Well, I was a little bit off with Federer, I didn't expect him to go out in the third round to Stanislas Wawrinka, but it's hard to make predictions for Federer now a days because he's so erratic. Anyway, these are my predictions for the semi-finals:
Nadal vs Murray:
Nadal, kind of obvious, he's much better on clay than Murray. I don't think that this will be close at all. Nadal in straights.
Djokovic vs Wawrinka:
A few days ago Stan won his match against Roger Federer but I would be surprised if he was able to upset Djokovic. The Djoker has a big lead in their head to head and has beaten Wawrinka on clay. I think Djokovic moves through in two very tight sets.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
How does the future look for Roger?
Roger, has entered a new chapter in his life. Now that he's married his long time girlfriend Mirka and is expecting a baby with her this summer, where will his tennis career rank? How will these changes affect him as a player? Can he ever get back his #1 ranking now that he has other responsibilities and his primary competition is 5-6 years younger than him? Finally, how will his career end?
My guess is that Federer won't be able to regain the top spot again. Roger did more with with his four years at the top, than virtually any other player in the history of tennis. He's reached countless finals and has won all of the grand slams (excluding the French Open) at least 3 times. There really isn't that much more for him to achieve. He can break Sampras's record of 14 majors and he can still try to win the French Open to complete the career grand slam. At this point a calendar year grand slam would be too much to ask.
Nadal, is still the one major obstacle in Federer's path. He's stopped Federer from becoming the GOAT by defeating him four times at the French Open. Even if Roger were to somehow beat Nadal in the finals, It doesn't seem like it would mean that much because Nadal has owned him so many times.
I was surprised that Federer decided to play Monte Carlo this week, since he has just gotten married. I don't think his chances of winning are very good unless Nadal goes out early with an injury, but even reaching the finals might be challenging for him. Federer, has reach only a 9 finals since his streaky results started in early 2008. Federer's Monte Carlo draw is favorable for him to make the finals but he's probably going to have to contend with Novak Djokovic in the semis. If Roger brings his best game to Monte Carlo, plays great tennis all the way through the tournament getting by in as few sets as possible and Nadal is a little off his game, then I think Roger might have a decent chance of winning his first ever Monte Carlo title.
A lot of things will have to go right for him and it's going to take some luck but he could do it. Even if he's not the #1 player in the world anymore, Federer is always a threat in any tourament, even on his worst surface. Nadal is the heavy favorite, but if he doesn't play well this week, look for Federer to possibly win his first Monte Carlo title.
My guess is that Federer won't be able to regain the top spot again. Roger did more with with his four years at the top, than virtually any other player in the history of tennis. He's reached countless finals and has won all of the grand slams (excluding the French Open) at least 3 times. There really isn't that much more for him to achieve. He can break Sampras's record of 14 majors and he can still try to win the French Open to complete the career grand slam. At this point a calendar year grand slam would be too much to ask.
Nadal, is still the one major obstacle in Federer's path. He's stopped Federer from becoming the GOAT by defeating him four times at the French Open. Even if Roger were to somehow beat Nadal in the finals, It doesn't seem like it would mean that much because Nadal has owned him so many times.
I was surprised that Federer decided to play Monte Carlo this week, since he has just gotten married. I don't think his chances of winning are very good unless Nadal goes out early with an injury, but even reaching the finals might be challenging for him. Federer, has reach only a 9 finals since his streaky results started in early 2008. Federer's Monte Carlo draw is favorable for him to make the finals but he's probably going to have to contend with Novak Djokovic in the semis. If Roger brings his best game to Monte Carlo, plays great tennis all the way through the tournament getting by in as few sets as possible and Nadal is a little off his game, then I think Roger might have a decent chance of winning his first ever Monte Carlo title.
A lot of things will have to go right for him and it's going to take some luck but he could do it. Even if he's not the #1 player in the world anymore, Federer is always a threat in any tourament, even on his worst surface. Nadal is the heavy favorite, but if he doesn't play well this week, look for Federer to possibly win his first Monte Carlo title.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Roddick/Federer head-to-head
In the history of Men's tennis I don't think there has ever been a more one sided head-to-head than the Roger Federer/Andy Roddick one. The closest that I know of was Rod Laver vs Roy Emerson: 14-1 and Bjorn Borg vs Vitas Gerulitas: 16-0. Roddick is now 2-17 vs Federer and there will most likely be even more victories for Fed in the future.
Whenever these two played, Federer always had an answer for Roddick's shots. Federer, was an expert at returning Roddicks huge serve and once the point began, Federer was able to move Roddick around the court and place the ball in tough places for him to get to.
Federer has recently lost some of his consistency and I think that's the main reason, Roddick, was able to beat him last year in Miami. With Federer's consistency dropping, Roddick may have some opportunities in the future to win their matches. However, I would still favor the former world #1 to win their most important meetings.
Whenever these two played, Federer always had an answer for Roddick's shots. Federer, was an expert at returning Roddicks huge serve and once the point began, Federer was able to move Roddick around the court and place the ball in tough places for him to get to.
Federer has recently lost some of his consistency and I think that's the main reason, Roddick, was able to beat him last year in Miami. With Federer's consistency dropping, Roddick may have some opportunities in the future to win their matches. However, I would still favor the former world #1 to win their most important meetings.
Monday, March 23, 2009
What's wrong with Djokovic?
If you were following tennis in the early part of last year, you couldn't help coming across Novak Djokovic's name every couple of weeks. Djokovic, was playing the best tennis of everyone on the tour and it seemed like it was only a matter of time until he replaced Federer as the #1 player in the world. Both Nadal and Federer were off their games, Federer in particular had some horrible performances in several of his matches early last year. At the Australian Open, Djokovic, snapped Federer's streak of 10 straight grand slam finals and beat Nadal, one month later at the Pacific Life Open. Novak, even won the Rome Masters series title, by defeating Stanislas Wawrinka in the finals. The following week Novak, earned himself a chance to become the #2 player in the world by reaching The Hamburg semi-finals. Ironically his opponent was the current #2 player in the world Nadal. After an exciting 3 hour match, Nadal walked away the winner and saved his ranking. Djokovic, continued to impress by reaching the semi-finals at the French Open (again losing to Nadal) and later made the finals at The Artois Championships where he lost to Nadal again.
It was around this point that Djokovic started to struggle, he lost early at Wimbledon and the Rogers Cup although he was able to avenge his series of losses to Nadal, during the US Open Series. Nole, seemed to regain some of his fire at the Olympics and won most of his matches easily but he was stopped again by Nadal in the semi-finals.
The next month he made the semi-finals at the US Open and consistently had good results at the tournaments but he wasn't able to win a title. Nole, went on a losing streak against Jo Wilfried Tsonga and lost to him 3 times before the end of the year. Despite the setbacks he was still able to win the Masters Cup for the first time.
Since the beginning of the year, Djokovic hasn't brought his best performance to most of his matches. He lost in the quarter-finals at the Australian Open and was beaten at the BNP Paribas Open. His head-to-head against the top players is bad. He's lost the majority of the matches against Federer, Nadal, Tsonga, and Roddick.
I would like to see Djokovic turn this slump around but I'm not sure if he's capable of it. At times he doesn't seem to really be motivated and I wouldn't be surprised to see Andy Murray take over the #3 ranking, sometime around Wimbledon. I could even see Murray replacing Federer in about a year. Federer's, seems to be declining and he said on his website that Mirka is pregnant with their child. I don't think this can do anything but make his lessen his chances of staying on top. The big question for me is, whether or not Federer break Sampras's record of 14 majors.
It was around this point that Djokovic started to struggle, he lost early at Wimbledon and the Rogers Cup although he was able to avenge his series of losses to Nadal, during the US Open Series. Nole, seemed to regain some of his fire at the Olympics and won most of his matches easily but he was stopped again by Nadal in the semi-finals.
The next month he made the semi-finals at the US Open and consistently had good results at the tournaments but he wasn't able to win a title. Nole, went on a losing streak against Jo Wilfried Tsonga and lost to him 3 times before the end of the year. Despite the setbacks he was still able to win the Masters Cup for the first time.
Since the beginning of the year, Djokovic hasn't brought his best performance to most of his matches. He lost in the quarter-finals at the Australian Open and was beaten at the BNP Paribas Open. His head-to-head against the top players is bad. He's lost the majority of the matches against Federer, Nadal, Tsonga, and Roddick.
I would like to see Djokovic turn this slump around but I'm not sure if he's capable of it. At times he doesn't seem to really be motivated and I wouldn't be surprised to see Andy Murray take over the #3 ranking, sometime around Wimbledon. I could even see Murray replacing Federer in about a year. Federer's, seems to be declining and he said on his website that Mirka is pregnant with their child. I don't think this can do anything but make his lessen his chances of staying on top. The big question for me is, whether or not Federer break Sampras's record of 14 majors.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Nadal vs Borg
If you could have any two players from any time period play each other 1 match, who would it be and why? It's a tough question for me. There are so many fun match ups: Nadal vs Sampras, Federer vs Laver, Edberg vs Borg, Roddick vs Tilden, Federer vs Budge etc. It's hard to pick just one. I guess if I had to I might go with Nadal vs Borg, two of the greatest clay court players of all time. Nadal and Borg have similar birthdays, and playing styles. They even look similar because of the long hair with the bandana/headband. If they were able to play each other on the European red clay it would be hard to say who would win (assuming that Borg was using and adept with a graphite racquet.)
Bjorn Borg, stopped playing the majors in 1981 and later completely retired from tennis in January of 1983 (with the exception of an unsuccessful return to the tour, in the early 90s.)
Years before I was born and about 22 years before I saw my first tennis match. I had actually never seen a Borg match until last year when I found one of his Wimbledon finals on You Tube. I had read about him and had heard that he was one of the greatest clay court players of all time (maybe more so than Nadal.) So, I was very curious to see how good he really was. I was impressed with what I saw. Borg was able to generate tremendous topspin with a wood racquet (very difficult to do because of the small head size.) Borg, lacked some of the power that Nadal has and looked less intimidating because of his smaller size but he was still extremely fast. My opinion is that Bjorn Borg deserves most of the praise that he gets. I wouldn't say he was the greatest player of all time but his French Open and Wimbledon achievements were amazing.
Despite having similar styles, there are noticeable differences between Borg and Nadal. Borg came to net a little bit more than Nadal and was probably more reliant on his serve than Nadal is. Nadal plays almost all of his points from way behind the base-line, where as Borg was more willing to step into the court and put more aggression into his ground strokes. Actually, Borg reminds me more of Federer on clay than Nadal. Both Nadal and Borg were incredibly fast runners.
If they were to play a match, in their primes, with the technology staying the same (both with a graphite) and Borg was able to master the newer technology, I think it would be an extremely close match. Nadal, would probably would have a strength advantage over Borg. I would probably go with Nadal in a very close 4 or 5 set match.
Who do you think would be the winner?
Bjorn Borg, stopped playing the majors in 1981 and later completely retired from tennis in January of 1983 (with the exception of an unsuccessful return to the tour, in the early 90s.)
Years before I was born and about 22 years before I saw my first tennis match. I had actually never seen a Borg match until last year when I found one of his Wimbledon finals on You Tube. I had read about him and had heard that he was one of the greatest clay court players of all time (maybe more so than Nadal.) So, I was very curious to see how good he really was. I was impressed with what I saw. Borg was able to generate tremendous topspin with a wood racquet (very difficult to do because of the small head size.) Borg, lacked some of the power that Nadal has and looked less intimidating because of his smaller size but he was still extremely fast. My opinion is that Bjorn Borg deserves most of the praise that he gets. I wouldn't say he was the greatest player of all time but his French Open and Wimbledon achievements were amazing.
Despite having similar styles, there are noticeable differences between Borg and Nadal. Borg came to net a little bit more than Nadal and was probably more reliant on his serve than Nadal is. Nadal plays almost all of his points from way behind the base-line, where as Borg was more willing to step into the court and put more aggression into his ground strokes. Actually, Borg reminds me more of Federer on clay than Nadal. Both Nadal and Borg were incredibly fast runners.
If they were to play a match, in their primes, with the technology staying the same (both with a graphite) and Borg was able to master the newer technology, I think it would be an extremely close match. Nadal, would probably would have a strength advantage over Borg. I would probably go with Nadal in a very close 4 or 5 set match.
Who do you think would be the winner?
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Will Nadal's knees cause his downfall?
I recently read that Nadal, is now going to skip Dubai, because of an injury that he suffered to his knee during his match against Murray in Rotterdam. This is the second time in the last two and a half months that he's had to skip an event because of knees pains and it may not be the last time that he's sidelined this season. Nadal's, knees aren't going to get any better, in fact his Uncle has been talking about seriously cutting back on the tournaments during the hard court months.
It's really too bad that he has these kinds of problems at 22. Nadal's, knees will most likely force him into retirement at some point. It's impossible to know when but it's not a good sign if he's already re-injured them only a month into the tennis season.
What are your thoughts on Nadal's knees?
It's really too bad that he has these kinds of problems at 22. Nadal's, knees will most likely force him into retirement at some point. It's impossible to know when but it's not a good sign if he's already re-injured them only a month into the tennis season.
What are your thoughts on Nadal's knees?
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Nadal vs Federer Australian Open Finals
It's only February and I think this may already be the match of the year. I woke up at 4:00 AM to see this one. Since it was between Nadal and Federer I knew that it had to be good.
Once the match began Federer, played a horrible first game and was easily broken by Nadal. Fed got the break back the next game and from that point on the first set was very close. Both players were playing amazing points, they struck winners that would blow your mind. Nadal, eventually got a break late in the first set to win it 7-5.
In the second set Nadal got an early break to go up 3-2 but Federer managed to dig deep and win four straight games to win the second set 6-3.
The third was extremely intense and produced some of the best points in the match. I had a feeling that whoever won the third set would win the match. Neither player was able to break serve so it eventually went to a tie-break. Nadal and Federer traded mini-breaks in the tie- break before Nadal began to pull away. Rafa won the tie-break 7-3.
With Nadal, now up two sets to one and Federer's chances looking worse than ever, I thought that Nadal might run away with the match. It didn't happen. After having several chances to break serve during one of the early games in the fourth set, Nadal, let down a bit and Federer was able to keep his hopes of a 14th grand slam alive by winning the fourth set 6-3.
Nadal, broke Federer's serve in the fourth game of the fifth set and ran ahead to a 4-1 lead. Federer tried his best to fight back but was broken when he was serving to stay in the match at 2-5.
This was a classic match. Fun from the very first serve. The trophy celebration at the end was somewhat awkward. Federer, wasn't able to hold in his feelings and he started crying when he went up to address the crowd after the match. I felt badly for him but it did detract from the ceremony. Nadal, was nice about it and reminded Fed that he was one of the greatest players of all time and would no doubt break Sampras's record by the end of his career.
Some people think that Federer's reaction during the ceremony was inappropriate. I'm not sure, what do you think?
Once the match began Federer, played a horrible first game and was easily broken by Nadal. Fed got the break back the next game and from that point on the first set was very close. Both players were playing amazing points, they struck winners that would blow your mind. Nadal, eventually got a break late in the first set to win it 7-5.
In the second set Nadal got an early break to go up 3-2 but Federer managed to dig deep and win four straight games to win the second set 6-3.
The third was extremely intense and produced some of the best points in the match. I had a feeling that whoever won the third set would win the match. Neither player was able to break serve so it eventually went to a tie-break. Nadal and Federer traded mini-breaks in the tie- break before Nadal began to pull away. Rafa won the tie-break 7-3.
With Nadal, now up two sets to one and Federer's chances looking worse than ever, I thought that Nadal might run away with the match. It didn't happen. After having several chances to break serve during one of the early games in the fourth set, Nadal, let down a bit and Federer was able to keep his hopes of a 14th grand slam alive by winning the fourth set 6-3.
Nadal, broke Federer's serve in the fourth game of the fifth set and ran ahead to a 4-1 lead. Federer tried his best to fight back but was broken when he was serving to stay in the match at 2-5.
This was a classic match. Fun from the very first serve. The trophy celebration at the end was somewhat awkward. Federer, wasn't able to hold in his feelings and he started crying when he went up to address the crowd after the match. I felt badly for him but it did detract from the ceremony. Nadal, was nice about it and reminded Fed that he was one of the greatest players of all time and would no doubt break Sampras's record by the end of his career.
Some people think that Federer's reaction during the ceremony was inappropriate. I'm not sure, what do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
