2020 Australian Open SF: Thiem vs. Zverev

[Sundaymorningguy]

I am glad he backed up his win over Nadal with another.

 

[Moxie]

It's a stupid tradition that they won't change. It's been brought up several times throughout the years and they won't change it. I think they are trying to keep things fair as to the playing conditions.

If they have both matches on the same day, they would have to start early (since men's matches have the propensity to go longer) and one of the matches would be played in the day while the other would be a night match. Since the final is played at night the early match will have the disadvantage of unlike playing conditions.

I appreciate that explanation, if that's what they are thinking. However, it's full of holes. Thursday night the roof was open, for example, Friday it rained, and so the roof was closed. So, while it was the same time of day, you're never going to be able to guarantee the same playing conditions. However, you are guaranteeing that one finalist will have 24 hours or more less rest. And if that's their thinking, they sure don't seem to give a rat's azz that the women don't play the semis in the same conditions as they play the final.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Just finished watching the match before I go to work.

Theim played the crucial points better,Sasha did have his chances....as I thought Theim experience at this level won through.

 

[Jelenafan]

Zverev, like Nadal is going to rue some of his lost chances.

 

[mrzz]

 

[atttomole]

Zverev, like Nadal is going to rue some of his lost chances.

So many tennis players have lost some chances which they rue.

 

[mrzz]

Zverev, like Nadal is going to rue some of his lost chances.

Now, replying seriously: In both those matches I guess that simply in all those chances Thiem came with great, aggressive play. It is not like they missed and easy winner, double faulted or made some stupid UFE. IF you watch most of those points, Thiem came with something which was highlight material (and actually most of them are shown in the highlights), like the set points in the third set last night, if I am not mistaken one saved with a big inside out forehand and other with a precise dtl backhand. So it is kind of misleading when one writes "lost opportunities". But, sure, two heavily contested, close matches, so the chances will be there. Total credit for Thiem in the way he played those points though.

 

[Ricardo]

Thiem seems like the rightful successor to Nadal, plays extremely physical game and both play their best on clay. Zverev seems to be appointed successor to Federer, as Fed's own management company signed him up, and Fed trained with him then took him to South America for a series of exo. Medvedev looks like successor to Djoker, both are extremely good at grinding it out, both super solid and very tough. I think the game will be in good hands when the elderlies finally announce their overdue retirements.

 

[mrzz]

Thiem seems like the rightful successor to Nadal, plays extremely physical game and both play their best on clay. Zverev seems to be appointed successor to Federer, as Fed's own management company signed him up, and Fed trained with him then took him to South America for a series of exo. Medvedev looks like successor to Djoker, both are extremely good at grinding it out, both super solid and very tough. I think the game will be in good hands when the elderlies finally announce their overdue retirements.

You have a point there. Not sure if Tsitsipas have shown that he belongs in to that group, but in that case he would be the one that, style wise, was a bit closer to Federer (even if still far away from it). Given that Tsitispas won ATP Finals already, we can say that those are the candidates for the "future big four".

Some guys could spoil their party occasionally (like Rublev and Kachanov), but one guy that could seriously challenge them is FAA. But of course, results wise for now those four are head and shoulders above the rest.

 

[Federberg]

You have a point there. Not sure if Tsitsipas have shown that he belongs in to that group, but in that case he would be the one that, style wise, was a bit closer to Federer (even if still far away from it). Given that Tsitispas won ATP Finals already, we can say that those are the candidates for the "future big four".

Some guys could spoil their party occasionally (like Rublev and Kachanov), but one guy that could seriously challenge them is FAA. But of course, results wise for now those four are head and shoulders above the rest.

If Tsitsipas is the avatar of Federer then perhaps Zverev is the avatar of Murray?

 

[Ricardo]

Looks to me Fed prefers Zverev to be his successor, Nadal showered praises on Thiem as hard worker like himself, Djoker doesn't prefer anyone yet so far. Game wise Tits is certainly close to Fed while Zverev's isn't like Fed or even Murray, as he is basically a big hitter without exceptional touch and feel (which both Fed and Murray have). FAA looks like he has a lot of good qualities but so far he hasn't put it together or proven that he belongs.
Rublev and Kachanov, along with Kyrgios all have a lot of abilities, but don't seem to be overall balanced package so may not become consistent performer in the long term.