What I like about 2014

[El Dude]

There's a sense of unknowing that it seems hasn't been there in years. I mean, there's always unknowing - but for a few years its been fairly clear who would win the Slams, or at least be serious contenders. But now it seems that every Slam is up-for-grabs. For instance...

The French Open is least up-for-grabs, but Novak's performance last year puts it in doubt more than its been for years. We could argue that Rafa still wasn't 100%, but we could counter by saying Rafa is often not 100%. Furthermore, Novak must be very hungry for a Slam after losing in the AO QF. I don't see any other player being a serious contender, but at least we have two.

Wimbledon seems completely up for grabs. One could argue that Andy Murray has the right game for it, plus home-field advantage. But he seemed to return to his pre-2012 US Open form after last year's victory, and before he got injuried. If he's healthy he might be the favorite, but certainly by only a hair over Djokovic and Nadal, and maybe not even then. Also, if Roger is going to win #18, this would be his best bet. Of all the Slams, Wimbledon is most prone for upsets, so we have to take other players seriously, as well - Wawrinka, del Potro, maybe even Berdych or Tsonga. Ferrer? Can't see it, but you never know.

For the US Open, ditto Wimbledon but slightly less so.

Overall there are just so may questions going forward this year that it makes for interesting, uncertain tennis, especially considering that Rafa is turning 28, Novak and Andy 27 - all still in their primes, but those are the ages you often see a slightly step back. As younger players like Grigor Dimitrov continue to take steps forward, we might start seeing more upsets.

Finally a note on Roger. Someone remarked the other day that he was back to his great self. I don't quite see that, but what I do see is a return to his 2010-11 form, but not quite the magic of 2012 when everything was clicking for him and he was on par with Djokovic and Nadal. 2013 was his worst year in a decade, so if 2014 is a return to his 2010-11, I'll take it. Look for him to make a serious push at Wimbledon and the US Open, as I think he realizes that those may be his last serious shots at another Slam.

 

[Kieran]

I think Roger is well off the pace, a sign of age, actually. I thought his performances in Oz were good, but the ridiculous suggestion that he was playing as well as his prime was based upon the matches against a lousy Tsonga, who showed no heart - or brains - and Murray, who clearly isn't back to his best and was facing his highest ranked opponent since his return.

As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel. But we Rafa fans are glum again, and fatalistic about his chances, based solely on what happened on Sunday. Even still, that'll be long forgotten by then, and he'll be favourite in Paris. Nole, as you said, will be his main rival, but others may take a nip out of either of them, if either is off his game.

Wimbledon and the US Open will be won by a player of the Big 4. I think Federer is gonna need 2009 multiplied, if he's going to win another slam, but he's the most likely to benefit from any strange goings on. However, bear in mind he's aging and you've already gotten more out of him than you could have reasonably expected.

Nole will be seriously motivated this year: think, the end of last season, but bring it up a level.

Andy should be fighting fit, but we'll see if that's enough.

Rafa will be there or thereabouts for everything, in a similar way to Nole, but hopefully with more success!

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

before murray was injured ?? wrong....it was an ongoing degenerative injury. he won Wimbledon and uso with it.

 

[brokenshoelace]

It's way too soon to tell whether Nadal is 100% or not for the FO, or how Djokovic will be playing by then. There's no reason why Nadal shouldn't be, by the way, unless that back injury is more serious than we think. Too early to play favorites. Obviously Nadal is the favorite with Djokovic as the second favorite, right now. Unless something dramatic happens in the clay season it will likely stay that way.

 

[Front242]

As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel..

Except Robin Soderling I guess. Ah, but then you'll say Rafa wasn't playing his best. Tell that to Hewitt who lost 6-1 6-3 6-1 just prior to the 4th round loss Nadal was handed by Soderling. And Hewitt was actually in very good form prior to that loss as was Rafa. He just met an even more in form opponent.

And to back that up if you really need it, supposing you counter with ah but Rafa was definitely 100% in RG 2010. Well then, explain how Hewitt actually fared better against a "reportedly" 100% Nadal the following year when he lost 6-3 6-4 6-3. That's a world of difference score wise and it shows Nadal was playing better in 2009 before losing to Soderling. So, sorry but at his best he was stopped. The shorts ball he was hitting were as a result of Soderling destroying him in many rallies. That's why he lost.

 

[Kieran]

Oh dear, you're not back in Denial Mode again, are ya? What will you say next, that Rafa skipped Wimbledon because he was crying in his sleep, and he took seven months off to see a shrink. :lolz:

And by the way, it's rude to derail El Dude's thread with your crankiness towards Rafa. You're contaminating every thread with it...

 

[Front242]

Oh dear, you're not back in Denial Mode again, are ya? What will you say next, that Rafa skipped Wimbledon because he was crying in his sleep, and he took seven months off to see a shrink. :lolz:

And by the way, it's rude to derail El Dude's thread with your crankiness towards Rafa. You're contaminating every thread with it...

One could say the same about your attempt's to defend Rafa in every post. The guy could pull his pants down and take a dump on the court and you'd find no fault in him. And nothing rude about it. I was countering the stupid assertion that Rafa is unbeatable at his best, 'cos frankly it's nonsense.

 

[Kieran]

Oh dear, you're not back in Denial Mode again, are ya? What will you say next, that Rafa skipped Wimbledon because he was crying in his sleep, and he took seven months off to see a shrink. :lolz:

And by the way, it's rude to derail El Dude's thread with your crankiness towards Rafa. You're contaminating every thread with it...

One could say the same about your attempt's to defend Rafa in every post. The guy could pull his pants down and take a dump on the court and you'd find no fault in him. And nothing rude about it. I was countering the stupid assertion that Rafa is unbeatable at his best, 'cos frankly it's nonsense.

You should have stuck to the OP. If there was a filter for your posts where you mention Rafa, I'd use it to block those posts out. You're prejudiced against him, and you drag it around everywhere. All your other posts are worth reading.

It would be good manners if you put this thread back on track with your next post.

And speaking of Soderling, is he expected back, or is he retired? Would be good to have him back but it would be unlikely he'd feature, given how long he's been out... :nono

 

[Front242]

Oh dear, you're not back in Denial Mode again, are ya? What will you say next, that Rafa skipped Wimbledon because he was crying in his sleep, and he took seven months off to see a shrink. :lolz:

And by the way, it's rude to derail El Dude's thread with your crankiness towards Rafa. You're contaminating every thread with it...

One could say the same about your attempt's to defend Rafa in every post. The guy could pull his pants down and take a dump on the court and you'd find no fault in him. And nothing rude about it. I was countering the stupid assertion that Rafa is unbeatable at his best, 'cos frankly it's nonsense.

You should have stuck to the OP. If there was a filter for your posts where you mention Rafa, I'd use it to block those posts out. You're prejudiced against him, and you drag it around everywhere. All your other posts are worth reading.

It would be good manners if you put this thread back on track with your next post.

And speaking of Soderling, is he expected back, or is he retired? Would be good to have him back but it would be unlikely he'd feature, given how long he's been out... :nono

No idea if he's coming back. I do searches and check his FB and Twitter pages every so often but there's no news. One could say the same about you with Roger and no need to be all goodie two shoes by mentioning putting the thread back on track as I've seen tons of silly posts of Rafa supposedly "thumping" Roger even though he lost a set and barely won 2 others by a break 7-5 and a TB. Clearly a royal thumping alright. Or he always thumps him when it matters. I've seen matches that mattered where he was the one who got thumped if you want to continue that phrase.

I'm not prejudiced against Rafa and during the match last weekend praised his good shots and serves and his heart for playing on and not retiring. What I dislike strenuously is the silly notion that no one beats him at his best and defending his every action, no matter how dubious they appear. I'd be the same if it were any other player. Anyway, I'm done here.

 

[El Dude]

Well since its been derailed, I'll join the fray.

As I said elsewhere, so often we like to say our favorite player lost because he was injured, or not on his game, or distracted by a distant cousin's bout with the flu...all of which may have some truth to it. But let us not forget that players are not machines, that they aren't either "on" or "off," and there are always a variety of factors figuring into how they play on a given day. It may be human nature to look for easy, clean answers - but those are the kind of answers that are usually wrong, or at least reductionistic.

A couple years ago, after Rosol beat Nadal, I said something to the effect that all professional players--especially those in the top 100--are capable of truly great tennis. The difference between a Nadal and Rosol isn't only a matter of how great they can play at their absolute best, but how frequently they can reach their absolute best, and in what conditions. I'd even say that the difference between Nadal and Rosol at their very best is smaller than many might believe, but that the difference in their greatness has far more to do with Rafa's ability to channel that greatness more frequently. Everyone has good and bad days, but how often can we create the conditions within ourselves to have a good day?

So when we look at Rafa's Grand Slam record, for instance, we see a lot of gaps and early exits - far more than Novak or Roger, at least during their respective primes. We can't use that to either write Rafa off as being not as great as his fans want him to be, or use them to support Rafa and say that he's even better than his record because of all of those injuries. Staying healthy--and playing at one's best--are part of greatness, not obstacles or pathways to it.

This is why I'm a fan of leaning heavily on the actual statistical record, the results. Federer fans might look at his match-ups with Nadal and say, "Roger was winning all of them until Rafa got to his head and he lost more than Rafa won," and thereby support their view that Roger is actually greater. But, in the end, Rafa is 23-10, not the other way around. Psychology is a huge part of greatness.

On the other hand, we can't simply say that because Rafa is 23-10 against Roger, he's much better. There are other factors, so many that it becomes very complex (e.g. the fact that Roger's game just doesn't match up well against Rafa's). I'm not even saying that we should stick to the results and the results only, but that they do mean a lot and don't require interpretation.

On a side note, it is interesting to me that Rafa receives such ire from his non-fans. I wonder if it is partially a personality thing, because he does come across as rather pouty, which ends up seeming less dignified than Roger's stoicism. Or it might be because he's so damned good, or his style of play that causes people to beat themselves just as much he scores winners and crafts points, or....all of the above and more.

That said, of the Big Four, I've got to say that Rafa is the most irritating loser, just as Novak is the most irritating winner (the shirt pulling), although Novak makes up for it by being such a gracious loser. Roger is pretty mild on both accounts, which may be why he's less annoying to most, and Andy still has that veneer of underdog so its hard to fault whatever his response is.

 

[Kieran]

It would perk up 2014 if Soderling did return. I don't understand the condition he has, but he's sorely missed. Yeah, even I liked him, because he played with fire.

We're all fans, we all watch these things with one eye, it's all good sport with the banter, but I'd be curious to read how you think 2014 will pan out, especially for Roger... :hug

 

[El Dude]

Get a room, you two.

 

[Front242]

It would perk up 2014 if Soderling did return. I don't understand the condition he has, but he's sorely missed. Yeah, even I liked him, because he played with fire.

We're all fans, we all watch these things with one eye, it's all good sport with the banter, but I'd be curious to read how you think 2014 will pan out, especially for Roger... :hug

Better than last year no doubt but not great. Isn't hard to predict him doing better than the 2nd round of Wimbledon (and likely same applies to Rafa) and I think he'll have his head together at the US Open also and won't fare as dismally as he did last year. His movement is already leagues above what it was much of last year and that's the difference between the crud results of last year and doing better, which I'm sure he will. As regards winning anything worth a toss, I've no idea but will take whatever he wins at this stage of his career. I'm sure he'll win more than just 1 title this year and hopefully not just another 250.

 

[El Dude]

We're all fans, we all watch these things with one eye, it's all good sport with the banter, but I'd be curious to read how you think 2014 will pan out, especially for Roger... :hug

I know you're asking Front242, but here's how I think 2014 - and 2015-16 - will pan out for Roger, with the big caveat that "you never know." This is just one possible narrative.

Roger plays well in 2014, winning maybe one ATP 1000 and playing into the second week at all Slams. He'll make the Final at either Wimbledon or the US Open, but lose. He'll finish the year in the 3-5 range.

2015 will be a bit more up and down, but overall solid - better than 2013, but a hair below 2014. Then, probably at Wimbledon but possibly at the US Open, the stars align for him. Rafa, by then 29-years old and struggling with nagging injuries and showing signs of decline, goes out early or misses the tournament, one of Andy or Novak is taken out by the other, and Roger does the miraculous: wins a Slam just shy of his 34th birthday. It his 18th and last.

Finally, in 2016 Roger has clearly lost steam but plays on until the Olympics, but is unable to capture the Gold - the lone remaining benchmark missing from his amazing career. It is sometime around then - perhaps after losing at Wimbledon - that he announces his retirement later in the year. He plays until Basel, and then calls it quits after the tournament ends, at the age of 35, as he just misses the cut for the ATP World Tour Finals.

 

[brokenshoelace]

As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel..

Except Robin Soderling I guess. Ah, but then you'll say Rafa wasn't playing his best. Tell that to Hewitt who lost 6-1 6-3 6-1 just prior to the 4th round loss Nadal was handed by Soderling. And Hewitt was actually in very good form prior to that loss as was Rafa. He just met an even more in form opponent.

And to back that up if you really need it, supposing you counter with ah but Rafa was definitely 100% in RG 2010. Well then, explain how Hewitt actually fared better against a "reportedly" 100% Nadal the following year when he lost 6-3 6-4 6-3. That's a world of difference score wise and it shows Nadal was playing better in 2009 before losing to Soderling. So, sorry but at his best he was stopped. The shorts ball he was hitting were as a result of Soderling destroying him in many rallies. That's why he lost.

Yup Nadal played his best tennis against Soderling at the FO...Now I've heard it all. Injury or not, he DIDN'T play his best tennis. Beating Hewitt just means...he played good in a different match.

Here, I'll use the same logic: Roger played his best tennis against Nadal at the AO. After all, look at how good he played against Tsonga/Murray.

The forums have been awful lately. No offense Front, I like you, but I don't know what's going on with everyone.

 

[Front242]

As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel..

Except Robin Soderling I guess. Ah, but then you'll say Rafa wasn't playing his best. Tell that to Hewitt who lost 6-1 6-3 6-1 just prior to the 4th round loss Nadal was handed by Soderling. And Hewitt was actually in very good form prior to that loss as was Rafa. He just met an even more in form opponent.

And to back that up if you really need it, supposing you counter with ah but Rafa was definitely 100% in RG 2010. Well then, explain how Hewitt actually fared better against a "reportedly" 100% Nadal the following year when he lost 6-3 6-4 6-3. That's a world of difference score wise and it shows Nadal was playing better in 2009 before losing to Soderling. So, sorry but at his best he was stopped. The shorts ball he was hitting were as a result of Soderling destroying him in many rallies. That's why he lost.

Yup Nadal played his best tennis against Soderling at the FO...Now I've heard it all. Injury or not, he DIDN'T play his best tennis. Beating Hewitt just means...he played good in a different match.

Here, I'll use the same logic: Roger played his best tennis against Nadal at the AO. After all, look at how good he played against Tsonga/Murray.

The forums have been awful lately. No offense Front, I like you, but I don't know what's going on with everyone.

It's just the notion that no one beats Nadal at 100% that annoys the hell out of me. Talk about exaggeration and it's the main reason for so much dislike between the fanbases.

 

[brokenshoelace]

As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel..

Except Robin Soderling I guess. Ah, but then you'll say Rafa wasn't playing his best. Tell that to Hewitt who lost 6-1 6-3 6-1 just prior to the 4th round loss Nadal was handed by Soderling. And Hewitt was actually in very good form prior to that loss as was Rafa. He just met an even more in form opponent.

And to back that up if you really need it, supposing you counter with ah but Rafa was definitely 100% in RG 2010. Well then, explain how Hewitt actually fared better against a "reportedly" 100% Nadal the following year when he lost 6-3 6-4 6-3. That's a world of difference score wise and it shows Nadal was playing better in 2009 before losing to Soderling. So, sorry but at his best he was stopped. The shorts ball he was hitting were as a result of Soderling destroying him in many rallies. That's why he lost.

Yup Nadal played his best tennis against Soderling at the FO...Now I've heard it all. Injury or not, he DIDN'T play his best tennis. Beating Hewitt just means...he played good in a different match.

Here, I'll use the same logic: Roger played his best tennis against Nadal at the AO. After all, look at how good he played against Tsonga/Murray.

The forums have been awful lately. No offense Front, I like you, but I don't know what's going on with everyone.

It's just the notion that no one beats Nadal at 100% that annoys the hell out of me. Talk about exaggeration and it's the main reason for so much dislike between the fanbases.

Being at 100% physically and playing his best tennis are two different notions.

 

[Front242]

I agree, but he can be both healthy and playing his best and still lose. It can happen! Except to Kieran, it can't.

That's what I dislike about hardcore Nadal fans and likely the same with others.

"As for the slams, if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel."

No one is unbeatable in tennis or any sport, even when playing their best on their best surface, etc. It's insulting to the other players out there. All of them. Anyway, hopefully 2014 will be a good year for tennis.

 

[Kieran]

We're making predictions, buddy. What basis could anybody have for saying, "If Nadal plays his best in Paris, he loses."

What would you base that prediction upon?

And what odds would you get for making it?

 

[Front242]

No, a prediction would be I think Nadal will win the French Open 2014 which is fine. On the other hand, "if Rafa is at his best, he takes Paris. At his best, nobody can stop him there, no matter what version of themselves they channel."...is not. This is just likely to annoy any fans besides Nadal fans. I'll give you an example. I personally thought Robin Soderling played an incredible match to beat Federer at Roland Garros 2010 and I think Fed was playing extremely high quality tennis but still lost. Same applies to Fed at AO 2005 v Safin. Extremely high level. Just the opponents were better. If only Nadal fans could be as generous as that with their comments.

Federer had 2 MPs against against him at Rome 2006 and Soderling beat him in 2009 so Nadal is not unbeatable in clay best of 5. As I said it's insulting and demeaning to the other players and also just plain wrong. I'm sure you'd get better odds on someone else winning than Nadal, naturally enough, but odds mean nothing. Serena Williams was the favourite by a long way for the AO eventhough Azarenka was defending and look how that turned out. Neither won.

What odds would you have given Stan last weekend?!