.

In the end, results are results. A player should be judged by their total record, not just the days that they woke up feeling peppy and fresh. It is like a marriage; if you're a douche to your wife you can't expect her to be so quickly forgiving because "I wasn't feeling myself today." Everything counts.

Andy lost to Grigor because Grigor played better. There is no excuse. Grigor has now beaten Andy in their last two meetings, so he's got some momentum and is unlikely to be a push-over going forward. Certainly Andy has lost to some opponents this year that he normally wouldn't have - Stepanek, Giraldo, Fognini - but two defeats by Dimitrov means something. A Wimbledon defeat means something. Grigor is a legit top 10 player and a spoiler threat. At some point he's going to take down Roger or Novak or Rafa...it is only a matter of time. Things change, and we're seeing the very beginnings of a tidal shift that will likely take a few years to happen, but 2014--as I predicted a year or two ago--would be the first signs of that shift. Viva la change!