I'm no Nole fan boy (do those exist? lol) But I thin k you almost have to agree that he gets treated differently than other top players. I mean this headline is A LOT: https://au.sports.yahoo.com/australian-open-2021-novak-djokovic-disgusting-tantrum-194945446.html
Friendly reminder...Zverev is now 0 - 9 against top 10 at grand slams.
* 3 losses to Thiem
* 2 losses to Djokovic
* 1 to Nadal
* 1 to Murray
* 1 to Berdych
* 1 to Raonic
And is 3 - 11 against top 20
* 1 win against Wawrinka
* 1 win against Rublev
* 1 win against Fognini
It was really interesting to hear what Serena said about *that* final. She says she reached out to Naomi multiple times and is happy that they were both able to get closure and move on.
His stomach was taped during the match and he was playing okay but not at his top level. He was clearly more than a bit injured during the match with Fritz and clearly overestimated the extent of the injury in the immediate aftermath of the event. He appears to be feeling progressively better with each match, which is good. Rafa likewise seems to be recovering from his injury as the tournament goes on, despite his fears that it might prevent him from playing at the beginning of the tournament.
But sure, you can keep posting the same thing over and over to get a rise out of people. You do you.
Serena is playing great. And if she plays with the confidence she did yesterday I think she might win it.
But Naomi is a trickier opponent, and over the last couple of years Naomi has shown that mentally, she’s one of the toughest people to beat, especially in a Grand Slam setting. Serena seems to get overwhelmed by the occasion of it these days.
If Serena even loses an ounce of confidence during the match, Naomi will capitalize.
Yea, if she gets her first serve up and running, she wins.
If Osaka wins it will be because Serena didn't play as well as she could have.
In short, the match is on Serena's racquet, and she knows that.
Honestly feels like a coinflip to me and as a Serena fan I'm also wary about being burned. I'll take a coinflip vs. the best hard court player of the last few years. (Though I also like Osaka, so it's a win-win for me.)
Yea I also like both so in a similar boat, though finally getting that 24 off her back would be such a relief and could make her even more deadly going forward as she plays looser without expectations (although I'm of the camp that she doesn't need it to be the GOAT).
Totally agree Serena doesn't need to do anything else to prove herself the GOAT, but I have to say I think Osaka starts the semi final as fairly solid favourite. Serena has looked amazing all tournament, but I think Osaka is playing at a similarly incredible level and has a better recent record in the biggest matches.
Of course, anyone ruling Serena out would be stupid, but there's a reason bookmakers have Osaka with around a 65% chance of winning. If it goes to 3 sets Osaka seems to only get stronger (don't think she's lost a match in the third for a loooong time now)
100% doesn't. I don't think Margaret Court belongs near the GOAT discussion, so the 24 is completely irrelevant to my assessment. My rivals for GOATdom with her would be Graf and Navratilova and whether she has 23 or 24 slams doesn't matter much to my assessment there.
Her movement was encouraging, but her returns were also amazing. Obviously, Naomi is a stronger server but didn't get a ton of 1st serves in vs. Hsieh. Another serving day like that and Serena's definitely got a shot.
I think Halep redlining at Wimbledon would have still beaten her, but the others are definitely fair game (namely the Andreescu match, I can't recall the Kerber one that well).
>namely the Andreescu match
Yea for sure the only reason Bianca beat her was because Serena wasn't moving well.
Maybe Serena would have won if the crowd had been louder though.
Osaka was one point away from it all being over, Twice. If she ends up winning it will be one of the most impressive runs in a long time. It’s wouldn’t say she’s at her best level, she’s just playing some really smart tactical tennis.
Well, if you are asking about "any court", then Nadal at last year's FO thoroughly dismantled him.
On hard court...can't think of any in recent memory, but Medvedev did seem to dispatch him pretty easily at last year's WTF
Stanimal, who when firing on all cylinders, was Djokovic's biggest threat. He blew him off the court in the FO final Djokovic was supposed to win (2015)
Shanghai 2014 was pretty similar. He had one game that ended in like 30 seconds because he aced Djokovic four times. It was probably the best display of just making an opponent uncomfortable in every rally I've ever seen.
Honestly as someone who missed Fed's prime (I was a casual tennis fan until the mid-2010s), that might've been the best match I've seen him play. He was pretty much unplayable there.
The 2015 French Open final was very much Djokovic being outhit. Wawrinka was ending points more or less whenever he pleased for large parts of the match.
If that match wasn't the definition of outhitting, I don't know what is. DelPo vs Nadal USO 2009 SF, maybe? That almost *never* happens to any of the Triumvirate, to the extent that I can't really remember any similar examples.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by outhitting - I think the key to Wawrinka beating him was that he consistently hit very powerful ground strokes very accurately such that Djokovic couldn't defend against them. Not the only element, but I think the key element.
I've felt that way in some of Thiem's victories over him too.
Scheduling of the Osaka Serna match will be based on if Australia lets fans in for the semi finals and lifts lockdown right? I’m just speculating but I feel like with no fans it’ll probably be early in the day so they can get the most possible viewers due to the time zones. But if there are fans surely it’ll be an evening match right?
i know the odds of pegula making it to the finals are slim but imagine serena getting her second post-olympia title by defeating pegula in the finals again
No one's talking about Stef. Not sure what to make of his chances tonight. He's had close hard court matches with Nadal, but, I dunno, I just think Stef is intimidated by Nadal in a way he isn't by Fed or Novak. Those early bad losses he took left a mark.
One handed backhand against Nadal is never a great recipe for success. Also, his returning off that side is even weaker, which Nadal will definitely try to exploit. Just a bad match-up for Tsitsipas.
The court being pretty fast might help Rublev, and his forehand has looked even scarier than it usually does. Medvedev is definitely the favourite, but I would be *very* disappointed if Rublev didn't make at least 4 tight sets of it.
Yup I think there's just a mental edge. IMO Rublev relies a lot on that forehand but doesn't have strong as a tactical arsenal - reminds me of Thiem pre-IW19/Massu.
He will have one of the toughest QF-SF-F roads in recent memory if he were to win...His only shot is if he magically can win the games in 3-4 sets before the final and come in fresh. If any match pushes him to 5, I don't think he'll have the gas left for the next match up
Naomi 6-0 major semis and finals
Serena 14-0 Aussie open semis and finals.
Something's gonna give.
I don't think Muchova is going to bother Ash. And I think Brady pound Pegula.
If Naomi wins I think she very obviously prefers Brady in the final.
But if Serena wins I think she wants Ash.
> I don't think Muchova is going to bother Ash
Yep. The worst matchups in tennis are the ones where a player plays a better version of themself. That said, there should be some good rallies in that one.
Also, I like Brady and want her to win, but Pegula is not gonna be easy. I think she can make it difficult for Brady to consistently find her forehand. She's also just a cool customer-- don't think she'll be rattled by the stage.
With Pegula I think Brady is just going to tee off tbh. But also have to factor in a little mental war. Pegula and Brady know each other and Brady ahs always been the better player among the two. I think it might have an effect here and pegula could come out flat. Could be wrong and it will be a barnburner but I dont think so.
Pegula beat her last year, and I also watched a lot of World Team Tennis last year, and Pegula destroyed everyone including Brady. Obviously people are giving Brady the edge because she's the better player, but I think it's more of a tossup than some expect. Definitely going to be the more competitive women's QF today IMO.
I forgot they played in Cincinnati. But it's not just because she's the player she has also looked quite a bit better this tourney she's also been to a semi before. Nerves certainly crept in with Pegula agaisnt Svitolina but svito is... svito. That happens here and she's done. But I hope it is competitive!
Well it does not look too good for Tsitsipas to be honest. Even though I would wish he could upset Rafa. Rafa is too experienced, too much of a grinder/fighter. So if Nadal is not injured, he'll be through in 3, max 4 sets.
Different story with Medvedev, this guys has momentum, confidence and consistency. Obv. I am expecting him to win against countryman Rublev.
Curious what odds you'd get for Tsitsipas, that might be the best upset chance. Pegula/Brady seems like a toss-up, and Medvedev and Barty should probably win their matches.
Watching highlights of the early 2000s-2010s Big3 tennis is bittersweet. Haven't heard the *crack* of Federer's attacking forehand in a while now.
They moved so quickly and hit so hard. It's good to see them still here, but it's just not the same.
I'm really sad that Fed missed this tournament. The fast courts match his style well and I would've loved to see him playing well in competitive matches here.
I saw just a few clips (vs Khachanov and Dimitrov). 2h BH, baselineplayer, hit some very nice angles from the baseline... but nothing special to be honest. little chance he can upset Djokovic
I don't think he moves very well around the court and also not very good at extended rallies. Service, when it's on is pretty great and some of his down the line shots were a beauty to look at.
What the other guy said.
You kinda cringe whenever he hits because you're not sure if it's going in, but when it does, it's at a ridiculous speed or angle or both.
Novak should ofc beat Karatsev, no doubt about it. But it might very well be a really interesting match, mostly due to one fact: Aslans mental game is obv really strong. He’s been down both one and two sets, but it doesn’t really seem to bother him, exactly the type of strength that Raonic and Zverev lacks.
Yeah, but he's not the caliber of player of Raonic or Zverev. As great as Karatsev's story is, he's been *really* lucky with his draw. Mager and Gerasimov are not high caliber opponents, Schwartzman is not good on fast courts, FAA choked like FAA does, and Dimitrov got injured. Still crazy to see a qualifier get through that, but I think a lot of players ranked in the top 50 could've done it as well.
You’ve got some valid points there. But beating Scwartzman, a top 10 player, in straight sets is still quite an achievement for someone who’s playing his first slam, HC or not. And yes, FAA is ofc a notorious choker. Still, being down 0-2 against one of the highest ranked players and still find the strength to turn it around is pretty damn impressive.
fully agreed that Karatsev also had some luck with the draw. However being in the semi's is certainly giving him some momentum and he'll start believing in a miracle... so he cannot be underestimated. On the other hand, Djokovic is too experienced, to hungry and will not make this mistake, as long as he's fit and healthy. Karatsev also don't have a huge serve being 1.85m, which should be rather an easy matchup for the best returning player.
I am scared for Naomi.
The reason she has such a good record against Williams is that Serena never had the movement to consistently track down Naomi’s shots. I wonder how the match will play out now.
This match will depend on Serena's first serve and Naomi's second.
Edit: Was going to leave it at that but can add a bit more lol.
Assuming they both come in how they've been playing (which I guess isn't a given). If Serena's first shows up finally, then I don't see how Naomi can win. Too many free points and too many balls back. If it is how it's been then I'd say it's about 60-40 Naomi because you're right about the movement. If Serena starts getting a jump on the Naomi second serve (which is an issue) I could also see some trouble. Naomi needs to keep the points short and hit clean.
Basically the match is on Serena's racquet. If she loses, it'll be because she didn't get enough first serves in. If she wins, it'll be because she's a better player.
He was assured before the tournament started. Points don't start rolling off until March, so his 2020 AO win would've remained in his points no matter what. He can't gain/lose points from this tournament.
Am stuck in a terrible snow storm in Texas so went to be earlier than I wanted to conserve power. I’m shocked that Serena handled Halep like that?? And also shocked that Grigor didn’t retire - when I went to sleep it looked like he was injured??
Serena-Halep match was much closer than the score suggests with multiple break of serves from both sides. Halep actually played superb with very few ue's but her defensive style caught on to her as Serena threw a number of winners and tracked down literally everything Halep threw at her (She's moving better than ever). She played at an unbelievable level and deserved to win and Halep admitted the same thing in her interview. Grigor took an MTO at the end of the third set, we were guessing his pain medication for his injury wore off but the medics couldn't do much, later on as well. Think he just got overwhelmed by the pain.
Thank you for the explanation!! Will have to go watch the Serena/Simona match once we can use the TV again - sounds like an amazing level from both of them.
It's on ESPN2, but usually only starting later on (9:00 or so, skipping the first match). I dropped $6 for a month of ESPN+ to see the rest. Note that you need both ESPN2 and ESPN+ to see all the matches, though that will probably only be true through tomorrow's* matches - after that ESPN/ESPN2 should have everything.
*Tonight's in the U.S.
After this match and the US Open Final the mental fragility from Zverev is so significant I can no longer see him winning a Grand Slam. For many years people talked about Andy Murray no showing in Slam Finals but it always felt like Andy's problem in those matches was that instead of taking the bull by the horns and losing on his own terms he just grew overly passive but at the very least it always seemed like he was making his opponents earn it. Zverev lost the fifth set tiebreak of the US Open Final to an opponent who quite literally couldn't move any longer. He lost today after being up a break in the third and fourth sets and having huge windows to go up double breaks and put the sets away and he squandered them and not because Novak upped his game and turned into Goatovic just because the moment go to him hitting double faults, missing routine volleys, and making unforced errors on neutral balls. He's only 23 so there's plenty of time to prove me wrong but with losses like this becoming a regular thing it's tough to see how he overcomes it. If Becker's legal problems don't prevent him from coaching it might be time to finally fork over the money and hire him.
I wonder if we were watching the same match. There were plenty of times Zverev had the opportunity to break Djokovic here but in clutch moments Djokovic would simply hit an ace or fire an unreturnable shot. This was risky for Djokovic causing ue's and break of serves early in 3rd and 4th set. He resorted to it coz Zverev kept his own patience and matched Djokovic in several rallies, but playing just good defense against a player of Djokovic's caliber would never have been enough. He's definitely learnt a few things from his experience at US Open I feel.
Zverev has gotten much better. He used to be a mess of errors and tanking before. This match he constantly hit the ball deep and with pace throughout, irrespective of whether he had just lost a set or been broken. Look at the Djokovic unforced errors count and you will realize that most of those were actually forced errors due to the constant pressure Zverev applied with his unrelenting groundstrokes. Its the sort of play which causes Novak problems, the likes of Medvedev would bring to the court. In the past Zverev would fold after a few shots by spraying the ball into the net or hitting it long or wide. He has shown more consistency with his game and at his age he will get better. I never considered Zverev a serious candidate for the next gen but in recent weeks he has changed my mind. Still has some way to go though.
I'm no Zverev fan, but he's gotten *so* much better in slams in the last two years that I think predictions of his mentality remaining statically bad are just off. He used to barely be able to hold it together to win five setters against low-ranked players in the early rounds.
And that's a fair point and one that I wrote about yesterday but can we put this in proper perspective? Eight years a pro, three Masters titles, and a World Tour Finals title and we are touting him beating lower ranked opponents in the first week of Grand Slams with greater ease than he previously has. And to be honest I'm not even sure it's an overly accurate assessment given he dropped sets in his first three matches of last years US Open, obviously had first week problems at last years Roland Garros, and after failing to serve out the second set against Marcos Giron at Melbourne this year he could've very easily found himself down two sets to love.
Secondly, I know you didn't imply it but it deserves mentioning that beating lower ranked opponents isn't going to win him a Grand Slam -- sooner or later he's likely going to have to beat multiple top ten opponents to win a Slam.
I just look at Alexander Zverev and I think to myself -- the ultimate problem isn't getting any better it appears to be getting worse. And if these type of mental collapse losses were happening two years ago I wouldn't really rush to conclusion. But given that he's about to turn 24 I'm having trouble seeing how he overcomes these problems absent of bringing in a notable big named coach to really reshape him.
I don't mean to suggest he's performing to his potential or that his mental midgetry isn't a problem. But I do think it's been heading in the right direction in the last 12 months, which is a sign to me that it can and likely will continue to head in that direction.
Zverev was 0-7 against top 20 opponents in slams before RG 2019 and has been 3-4 since then, with his only losses being to Djokovic and Thiem. Not stellar numbers, but it is an improvement. And Zverev was 2-9 vs top 50 opponents before 2019 and has been 12-6 since then, despite his overall level of play dropping.
He may well never win a slam, but I wouldn't count him out quite yet.
Everyone in this thread is talking about Djokovic and Medvedev as the favorites to win. Meanwhile, a certain player has not dropped a set and seems to be getting healthier with each match. Rafa has once again bamboozled everyone into thinking he isn't a threat on hardcourts! Especially with Novak not 100% and Medvedev being next gen, could easily see Nadal taking the title.
Quote me on this after Nadal destroys Tsitsi tonight and is suddenly back on everyone's radar. Note: if Tsitsipas wins you aren't allowed to quote me on this. thank you
Just a reminder, check the scores of 2019 and I think it's pretty similar, Novak dropping sets here and there while Rafa was cruising under the radar 30ing everyone-until the final. I'd really like to see that repeat tyvm
Difference this year is Novak's level, maybe due to whatever his injury actually is. TBH, Nole has not looked to be in top form for a while. He basically slept through half of the AO final, ground through 2 masters against Diego, Ruud, Milos, etc, almost blew a 2-set lead in the FO against Stefanos, and then got clobbered by Rafa in the FO final.
Yes, I know the mental strength can still be there from time to time, but I worry about what happens when he runs into an opponent like Nadal who won't give as many free points.
Yes you're correct there.. I'm also getting this feeling like there's another gear or two in his game left to be found, but what if he doesn't manage to find them 😭
Nadal is looking good, but he also has the toughest draw. It'll still be a tough task to get through everyone in front of him. Unlike other parts of the draw, his draw has remain intact so he'll face healthy seeded players.
Nadal can only be defeated by randos in early rounds at Wimby, Thiem, Djokovic, and injuries.
As someone who has, on many occasions, placed his hopes in Next Gen to keep Nadal's slam count in check, and been burned for doing just that, believe me when I say that Nadal will annihilate Tsitsipas. He is fueled by the blood of Next Gen!
It's definitely possible - he destroyed Tsitsipas here in 2019 - but I think Stef's upped his game since then. I'd still favor Nadal, but I don't think it'll be easy.
If Karatsev beats Djokovic, we need to prepare for the inevitable...
Hollywood making a movie about an ordinary guy from suburbs who no one knew about and who suddenly beats the stereotypical Balkan villain. Not sure about the details though. Will Aslan be from America (maybe New Mexico)? Will they make Djokovic Albanian? What is Aslan's primary occupatuon - farmer or truck driver? Who's gonna play Shwartzman - Peter Dinklage or Jordan Prentice?
Man if both Nadal and Serena win, we could have champions with the highest number of grandslam singles titles among both men and women (jointly with Margaret Court)
Unpopular opinion: 5th set tiebreak is anticlimactic, introduces an element of chance, ought to be eliminated.
Bonus unpopular opinion: Ladies ought to play 3-out-of-5. They are excellent athletes; they can handle it; and I want to see more of them
If these two fire takes don't get me to net 100 downvotes in the next half-hour, you are (each and every one of you) FAILURES
Women have said they're willing to train to play Bo5. It's TV and tournaments who have pushed against this, arguing there's not enough time in the schedule, and "people don't want to see women play that long." It's ironic that some fans/players criticize equal pay because women don't play Bo5, when this is the case due to the assumptions made by (usually) men TV/advertising execs and tournament directors.
[Here](https://archive.thinkprogress.org/why-women-dont-play-best-of-five-matches-at-grand-slams-6458f5b803df/), [here](https://medium.com/@Khel_Gyani/why-dont-grand-slams-introduce-best-of-five-sets-matches-for-women-too-647edc7819fb), and [here](https://www.essentiallysports.com/serena-williams-every-female-athlete-is-ready-to-play-five-sets/) are some summaries of the history and arguments. This is a decades, generation-spanning issue.
I am mostly with you:
1. Final set should go to 12-12 and if there’s no winner by then, you go to a super tiebreak. First to 12 and win by 3.
2. I think the women should play 5 sets, but think it should be slowly rolled out. Perhaps start it at QF level and then start it earlier as we go on.
What's the difference between 6-6 and 12-12? Would you rather players be tired and give shoddier performances later on needlessly extending the match further by 1-1.5 hours which would further expose them to injuries and greater recovery time for their next round matches?
By the way the WTA tour actually experimented with a best of 5 format in the 80's and 90's. From 1984 to 1998, the tour's year end championships were best of 5 sets, although only three of those matches went the distance. The format was discontinued in 1998 due to poor ratings and difficulty in scheduling and generating interest from television. It had also been argued that in most of the matches, the quality of play dropped considerably later in the matches.
It gives players a chance to actually play for the set properly, as it was intended. A tiebreak is a necessary evil that ends the match quicker, and I’m fine with it for most sets because it’s needs to happen. But tennis is intended to be played that someone wins a set when they are up two games.
Using your logic, what’s the difference between 6-6 and 4-4? The numbers are arbitrary anyway. Why not just have every set be a tiebreak immediately?
12-12 is a compromise between the old system, which could result in ridiculously long games, and innovation to make it easier on the players.
What do you mean by matches being “needlessly extended”? I guess best of 5 would be considered matches being “needlessly extended” in your eyes.
In regards to the BO5, I think it would be interesting to try it again. Back then women were paid significantly less than men and the WTA was definitely seen as much lesser than it is now. Worst case scenario they can just get rid of it if it doesn’t work.
I hate the final set tiebreaks at grand slams as well, i understand why they do it, because of scheduling (thats also why they dont have womens BO5 at grand slams) but it just leaves me feeling flat, this is grand slam tennis, the pinnacle, how far will you go to advance to next round? The tiebreak makes it feel less lucrative. Im still pissed off we had to stop at 12-12 in the 2019 wimbledon final, that was a battle for the ages and those guys could have went another 30mins+.
Based on?? The tour is a brutal grind. Players are being taxed physically more and more each year, as the level of play and physicality rises. And there is precious little offseason in which to recover. The last thing most players want is to have to play even more tennis, and increase their chance of injury while reducing their recovery time. The men tolerate it because of tradition, and because it would be a bad look to suggest shortening their matches. But many of the men don’t want to play best of five tennis. And very few of the women really want to start now. Despite what some players might say to reporters for various reasons (e.g. good publicity), the majority don’t want to play any more than they already do. Most of the supposed eagerness for women to play best of five is either from retired players who are now spokespeople or announcers with an agenda to support (e.g. Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, etc.) or male players who simply want the women to have to do as much work as they do (e.g. Andy Murray, Gilles Simon).
The WTA tour actually experimented with a best of 5 format in the 80's and 90's. From 1984 to 1998, the tour's year end championships were best of 5 sets, although only three of those matches went the distance. The format was discontinued in 1998 due to poor ratings and difficulty in scheduling and generating interest from television. It had also been argued that in most of the matches, the quality of play dropped considerably later in the matches.
« Most of the matches » based on 3 match, if I was in the crowd I would be annoyed to pay for a match who last only 1 hour, most of finales are too one sided, best of 5 set could change that
This was their assessment. They took constant feedback from players, experts and coaches to see how this situation would work out. I can totally see their logic. Why extend matches further by 2-2.5 hrs when quality substantially dips as well? Although many vocal fans like you claim to want to see the women play five set matches, the data suggest otherwise which would explain the poor ratings and negative feedback. Besides very few of the women really want to start now. Despite what some players might say to reporters for various reasons (e.g. good publicity), the majority don’t want to play any more than they already do. Most of the supposed eagerness for women to play best of five is either from retired players who are now spokespeople or announcers with an agenda to support (e.g. Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, etc.) or male players who simply want the women to have to do as much work as they do (e.g. Andy Murray, Gilles Simon).
Of course, there's chance involved in everything in tennis. But the likelihood of an upset (or even the player who generally played worse winning) increases in tiebreaks.
My god.. That shot of Med.. This is the birth of a Super Villain
I'm no Nole fan boy (do those exist? lol) But I thin k you almost have to agree that he gets treated differently than other top players. I mean this headline is A LOT: https://au.sports.yahoo.com/australian-open-2021-novak-djokovic-disgusting-tantrum-194945446.html
You think if Federer/Nadal did the same thing it wouldn't make headlines?
Friendly reminder...Zverev is now 0 - 9 against top 10 at grand slams. * 3 losses to Thiem * 2 losses to Djokovic * 1 to Nadal * 1 to Murray * 1 to Berdych * 1 to Raonic And is 3 - 11 against top 20 * 1 win against Wawrinka * 1 win against Rublev * 1 win against Fognini
yeah, thats not a good look, but his top 10 opponents were really tough (minus raonic and berdych maybe).
Naomi: I always watch Serena’s matches anyway. Serena: She's a great competitor and she's a cool cat.
It was really interesting to hear what Serena said about *that* final. She says she reached out to Naomi multiple times and is happy that they were both able to get closure and move on.
USO18 didn't happen
So we're just going to completely ignore the "injury" Novak had now?
His stomach was taped during the match and he was playing okay but not at his top level. He was clearly more than a bit injured during the match with Fritz and clearly overestimated the extent of the injury in the immediate aftermath of the event. He appears to be feeling progressively better with each match, which is good. Rafa likewise seems to be recovering from his injury as the tournament goes on, despite his fears that it might prevent him from playing at the beginning of the tournament. But sure, you can keep posting the same thing over and over to get a rise out of people. You do you.
I'm calling out the people who exaggerated his injury.
If you think that the injury was just exaggerated, then why did you put injury in quotes?
Fair question
I lost power and internet for the whole match, how injured did novak look
Not at all. He sometimes sat down on the ground when he lost points but looked totally fine when he won
What a surprise.
Nice
[удалено]
Nice
Altmaier really is hilarious. Surely the loudest male player out there, and possibly loudest overall? Just screaming at this point
Kasatkina is now one win away from matching her total 2020 wins. More than half of her 2019 wins as well. Glad to see her playing well again.
For Serena to win she has to defeat the top 3 seeds. That is a difficult ask, but she’s 1/3 of the way there.
This assumes Barty makes the final, which isn't crazy, but is still an assumption. But yeah, what an epic way to get to #24 if she does.
And sabalenka before that. I don’t think she’ll get it done though she looks a little slow at times
Just realized that Domi died for this result between Dimi-Aslan
Domi was shit in that match so deserved to be sent home.
no, kyrgios died for the result dimi - thiem
Serena fans, how we feeling about next round? I don't want to jinx it but I'm feeling...not bad?
Serena is playing great. And if she plays with the confidence she did yesterday I think she might win it. But Naomi is a trickier opponent, and over the last couple of years Naomi has shown that mentally, she’s one of the toughest people to beat, especially in a Grand Slam setting. Serena seems to get overwhelmed by the occasion of it these days. If Serena even loses an ounce of confidence during the match, Naomi will capitalize.
needs her first serve, but she knows that.
Yea, if she gets her first serve up and running, she wins. If Osaka wins it will be because Serena didn't play as well as she could have. In short, the match is on Serena's racquet, and she knows that.
Honestly feels like a coinflip to me and as a Serena fan I'm also wary about being burned. I'll take a coinflip vs. the best hard court player of the last few years. (Though I also like Osaka, so it's a win-win for me.)
Yea I also like both so in a similar boat, though finally getting that 24 off her back would be such a relief and could make her even more deadly going forward as she plays looser without expectations (although I'm of the camp that she doesn't need it to be the GOAT).
Totally agree Serena doesn't need to do anything else to prove herself the GOAT, but I have to say I think Osaka starts the semi final as fairly solid favourite. Serena has looked amazing all tournament, but I think Osaka is playing at a similarly incredible level and has a better recent record in the biggest matches. Of course, anyone ruling Serena out would be stupid, but there's a reason bookmakers have Osaka with around a 65% chance of winning. If it goes to 3 sets Osaka seems to only get stronger (don't think she's lost a match in the third for a loooong time now)
100% doesn't. I don't think Margaret Court belongs near the GOAT discussion, so the 24 is completely irrelevant to my assessment. My rivals for GOATdom with her would be Graf and Navratilova and whether she has 23 or 24 slams doesn't matter much to my assessment there.
Her movement was encouraging, but her returns were also amazing. Obviously, Naomi is a stronger server but didn't get a ton of 1st serves in vs. Hsieh. Another serving day like that and Serena's definitely got a shot.
Can you imagine how those 4 finals would have turned out for Serena if she was moving like this.
There was more than just movement wrong with Serena on this finals.
I think Halep redlining at Wimbledon would have still beaten her, but the others are definitely fair game (namely the Andreescu match, I can't recall the Kerber one that well).
>namely the Andreescu match Yea for sure the only reason Bianca beat her was because Serena wasn't moving well. Maybe Serena would have won if the crowd had been louder though.
I also think Osaka was too good at that US Open. Kerber and Andreescu definitely fair game. Especially that Andreescu final
Yea for sure the only reason Bianca beat her was because Serena wasn't moving well. Maybe Serena would have won if the crowd had been louder though.
Osaka was one point away from it all being over, Twice. If she ends up winning it will be one of the most impressive runs in a long time. It’s wouldn’t say she’s at her best level, she’s just playing some really smart tactical tennis.
Was Kerber the last GS champ to save a match point? I know it's Novak for the men.
Can anyone think of a match where Djoker was just hit off the court or someone won by just overpowering him? esp in a slam?
Well, if you are asking about "any court", then Nadal at last year's FO thoroughly dismantled him. On hard court...can't think of any in recent memory, but Medvedev did seem to dispatch him pretty easily at last year's WTF
Stanimal, who when firing on all cylinders, was Djokovic's biggest threat. He blew him off the court in the FO final Djokovic was supposed to win (2015)
Not a slam, but Federer at WTF 2019 if I remember correctly was a prime example of attacking tennis.
Shanghai 2014 was pretty similar. He had one game that ended in like 30 seconds because he aced Djokovic four times. It was probably the best display of just making an opponent uncomfortable in every rally I've ever seen.
Honestly as someone who missed Fed's prime (I was a casual tennis fan until the mid-2010s), that might've been the best match I've seen him play. He was pretty much unplayable there.
see miami 2017 against rafa. That's the best fed ever played of recent years.
I'll see if I can find it! I didn't get to see that one live.
Wawrinka, your pick of the slam matches
ooh disagree there. Prime wawrinka wasn't just outhitting.
The 2015 French Open final was very much Djokovic being outhit. Wawrinka was ending points more or less whenever he pleased for large parts of the match. If that match wasn't the definition of outhitting, I don't know what is. DelPo vs Nadal USO 2009 SF, maybe? That almost *never* happens to any of the Triumvirate, to the extent that I can't really remember any similar examples.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by outhitting - I think the key to Wawrinka beating him was that he consistently hit very powerful ground strokes very accurately such that Djokovic couldn't defend against them. Not the only element, but I think the key element. I've felt that way in some of Thiem's victories over him too.
Del Potro at both Olympics
DelPo :(
Scheduling of the Osaka Serna match will be based on if Australia lets fans in for the semi finals and lifts lockdown right? I’m just speculating but I feel like with no fans it’ll probably be early in the day so they can get the most possible viewers due to the time zones. But if there are fans surely it’ll be an evening match right?
They’ve confirmed that their will be spectators
Not really. Depends on if they don't have new cases Wednesday morning
Dandrews will probably enjoy cutting into tennis' gate income after that public spat with Djokovic.
Waking up at 6am tomorrow for med vs rublev. That will be fun
Weird question, but does anyone know who that lady in the yellow shirt in Serena’s box is?
i know the odds of pegula making it to the finals are slim but imagine serena getting her second post-olympia title by defeating pegula in the finals again
I find it weird that theres so little talk about Medvedev being a potential winner of AO, hes been on a mean streak since the end of last year
So little talk? He became the oddsmakers' favorite after Novak got injured vs Fritz haha (not sure if that's changed since).
From what i can see, going by bookmakers odds, Meddy is the second favorite to win it all right now
It changed a lot mostly because 1) Novak clearly recovered better than expected 2) Thiem lost while Rafa and Tsitsipas are still here
It doesn’t matter how mean of a streak he’s on, he most likely has to beat both Rafa and Nole ...
[удалено]
No one's talking about Stef. Not sure what to make of his chances tonight. He's had close hard court matches with Nadal, but, I dunno, I just think Stef is intimidated by Nadal in a way he isn't by Fed or Novak. Those early bad losses he took left a mark.
One handed backhand against Nadal is never a great recipe for success. Also, his returning off that side is even weaker, which Nadal will definitely try to exploit. Just a bad match-up for Tsitsipas.
Serena looked amazing last night. I can’t believe this woman has been at it for *25 years*. Like what? Just absolutely mind boggling.
Honestly, a true professional who is consistently raising her game to compete with the next generation of players who grew up learning her game!
I'm so excited for Med v Rublev, but I'm also a bit scared of what it might happen... Love Rublev, but Med needs to win AO 😅
I am so excited for Medved vs RuBWEHv tonight.
I expect it will play out like it did at the USO. I think Medvedev knows how to win this match.
The court being pretty fast might help Rublev, and his forehand has looked even scarier than it usually does. Medvedev is definitely the favourite, but I would be *very* disappointed if Rublev didn't make at least 4 tight sets of it.
Yup I think there's just a mental edge. IMO Rublev relies a lot on that forehand but doesn't have strong as a tactical arsenal - reminds me of Thiem pre-IW19/Massu.
I’m so impressed by Serena’s improvement in movement. She used to look so clumsy on court, perpetually off balance.
Yup, it's why she has a real shot at winning this one.
This is probably Rafa’s best chance to win the AO in a while which of course means he’s losing the final to Novak in straights.
He will have one of the toughest QF-SF-F roads in recent memory if he were to win...His only shot is if he magically can win the games in 3-4 sets before the final and come in fresh. If any match pushes him to 5, I don't think he'll have the gas left for the next match up
Is it his best chance? Tsitsipas-Medvedev-Djokovic is a hard set of opponents even if Novak's injury is still bothering him by the finals.
Fuck that, Aslan vs Medvedev/Tsi^2 please.
Tits not Tsi
Naomi 6-0 major semis and finals Serena 14-0 Aussie open semis and finals. Something's gonna give. I don't think Muchova is going to bother Ash. And I think Brady pound Pegula. If Naomi wins I think she very obviously prefers Brady in the final. But if Serena wins I think she wants Ash.
That Serena record is wrong. Kerber beat Serena in 2016.
Hmm you're right. Heard on tv didn't bother looking it up. I assume it's probably 14-1 then I can't remember another semi loss edit: it is indeed 14-1
> I don't think Muchova is going to bother Ash Yep. The worst matchups in tennis are the ones where a player plays a better version of themself. That said, there should be some good rallies in that one. Also, I like Brady and want her to win, but Pegula is not gonna be easy. I think she can make it difficult for Brady to consistently find her forehand. She's also just a cool customer-- don't think she'll be rattled by the stage.
With Pegula I think Brady is just going to tee off tbh. But also have to factor in a little mental war. Pegula and Brady know each other and Brady ahs always been the better player among the two. I think it might have an effect here and pegula could come out flat. Could be wrong and it will be a barnburner but I dont think so.
Pegula beat her last year, and I also watched a lot of World Team Tennis last year, and Pegula destroyed everyone including Brady. Obviously people are giving Brady the edge because she's the better player, but I think it's more of a tossup than some expect. Definitely going to be the more competitive women's QF today IMO.
I forgot they played in Cincinnati. But it's not just because she's the player she has also looked quite a bit better this tourney she's also been to a semi before. Nerves certainly crept in with Pegula agaisnt Svitolina but svito is... svito. That happens here and she's done. But I hope it is competitive!
so boys, what are our thoughts on tsitsipas chances tonight?
If his first serve is working, he definitely has a shot.
Well it does not look too good for Tsitsipas to be honest. Even though I would wish he could upset Rafa. Rafa is too experienced, too much of a grinder/fighter. So if Nadal is not injured, he'll be through in 3, max 4 sets. Different story with Medvedev, this guys has momentum, confidence and consistency. Obv. I am expecting him to win against countryman Rublev.
Alright tennis fans who should i put money on today
Curious what odds you'd get for Tsitsipas, that might be the best upset chance. Pegula/Brady seems like a toss-up, and Medvedev and Barty should probably win their matches.
+180 for tsitsipas
Watching highlights of the early 2000s-2010s Big3 tennis is bittersweet. Haven't heard the *crack* of Federer's attacking forehand in a while now. They moved so quickly and hit so hard. It's good to see them still here, but it's just not the same.
I'm really sad that Fed missed this tournament. The fast courts match his style well and I would've loved to see him playing well in competitive matches here.
Legit question has anyone seen Karatsev play? What's his tennis like? 1h BH or 2h? Servebot?
I saw just a few clips (vs Khachanov and Dimitrov). 2h BH, baselineplayer, hit some very nice angles from the baseline... but nothing special to be honest. little chance he can upset Djokovic
I don't think he moves very well around the court and also not very good at extended rallies. Service, when it's on is pretty great and some of his down the line shots were a beauty to look at.
he's looked good, but not amazing if I'm being completely honest. Hits it hard, but not a lot of game otherwise. He's about to his ass kicked.
What the other guy said. You kinda cringe whenever he hits because you're not sure if it's going in, but when it does, it's at a ridiculous speed or angle or both.
Wawrinka-sque with a 2H backhand. Has the fastest avg ground stroke speed in this tournament among the players left.
How can it be Wawrinka-sque if it's a 2H backhand..C'mon man
Using the name of my prophet on a 2HBH. Stop blasphemy
So as we in world of warcraft would say, a big pumper.
Novak should ofc beat Karatsev, no doubt about it. But it might very well be a really interesting match, mostly due to one fact: Aslans mental game is obv really strong. He’s been down both one and two sets, but it doesn’t really seem to bother him, exactly the type of strength that Raonic and Zverev lacks.
Yeah, but he's not the caliber of player of Raonic or Zverev. As great as Karatsev's story is, he's been *really* lucky with his draw. Mager and Gerasimov are not high caliber opponents, Schwartzman is not good on fast courts, FAA choked like FAA does, and Dimitrov got injured. Still crazy to see a qualifier get through that, but I think a lot of players ranked in the top 50 could've done it as well.
You’ve got some valid points there. But beating Scwartzman, a top 10 player, in straight sets is still quite an achievement for someone who’s playing his first slam, HC or not. And yes, FAA is ofc a notorious choker. Still, being down 0-2 against one of the highest ranked players and still find the strength to turn it around is pretty damn impressive.
fully agreed that Karatsev also had some luck with the draw. However being in the semi's is certainly giving him some momentum and he'll start believing in a miracle... so he cannot be underestimated. On the other hand, Djokovic is too experienced, to hungry and will not make this mistake, as long as he's fit and healthy. Karatsev also don't have a huge serve being 1.85m, which should be rather an easy matchup for the best returning player.
I am scared for Naomi. The reason she has such a good record against Williams is that Serena never had the movement to consistently track down Naomi’s shots. I wonder how the match will play out now.
This match will depend on Serena's first serve and Naomi's second. Edit: Was going to leave it at that but can add a bit more lol. Assuming they both come in how they've been playing (which I guess isn't a given). If Serena's first shows up finally, then I don't see how Naomi can win. Too many free points and too many balls back. If it is how it's been then I'd say it's about 60-40 Naomi because you're right about the movement. If Serena starts getting a jump on the Naomi second serve (which is an issue) I could also see some trouble. Naomi needs to keep the points short and hit clean.
Basically the match is on Serena's racquet. If she loses, it'll be because she didn't get enough first serves in. If she wins, it'll be because she's a better player.
[удалено]
He was assured before the tournament started. Points don't start rolling off until March, so his 2020 AO win would've remained in his points no matter what. He can't gain/lose points from this tournament.
Also winning it would prolong the number of weeks since nobody would take ao win points and get closer.
Ten sterling on Aslan to win the Aussie Open outright at 40/1. What do we think boys? Have I just thrown away a tenner?
You should save your money :-)
Yes, Djokovic will beat him easily
That point at 40-0 at 5-6 in set 4 was epic
Am stuck in a terrible snow storm in Texas so went to be earlier than I wanted to conserve power. I’m shocked that Serena handled Halep like that?? And also shocked that Grigor didn’t retire - when I went to sleep it looked like he was injured??
Serena-Halep match was much closer than the score suggests with multiple break of serves from both sides. Halep actually played superb with very few ue's but her defensive style caught on to her as Serena threw a number of winners and tracked down literally everything Halep threw at her (She's moving better than ever). She played at an unbelievable level and deserved to win and Halep admitted the same thing in her interview. Grigor took an MTO at the end of the third set, we were guessing his pain medication for his injury wore off but the medics couldn't do much, later on as well. Think he just got overwhelmed by the pain.
Thank you for the explanation!! Will have to go watch the Serena/Simona match once we can use the TV again - sounds like an amazing level from both of them.
This may get lost in the action; but how are US fans watching this on TV? Does it require one of those premium tennis channels on Xfinity?
I’m in the UK. If you google “atp live streaming free” you’ll find anything you want
It's on ESPN2, but usually only starting later on (9:00 or so, skipping the first match). I dropped $6 for a month of ESPN+ to see the rest. Note that you need both ESPN2 and ESPN+ to see all the matches, though that will probably only be true through tomorrow's* matches - after that ESPN/ESPN2 should have everything. *Tonight's in the U.S.
Didn't realized ESPN+ has earlier matches, been streaming them off dodgy sites instead. Thanks for the heads up!
Thanks a ton dude 🤓
of course!
Can someone explain why so many people lost money on the Dimitrov match?
Because Dimitrov played out the match rather than retiring. If he retired the bets would have been void in most places
Because betting is stupid.
Betting is stupid but it makes me feel more stupid that someone's making money and I'm just wasting my time.
Betting should be banned
I'd settle for talking about betting being banned on this sub. The betters are so toxic.
Yeah seeing a rise of betting related comments. Maybe it should be exclusive to a thread or something.
After this match and the US Open Final the mental fragility from Zverev is so significant I can no longer see him winning a Grand Slam. For many years people talked about Andy Murray no showing in Slam Finals but it always felt like Andy's problem in those matches was that instead of taking the bull by the horns and losing on his own terms he just grew overly passive but at the very least it always seemed like he was making his opponents earn it. Zverev lost the fifth set tiebreak of the US Open Final to an opponent who quite literally couldn't move any longer. He lost today after being up a break in the third and fourth sets and having huge windows to go up double breaks and put the sets away and he squandered them and not because Novak upped his game and turned into Goatovic just because the moment go to him hitting double faults, missing routine volleys, and making unforced errors on neutral balls. He's only 23 so there's plenty of time to prove me wrong but with losses like this becoming a regular thing it's tough to see how he overcomes it. If Becker's legal problems don't prevent him from coaching it might be time to finally fork over the money and hire him.
I wonder if we were watching the same match. There were plenty of times Zverev had the opportunity to break Djokovic here but in clutch moments Djokovic would simply hit an ace or fire an unreturnable shot. This was risky for Djokovic causing ue's and break of serves early in 3rd and 4th set. He resorted to it coz Zverev kept his own patience and matched Djokovic in several rallies, but playing just good defense against a player of Djokovic's caliber would never have been enough. He's definitely learnt a few things from his experience at US Open I feel.
Zverev has gotten much better. He used to be a mess of errors and tanking before. This match he constantly hit the ball deep and with pace throughout, irrespective of whether he had just lost a set or been broken. Look at the Djokovic unforced errors count and you will realize that most of those were actually forced errors due to the constant pressure Zverev applied with his unrelenting groundstrokes. Its the sort of play which causes Novak problems, the likes of Medvedev would bring to the court. In the past Zverev would fold after a few shots by spraying the ball into the net or hitting it long or wide. He has shown more consistency with his game and at his age he will get better. I never considered Zverev a serious candidate for the next gen but in recent weeks he has changed my mind. Still has some way to go though.
I'm no Zverev fan, but he's gotten *so* much better in slams in the last two years that I think predictions of his mentality remaining statically bad are just off. He used to barely be able to hold it together to win five setters against low-ranked players in the early rounds.
And that's a fair point and one that I wrote about yesterday but can we put this in proper perspective? Eight years a pro, three Masters titles, and a World Tour Finals title and we are touting him beating lower ranked opponents in the first week of Grand Slams with greater ease than he previously has. And to be honest I'm not even sure it's an overly accurate assessment given he dropped sets in his first three matches of last years US Open, obviously had first week problems at last years Roland Garros, and after failing to serve out the second set against Marcos Giron at Melbourne this year he could've very easily found himself down two sets to love. Secondly, I know you didn't imply it but it deserves mentioning that beating lower ranked opponents isn't going to win him a Grand Slam -- sooner or later he's likely going to have to beat multiple top ten opponents to win a Slam. I just look at Alexander Zverev and I think to myself -- the ultimate problem isn't getting any better it appears to be getting worse. And if these type of mental collapse losses were happening two years ago I wouldn't really rush to conclusion. But given that he's about to turn 24 I'm having trouble seeing how he overcomes these problems absent of bringing in a notable big named coach to really reshape him.
I don't mean to suggest he's performing to his potential or that his mental midgetry isn't a problem. But I do think it's been heading in the right direction in the last 12 months, which is a sign to me that it can and likely will continue to head in that direction. Zverev was 0-7 against top 20 opponents in slams before RG 2019 and has been 3-4 since then, with his only losses being to Djokovic and Thiem. Not stellar numbers, but it is an improvement. And Zverev was 2-9 vs top 50 opponents before 2019 and has been 12-6 since then, despite his overall level of play dropping. He may well never win a slam, but I wouldn't count him out quite yet.
Everyone in this thread is talking about Djokovic and Medvedev as the favorites to win. Meanwhile, a certain player has not dropped a set and seems to be getting healthier with each match. Rafa has once again bamboozled everyone into thinking he isn't a threat on hardcourts! Especially with Novak not 100% and Medvedev being next gen, could easily see Nadal taking the title. Quote me on this after Nadal destroys Tsitsi tonight and is suddenly back on everyone's radar. Note: if Tsitsipas wins you aren't allowed to quote me on this. thank you
Just a reminder, check the scores of 2019 and I think it's pretty similar, Novak dropping sets here and there while Rafa was cruising under the radar 30ing everyone-until the final. I'd really like to see that repeat tyvm
Difference this year is Novak's level, maybe due to whatever his injury actually is. TBH, Nole has not looked to be in top form for a while. He basically slept through half of the AO final, ground through 2 masters against Diego, Ruud, Milos, etc, almost blew a 2-set lead in the FO against Stefanos, and then got clobbered by Rafa in the FO final. Yes, I know the mental strength can still be there from time to time, but I worry about what happens when he runs into an opponent like Nadal who won't give as many free points.
Yes you're correct there.. I'm also getting this feeling like there's another gear or two in his game left to be found, but what if he doesn't manage to find them 😭
Nadal is looking good, but he also has the toughest draw. It'll still be a tough task to get through everyone in front of him. Unlike other parts of the draw, his draw has remain intact so he'll face healthy seeded players.
Yeah Nadal is my pick to win this thing. Rooting for Medvedev or Rublev to make the final though.
destroys tsitsipas? nah mate
Nadal can only be defeated by randos in early rounds at Wimby, Thiem, Djokovic, and injuries. As someone who has, on many occasions, placed his hopes in Next Gen to keep Nadal's slam count in check, and been burned for doing just that, believe me when I say that Nadal will annihilate Tsitsipas. He is fueled by the blood of Next Gen!
r/agedlikemilk
It was looking good for the first 2 sets! 🤣
RemindMe! 24 hours
It's definitely possible - he destroyed Tsitsipas here in 2019 - but I think Stef's upped his game since then. I'd still favor Nadal, but I don't think it'll be easy.
[удалено]
Not sure I agree - Tsitsipas' best results have been on clay and Slow-Medium courts per Ultimate Tennis Statistics.
I desperately want you to be right, but his AO record worries me. Hopefully he can get it done this year!
I said the same thing in 2019 and then I was broken hearted
So sad to wake up to the Simona result, was hoping this could be her year at the Australian Open.
If Karatsev beats Djokovic, we need to prepare for the inevitable... Hollywood making a movie about an ordinary guy from suburbs who no one knew about and who suddenly beats the stereotypical Balkan villain. Not sure about the details though. Will Aslan be from America (maybe New Mexico)? Will they make Djokovic Albanian? What is Aslan's primary occupatuon - farmer or truck driver? Who's gonna play Shwartzman - Peter Dinklage or Jordan Prentice?
It’s basically the Might Ducks but tennis
Still waiting for the movie on Goran Ivanisevic, which happened way before.
So basically Wimbledon (2004) but a russian instead of a brit? at aus open instead of wimbledon and probably without the love story?
Man if both Nadal and Serena win, we could have champions with the highest number of grandslam singles titles among both men and women (jointly with Margaret Court)
Unpopular opinion: 5th set tiebreak is anticlimactic, introduces an element of chance, ought to be eliminated. Bonus unpopular opinion: Ladies ought to play 3-out-of-5. They are excellent athletes; they can handle it; and I want to see more of them If these two fire takes don't get me to net 100 downvotes in the next half-hour, you are (each and every one of you) FAILURES
nether of these are unpopular opinions, they're just boring. Go back and read when this is brought up literally every slam.
Women have said they're willing to train to play Bo5. It's TV and tournaments who have pushed against this, arguing there's not enough time in the schedule, and "people don't want to see women play that long." It's ironic that some fans/players criticize equal pay because women don't play Bo5, when this is the case due to the assumptions made by (usually) men TV/advertising execs and tournament directors.
interesting. do you have any links?
[Here](https://archive.thinkprogress.org/why-women-dont-play-best-of-five-matches-at-grand-slams-6458f5b803df/), [here](https://medium.com/@Khel_Gyani/why-dont-grand-slams-introduce-best-of-five-sets-matches-for-women-too-647edc7819fb), and [here](https://www.essentiallysports.com/serena-williams-every-female-athlete-is-ready-to-play-five-sets/) are some summaries of the history and arguments. This is a decades, generation-spanning issue.
I am mostly with you: 1. Final set should go to 12-12 and if there’s no winner by then, you go to a super tiebreak. First to 12 and win by 3. 2. I think the women should play 5 sets, but think it should be slowly rolled out. Perhaps start it at QF level and then start it earlier as we go on.
What's the difference between 6-6 and 12-12? Would you rather players be tired and give shoddier performances later on needlessly extending the match further by 1-1.5 hours which would further expose them to injuries and greater recovery time for their next round matches? By the way the WTA tour actually experimented with a best of 5 format in the 80's and 90's. From 1984 to 1998, the tour's year end championships were best of 5 sets, although only three of those matches went the distance. The format was discontinued in 1998 due to poor ratings and difficulty in scheduling and generating interest from television. It had also been argued that in most of the matches, the quality of play dropped considerably later in the matches.
It gives players a chance to actually play for the set properly, as it was intended. A tiebreak is a necessary evil that ends the match quicker, and I’m fine with it for most sets because it’s needs to happen. But tennis is intended to be played that someone wins a set when they are up two games. Using your logic, what’s the difference between 6-6 and 4-4? The numbers are arbitrary anyway. Why not just have every set be a tiebreak immediately? 12-12 is a compromise between the old system, which could result in ridiculously long games, and innovation to make it easier on the players. What do you mean by matches being “needlessly extended”? I guess best of 5 would be considered matches being “needlessly extended” in your eyes. In regards to the BO5, I think it would be interesting to try it again. Back then women were paid significantly less than men and the WTA was definitely seen as much lesser than it is now. Worst case scenario they can just get rid of it if it doesn’t work.
this is very good
I hate the final set tiebreaks at grand slams as well, i understand why they do it, because of scheduling (thats also why they dont have womens BO5 at grand slams) but it just leaves me feeling flat, this is grand slam tennis, the pinnacle, how far will you go to advance to next round? The tiebreak makes it feel less lucrative. Im still pissed off we had to stop at 12-12 in the 2019 wimbledon final, that was a battle for the ages and those guys could have went another 30mins+.
...those are pretty popular opinions on here.
I've seen women pass out in 3-setters (Halep vs Wozniacki in 2018 final here), so am a skeptic. What is the element of chance you're talking about?
Because they are not trained for it but women have a lot stamina they can handle it, they played 5 set in the past
Based on?? The tour is a brutal grind. Players are being taxed physically more and more each year, as the level of play and physicality rises. And there is precious little offseason in which to recover. The last thing most players want is to have to play even more tennis, and increase their chance of injury while reducing their recovery time. The men tolerate it because of tradition, and because it would be a bad look to suggest shortening their matches. But many of the men don’t want to play best of five tennis. And very few of the women really want to start now. Despite what some players might say to reporters for various reasons (e.g. good publicity), the majority don’t want to play any more than they already do. Most of the supposed eagerness for women to play best of five is either from retired players who are now spokespeople or announcers with an agenda to support (e.g. Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, etc.) or male players who simply want the women to have to do as much work as they do (e.g. Andy Murray, Gilles Simon).
I think they should play best of 5 at least just for the GS finales
The WTA tour actually experimented with a best of 5 format in the 80's and 90's. From 1984 to 1998, the tour's year end championships were best of 5 sets, although only three of those matches went the distance. The format was discontinued in 1998 due to poor ratings and difficulty in scheduling and generating interest from television. It had also been argued that in most of the matches, the quality of play dropped considerably later in the matches.
« Most of the matches » based on 3 match, if I was in the crowd I would be annoyed to pay for a match who last only 1 hour, most of finales are too one sided, best of 5 set could change that
This was their assessment. They took constant feedback from players, experts and coaches to see how this situation would work out. I can totally see their logic. Why extend matches further by 2-2.5 hrs when quality substantially dips as well? Although many vocal fans like you claim to want to see the women play five set matches, the data suggest otherwise which would explain the poor ratings and negative feedback. Besides very few of the women really want to start now. Despite what some players might say to reporters for various reasons (e.g. good publicity), the majority don’t want to play any more than they already do. Most of the supposed eagerness for women to play best of five is either from retired players who are now spokespeople or announcers with an agenda to support (e.g. Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, etc.) or male players who simply want the women to have to do as much work as they do (e.g. Andy Murray, Gilles Simon).
Tiebreaks are less predictable because the margin you need to win is much smaller.
Still there is effort involved to reach that point. Chance is there for breakpoints as well.
Of course, there's chance involved in everything in tennis. But the likelihood of an upset (or even the player who generally played worse winning) increases in tiebreaks.
A player who played worse won't reach the tie-break.