PDA

View Full Version : Who is the best bet for the Australian Open?


klementine79
01-06-2009, 08:42 PM
Here is what Vegas says...

Andy Murray +400

Andy Roddick +4000

David Nalbandian +4000

Ernests Gulbis +4000

Fernando Gonzalez +7500

Gael Monfils +12500

Gilles Simon +5000

James Blake +10000

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga +1500

Juan Martin Del Potro +2500

Lleyton Hewitt +10000

Marcos Baghdatis +10000

Marin Cilic +10000

Nikolay Davydenko +5000

Novak Djokovic +450

Rafael Nadal +300

Richard Gasquet +10000

Roger Federer +180

Tomas Berdych +12500

zx Field (Any Other Player) +1000

GameSampras
01-06-2009, 08:47 PM
At this point.. I would have to put my money on Fed to be honest though I did say Murray earlier but I renig thinking about it. Murray is still unproven in the big time. Though he would be my second choice.

veroniquem
01-06-2009, 08:47 PM
So Federer is the favorite in Vegas if I interpret the odds correctly?

matchmaker
01-06-2009, 08:48 PM
Well, I'd say Murray's chances are as good as Nadal's and maybe even as Fed's. Then again, I do not understand why they consider Murray (400) as a more probable winner than Djokovic (450), who is a former winner and higher on the rankings.
Gulbis has quite a good rating for someone who is rather low on the rankings.
Anyway, these people are specialists at determining the odds, so overall, I feel the appreciations are more or less correct.
The one thing I would not do is estimate Federer's chances that high. I really feel that he goes into the AO with no better chances than Murray or Djokovic.

ThugNasty
01-06-2009, 08:49 PM
i would say a tossup between federer and murray

GameSampras
01-06-2009, 08:50 PM
Im sorry.. But how is Nadal a favorite exactly at the AO? He could easily be taken out by a Del Potro, Gulbis, Djoker, Murray, Simon, Tsonga etc. Just wondering. Hes a good HC player but not great. Maybe he has just as good of a chance as Murry or Fed. But you certainly have to favor Djoker, Murray, and Fed before Nadal. We would have to see the draws first before forming a definite conclusion

klementine79
01-06-2009, 08:56 PM
It is an 'american' style vegas proposition, the actual lines. So federer is +180/100 or 1.8/1 favorite to win, Nadal at +300 is at 3 to 1 , according to the odds makers. If you want to pay off your car, Tomas Berdych is +12500 to win or 125 to 1, so for every $1 you put in you get back $125.

klementine79
01-06-2009, 09:01 PM
If Tsonga is completely healthy, I would go for him, but I just don't see him lasting with his style of play, like Blake, all out for 3setters but not enough for the slams' 5setters, just don't see him enduring, strictly power, although he was in a zone last year. My vote is for Ernests Gulbis. Have been watching him gain confidence, still 20 years old. I think this will be his year.

mrDamien
01-06-2009, 09:47 PM
Rafael Nadal and Lleyton Hewitt in the final.

gj011
01-06-2009, 10:08 PM
With these odds, Djokovic.

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 06:29 AM
Nadal or Murray will win it.

ndtennis
01-07-2009, 09:47 AM
it will be one of the top 3 to win for sure... but its harder to predict who is going to break out this open

NamRanger
01-07-2009, 11:27 AM
Safest bet is Federer, if you want to be risky and hope to get some money, put your money on either Nadal or Murray.



If you are ballsy, I'd pick Nalbandian.

bladepdb
01-07-2009, 01:18 PM
Im sorry.. But how is Nadal a favorite exactly at the AO? He could easily be taken out by a Del Potro, Gulbis, Djoker, Murray, Simon, Tsonga etc. Just wondering. Hes a good HC player but not great. Maybe he has just as good of a chance as Murry or Fed. But you certainly have to favor Djoker, Murray, and Fed before Nadal. We would have to see the draws first before forming a definite conclusion

AO is actually a better ground for Nadal than typical hard courts. The surface is nothing ilke it is at Cincinnati or USO. He performed well on both of thsoe venues, in addition to good performances on other hard courts last year.

So to call Nadal out just because this is a hard court is a pretty ridiculous idea :)

The surface at AO is, if I remember right, Rebound Ace right?

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 01:31 PM
Safest bet is Federer, if you want to be risky and hope to get some money, put your money on either Nadal or Murray.



If you are ballsy, I'd pick Nalbandian.
It's definitely not Federer based on the last 52 weeks. Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal have had better results on the hard courts. Murray did much better the second half of the year and Djokovic/Nadal had the best consistent results all year. Federer is the 4th option.

thejoe
01-07-2009, 01:32 PM
AO is actually a better ground for Nadal than typical hard courts. The surface is nothing ilke it is at Cincinnati or USO. He performed well on both of thsoe venues, in addition to good performances on other hard courts last year.

So to call Nadal out just because this is a hard court is a pretty ridiculous idea :)

The surface at AO is, if I remember right, Rebound Ace right?

I agree that Nadal is one of the likely contenders, and regardless of surface, he now has the aura to beat players almost before they go on court, but using the US Open is a bad example. He had such an easy draw, that I view his semi-final loss to Murray as "falling at the first hurdle" if you will.

It's definitely not Federer based on the last 52 weeks. Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal have had better results on the hard courts. Murray did much better the second half of the year and Djokovic/Nadal had the best consistent results all year. Federer is the 4th option.

I'm not so sure he is fourth. I think Murray, Federer and Djokovic are on a par as it were, with Murray perhaps just in front. I picked Federer, but I may be letting my heart rule my head. Nadal is just not as much of a threat on a hard-court as those three, regardless of last years results.

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 01:41 PM
I'm not so sure he is fourth. I think Murray, Federer and Djokovic are on a par as it were, with Murray perhaps just in front. I picked Federer, but I may be letting my heart rule my head. Nadal is just not as much of a threat on a hard-court as those three, regardless of last years results.
Yeah just ignore last years results? Nadal beat Djokovic the last time they played on hardcourts. Murray might be the favorite but Nadal I would pick second and possibly favorite since the Australian Open is slightly slower then the US Open and he has been on a tear in Doha so far.

thejoe
01-07-2009, 01:47 PM
Yeah just ignore last years results? Nadal beat Djokovic the last time they played on hardcourts. Murray might be the favorite but Nadal I would pick second and possibly favorite since the Australian Open is slightly slower then the US Open and he has been on a tear in Doha so far.

But he has played Santoro and Beck. I'm ignoring last year's results because it was hardly business as usual for Federer, and Djokovic went walkabout for a good portion of the year. Murray also only became a factor over the last few months of the season. Impartial tennis fans would pick both Djokovic and Federer over Nadal on a hardcourt and you know it, you won't just admit it.

seffina
01-07-2009, 01:57 PM
I would say based on current form and recent results, it would be Murray, Federer, Djokovic, and then Nadal.

I think Nadal looks great in his first two matches. He looks very sharp and I hope it will translate into his first hard court slam, but Fed won the last HC slam, Murray has been consistently better than Nadal in the past few months, Nole won the year end Masters Cup (granted no Nadal or Fed) and he is the defending champ.

Not that it matters to me as I'm not the betting kind. It would be awesome for all four to make it to the semis.

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 01:59 PM
But he has played Santoro and Beck. I'm ignoring last year's results because it was hardly business as usual for Federer, and Djokovic went walkabout for a good portion of the year. Murray also only became a factor over the last few months of the season. Impartial tennis fans would pick both Djokovic and Federer over Nadal on a hardcourt and you know it, you won't just admit it.
Nadal would beat Federer if they played at the Australian Open. It is a matchup issue and on slower courts even worse for Federer. Djokovic and Murray would be Nadal's toughest matchups. Djokovic has been going out early a lot. Murray is probably the favorite but I think Nadal can beat him on these slower hard courts of Australia. Similar to Toronto. We'll see.

thejoe
01-07-2009, 02:04 PM
Nadal would beat Federer if they played at the Australian Open. It is a matchup issue and on slower courts even worse for Federer. Djokovic and Murray would be Nadal's toughest matchups. Djokovic has been going out early a lot. Murray is probably the favorite but I think Nadal can beat him on these slower hard courts of Australia. Similar to Toronto. We'll see.

I could see it happening, but I would still put my money on Federer. I see where you are coming from about the matchup issue. What would the plexicushion do to the bounce of the ball? I know it would be fairly consistent, but would it bounce high, or not so much? Because if Nadal's ball doesn't bounce high on the backhand side, that is his main tactic shot out of the air. Could Federer do a Gonzalez and neutralise the threat on the backhand wing?

NamRanger
01-07-2009, 02:13 PM
I could see it happening, but I would still put my money on Federer. I see where you are coming from about the matchup issue. What would the plexicushion do to the bounce of the ball? I know it would be fairly consistent, but would it bounce high, or not so much? Because if Nadal's ball doesn't bounce high on the backhand side, that is his main tactic shot out of the air. Could Federer do a Gonzalez and neutralise the threat on the backhand wing?



Last year it was a slow and low bouncing court, which negated all of Nadal's weapons. Thus why Tsonga absolutely obliterated him.

NamRanger
01-07-2009, 02:14 PM
It's definitely not Federer based on the last 52 weeks. Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal have had better results on the hard courts. Murray did much better the second half of the year and Djokovic/Nadal had the best consistent results all year. Federer is the 4th option.


Yes, just discount the man who won the USO beating both Djokovic and Murray, and has won 13 GS. He's not a favorite at all; he's possibly just the best HC player, ever.

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 02:25 PM
Last year it was a slow and low bouncing court, which negated all of Nadal's weapons. Thus why Tsonga absolutely obliterated him.
Tsonga won because he couldn't miss. Yeah it isn't the highest bouncing courts but I think high enough to give Fed problems. Tsonga has a two-handed backhand and loves the high ball. Nadal just had a horrible day and he is a better player now btw.

thejoe
01-07-2009, 02:28 PM
Tsonga won because he couldn't miss. Yeah it isn't the highest bouncing courts but I think high enough to give Fed problems. Tsonga has a two-handed backhand and loves the high ball. Nadal just had a horrible day and he is a better player now btw.

The way Tsonga played leads me to believe that Nadal at his best still would have been helpless, because as you say, Tsonga loves the high ball, and he couldn't miss that day. What exactly did Nadal do so badly?

Nadal_Freak
01-07-2009, 02:35 PM
The way Tsonga played leads me to believe that Nadal at his best still would have been helpless, because as you say, Tsonga loves the high ball, and he couldn't miss that day. What exactly did Nadal do so badly?
Nadal just didn't play aggressively and relied on getting the ball high on Tsonga. Something that didn't bother him. He let Tsonga dictate and his serve looked more attackable at that time. Different motion that wasn't as good.

vmosrafa08
01-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Andy Murray- Strong performance against Federer and Nadal. 2008 has been a great year for him, and 2009 certainly will. He doesn't have experience however, so he most likely will not win AO 2009. He will get far, though.

Andy Roddick- Andy Roddick has had good years, but it is unlikely that he will win AO 2009. It is one of his last chances to win a grand slam, but his mentality and game need to improve.

Roger Federer- Being one Grand Slam behind Sampras, he definitely has a lot of motivation. However, he recently lost to Murray (as Nadal did), and lost to Djokovic in AO 2008. He will definitely get to the semi finals or the finals, and has a possibility of winning.

Ernests Gulbis- He ended 2008 as no. 53. He recently beat Djokovic for a variety of reasons, but he does not have a real chance of winning. He does not have the experience, or the game needed to win a grand slam.

Novak Djokovic- He won AO 2008, which makes him one of the best canditates. He also won the Masters Cup series in Shanghai. His loss to Gulbis might be a setback, but he definitely can win the AO again in 2009. His new gear (racquet and shoes) are definitely a factor. He has to get used to them, and actually win.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga- Lost to Djokovic in 2008, however, he beat Djokovic a couple of times after that. He says that he can possibly be no. 1 in 2009, and that he is ready for a great season. He has a lot of confidence, and a lot of skill. He can definitely get far in AO 2009.

Rafael Nadal- Lost to Tsonga in 2008. He is very weak on hard courts, and it is very unlikely that he will win. He needs to flatten out his forehand to be successful on hard courts. He will get far in AO 2009, but he will not win.

Other- There are many talented tennis players out there, who definitely have a chance to get far in AO 2009, or even win it. However, the people listed above definitely have a greater chance of winning.

veroniquem
01-07-2009, 04:40 PM
Andy Murray- Strong performance against Federer and Nadal. 2008 has been a great year for him, and 2009 certainly will. He doesn't have experience however, so he most likely will not win AO 2009. He will get far, though.

Andy Roddick- Andy Roddick has had good years, but it is unlikely that he will win AO 2009. It is one of his last chances to win a grand slam, but his mentality and game need to improve.

Roger Federer- Being one Grand Slam behind Sampras, he definitely has a lot of motivation. However, he recently lost to Murray (as Nadal did), and lost to Djokovic in AO 2008. He will definitely get to the semi finals or the finals, and has a possibility of winning.

Ernests Gulbis- He ended 2008 as no. 53. He recently beat Djokovic for a variety of reasons, but he does not have a real chance of winning. He does not have the experience, or the game needed to win a grand slam.

Novak Djokovic- He won AO 2008, which makes him one of the best canditates. He also won the Masters Cup series in Shanghai. His loss to Gulbis might be a setback, but he definitely can win the AO again in 2009. His new gear (racquet and shoes) are definitely a factor. He has to get used to them, and actually win.

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga- Lost to Djokovic in 2008, however, he beat Djokovic a couple of times after that. He says that he can possibly be no. 1 in 2009, and that he is ready for a great season. He has a lot of confidence, and a lot of skill. He can definitely get far in AO 2009.

Rafael Nadal- Lost to Tsonga in 2008. He is very weak on hard courts, and it is very unlikely that he will win. He needs to flatten out his forehand to be successful on hard courts. He will get far in AO 2009, but he will not win.

Other- There are many talented tennis players out there, who definitely have a chance to get far in AO 2009, or even win it. However, the people listed above definitely have a greater chance of winning.
About Murray, one doesn't have experience until one gets a big win and starts building up on that. I think Murray is ready for a big win.
About Tsonga, he really said he was going to be #1? Wow, getting ahead of himself isn't he with his 2 titles in tow? Good luck to him, he's sure gonna need truckloads of it!
About Nadal, "very weak" may be a tad exaggerated. I'm sure a lot of players would love to be so weak on hard as to win Indian Wells, Madrid, Toronto, Montreal, Dubai and the Olympics in the course of their career! Last year's semis were his best result so far at AO and USO, no reason to think that he cannot go 1 better in the near future...

bladepdb
01-07-2009, 05:56 PM
I'm not a big Murray fan but I certainly wouldn't discredit him as a player without much experience. Sure compared to Nadal and Fed who have had so many Slam finals, he pales in comparison, but look at Djokovic. His highlight of 07 was his finals appearance at USO, and it showed when he played those big points poorly. Murray in 08 is comparable, IMO, to Djoker in 07 (I'll be honest, I don't know Djoker's highlights in 07 except a couple of Masters titles and the USO finals and semis at Wimby).

So, by that logic, Djoker was pretty inexperienced going into AO 08, but look what he did there....

My point? If Djoker won AO 08, Murray has a terrific chance of taking AO 09.

kelz
01-07-2009, 06:01 PM
Federer. Murray's got a pretty strong chance if his draw isn't too bad.

Gugafan
01-07-2009, 09:44 PM
The reason I choose Murray is because he has dominated the top 3 recently, stringing consecutive wins against each player.

In addition, his game shows the greatest improvement in that he has been able to 'add weapons' to an already solid game that he possesses. For example, Murrays serve has become bigger allowing him to win many more cheap points even moreso then Federer and Djokovic.

Providing Murray can hold it together mentally, I cannot see him getting beat at Australia.

drakulie
01-07-2009, 09:51 PM
It's definitely not Federer based on the last 52 weeks. Djokovic, Murray, and Nadal have had better results on the hard courts. Murray did much better the second half of the year and Djokovic/Nadal had the best consistent results all year. Federer is the 4th option.

Uhmmm, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, and Tsonga have had better reults than Rafa on hard courts.

P_Agony
01-08-2009, 12:59 AM
Nadal would beat Federer if they played at the Australian Open. It is a matchup issue and on slower courts even worse for Federer. Djokovic and Murray would be Nadal's toughest matchups. Djokovic has been going out early a lot. Murray is probably the favorite but I think Nadal can beat him on these slower hard courts of Australia. Similar to Toronto. We'll see.

There is something in what you say, but you are forgetting one thing - Federer usually plays his best tennis in Australia (aside of 2008). Nadal however is usually gone by the surprise finalist.

It's a matter of draw though. If Federer has Djokovic in his side I believe Federer goes to the final and wins it, probably against Murray (but possibly Nadal too). However, if Nadal gets Djokovic on his side Federer has a 50% chance to lose in the semis and Nadal has a big chance to go to the final.

However, if both Murray and Djokovic are in the semis, I like Federer's chances a bit more than Nadal's. Federer can deal with Djokovic, and he's proven he can beat Murray on the big stage.

I'm ignoring here guys like Del Potro and Tsonga, guys who Federer beat quite easily in Madrid, but Nadal may run into trouble with these guys. Simon, on the other hand, can be fatal for Federer if both of them meet. This is going to be one interesting event, but I don't think a Federer/Nadal final is likely.

veroniquem
01-08-2009, 01:09 AM
The way Tsonga played leads me to believe that Nadal at his best still would have been helpless, because as you say, Tsonga loves the high ball, and he couldn't miss that day. What exactly did Nadal do so badly?
Tsonga won't duplicate that kind of form that easily and Nadal will be better prepared for the challenge.

Rten10
01-08-2009, 06:19 AM
I say Federer...his U.S. Open win I'm sure was a huge confidence booster for him and that's what he really needed to stop his Grand Slam slump. As long as he is healthy I think that he'll win.

rosenstar
01-08-2009, 06:45 AM
I say Fed over gulbis, or some other up and coming player in the finals, but it depends on the draw

LordRaceR
01-08-2009, 08:40 AM
The odds are pretty bang on. Between top 4, Federer has maybe the best chance if motivated enough and if his doesn’t play against Nadal or Djkokovic, and I think he won’ t have to. After his injures, I doubt that Nadal can go all the way. Djokovic isn’t prepared enough and if he has problems with new racquet, we will be out in the first week. After Fed, Murray has good chance because his recently top form. Other those that, Tsonga, Gulbis, Roddick, Nalbandian etc. have pretty much equal chance.

swedechris
01-08-2009, 08:52 AM
nadal may suffer now after losing to monfils but in a 5 set match he will fare better . i think he can make the semis or even the final. win it.. no. fed or murray will take it .

thejoe
01-08-2009, 09:10 AM
Tsonga won't duplicate that kind of form that easily and Nadal will be better prepared for the challenge.

THERE IS A SPOILER IN HERE! IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE RESULT OF THE NADAL MATCH THEN LOOK AWAY NOW AND DON'T READ THIS POST!

Yes, but if he meets someone like that (the same way he did today with Monfils) what could he do? I honestly don't think he could have done anything better, or differently against Tsonga. Its the same today, he didn't play badly, and from what I have read, he didn't make many errors at all. If you don't make errors, but still don't win the match, then you have to assume you were beaten by the better player, instead of it being your fault. He could be prepared for it (another Tsonga-esque onslaught), but I don't think he has a plan B, which is why I don't feel he will stay Number 1 for long. As Number 1, you have a target on your back, and you will often meet players who will swing for the fence against you.

TennisLover17
01-08-2009, 10:41 AM
BERDYCHHHHHHHHHH.

Nah I'd put it on Djoko. Good odds if he defends.

veroniquem
01-08-2009, 07:39 PM
THERE IS A SPOILER IN HERE! IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE RESULT OF THE NADAL MATCH THEN LOOK AWAY NOW AND DON'T READ THIS POST!

Yes, but if he meets someone like that (the same way he did today with Monfils) what could he do? I honestly don't think he could have done anything better, or differently against Tsonga. Its the same today, he didn't play badly, and from what I have read, he didn't make many errors at all. If you don't make errors, but still don't win the match, then you have to assume you were beaten by the better player, instead of it being your fault. He could be prepared for it (another Tsonga-esque onslaught), but I don't think he has a plan B, which is why I don't feel he will stay Number 1 for long. As Number 1, you have a target on your back, and you will often meet players who will swing for the fence against you.
What I meant is that you don't play "in the zone" every time. It's the same for Monfils today, he won't always play that well. The second time Tsonga met Rafa on hard, he lost. Also Tsonga'd better pray to not be on Fed's side at AO as Fed has no trouble taking care of Tsonga (as we saw in their last match which wasn't even close). Tennis is very much a question of matchups. Even if Tsonga could upset Nadal again, there are quite a few players that could beat him before that had a chance to happen...
About the #1, even though Nadal is less regular on hard, he's phenomenal on the other surfaces (grass and clay). That's where a lot of his points come from, for that reason I think he has a good shot at staying #1 especially since IMO in the near future hard court will be dominated by a handful of players and not just one guy (as was the case during Fed's peak years).

rommil
01-08-2009, 10:05 PM
THERE IS A SPOILER IN HERE! IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE RESULT OF THE NADAL MATCH THEN LOOK AWAY NOW AND DON'T READ THIS POST!

Yes, but if he meets someone like that (the same way he did today with Monfils) what could he do? I honestly don't think he could have done anything better, or differently against Tsonga. Its the same today, he didn't play badly, and from what I have read, he didn't make many errors at all. If you don't make errors, but still don't win the match, then you have to assume you were beaten by the better player, instead of it being your fault. He could be prepared for it (another Tsonga-esque onslaught), but I don't think he has a plan B, which is why I don't feel he will stay Number 1 for long. As Number 1, you have a target on your back, and you will often meet players who will swing for the fence against you.
Hardcourts joe. Hardly a spoiler.

Lendl and Federer Fan
01-09-2009, 12:14 AM
It is going to be Murray all the way. :twisted::)

1Sampras
01-09-2009, 12:19 AM
Federer is by far the clear favorite to win the Ausi open. The only chance for Murray,Nadal,Djoker is if Federer looses in an early round.

edmondsm
01-09-2009, 12:28 AM
Yeah just ignore last years results? Nadal beat Djokovic the last time they played on hardcourts. Murray might be the favorite but Nadal I would pick second and possibly favorite since the Australian Open is slightly slower then the US Open and he has been on a tear in Doha so far.


Nadal is 4th favorite at best. That guy can lose to anyone hot john-doe at the AO. Just see the last 3 years.

Greenfin Beta
01-09-2009, 01:33 AM
i think the more interesting question is "who is going to be the surprise finalist?" or is there already a thread on this?

thejoe
01-09-2009, 06:01 AM
What I meant is that you don't play "in the zone" every time. It's the same for Monfils today, he won't always play that well. The second time Tsonga met Rafa on hard, he lost. Also Tsonga'd better pray to not be on Fed's side at AO as Fed has no trouble taking care of Tsonga (as we saw in their last match which wasn't even close). Tennis is very much a question of matchups. Even if Tsonga could upset Nadal again, there are quite a few players that could beat him before that had a chance to happen...
About the #1, even though Nadal is less regular on hard, he's phenomenal on the other surfaces (grass and clay). That's where a lot of his points come from, for that reason I think he has a good shot at staying #1 especially since IMO in the near future hard court will be dominated by a handful of players and not just one guy (as was the case during Fed's peak years).

I agree to an extent, but you seem to be missing what I am saying. Someone like Murray or Federer tactically have more options. They both have big serves, and they both volley well. They would be able to do things differently against someone on a hot streak. I agree that he has a good shot at staying #1, but I don't feel confident enough to put money on it. I think it all depends on his grass court season. He should dominate the clay-court season like he normally does, but he isn't as unbeatable on grass as he is on clay. If he doesn't retain Wimbledon, he'll struggle to stay #1.

Zaragoza
01-09-2009, 06:10 AM
I agree that Nadal is one of the likely contenders, and regardless of surface, he now has the aura to beat players almost before they go on court, but using the US Open is a bad example. He had such an easy draw, that I view his semi-final loss to Murray as "falling at the first hurdle" if you will.



I'm not so sure he is fourth. I think Murray, Federer and Djokovic are on a par as it were, with Murray perhaps just in front. I picked Federer, but I may be letting my heart rule my head. Nadal is just not as much of a threat on a hard-court as those three, regardless of last years results.

Querrey and Fish were playing very well at the USO, they were tough opponents. Fish showed in Indian Wells what he's able to do when he's on fire like he was at the USO. Nadal also made the semis at the AO without dropping a set. He was the most solid player in the hardcourt Slams before the semifinals.

Zaragoza
01-09-2009, 06:18 AM
THERE IS A SPOILER IN HERE! IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE RESULT OF THE NADAL MATCH THEN LOOK AWAY NOW AND DON'T READ THIS POST!

Yes, but if he meets someone like that (the same way he did today with Monfils) what could he do? I honestly don't think he could have done anything better, or differently against Tsonga. Its the same today, he didn't play badly, and from what I have read, he didn't make many errors at all. If you don't make errors, but still don't win the match, then you have to assume you were beaten by the better player, instead of it being your fault. He could be prepared for it (another Tsonga-esque onslaught), but I don't think he has a plan B, which is why I don't feel he will stay Number 1 for long.

Nadal played badly against Monfils, not even close to an average day. I don't know whom you read but that's the worst I've seen Nadal play in a long time. He has always had some off days at the start of the season. If he can step up his game and regain his Toronto-Beijing form from last year serving well and being aggressive, he stands a chance.

ksbh
01-09-2009, 06:21 AM
I very much hope that match-up happens! I'd love to see Federer lay the beatdown on Jo Willy, just as he did the last time they played!

What I meant is that you don't play "in the zone" every time. It's the same for Monfils today, he won't always play that well. The second time Tsonga met Rafa on hard, he lost. Also Tsonga'd better pray to not be on Fed's side at AO as Fed has no trouble taking care of Tsonga (as we saw in their last match which wasn't even close).

veroniquem
01-09-2009, 06:58 AM
Nadal played badly against Monfils, not even close to an average day. I don't know whom you read but that's the worst I've seen Nadal play in a long time. He has always had some off days at the start of the season. If he can step up his game and regain his Toronto-Beijing form from last year serving well and being aggressive, he stands a chance.
Did he really play that badly? I couldn't see the match yesterday but from people's comments I understood that Monfils played the match of his life. Anyway I thought Monfils was the toughest draw in the quarters (for the top seeds), too bad for Nadal.

jaggy
01-09-2009, 07:00 AM
I dont think Monfils will win but he is a great outside bet.

thejoe
01-09-2009, 07:07 AM
Querrey and Fish were playing very well at the USO, they were tough opponents. Fish showed in Indian Wells what he's able to do when he's on fire like he was at the USO. Nadal also made the semis at the AO without dropping a set. He was the most solid player in the hardcourt Slams before the semifinals.

I don't care what you say, Mardy Fish and Sam Querrey do not qualify as hard draws. Nadal was consistent because of his opposition:

Australian Open:

Victor Troicki, Florent Serra, Gilles Simon (not playing like the end-of-year Simon), Mathieu (who retired hurt), Nieminen, and then lost to Tsonga in straight sets

US Open:

Bjorn Phau, Deheart, Troicki, Querrey, Fish, and then lost to Murray

He was consistent at the US Open because he didn't play a seeded player until the semi-finals, where he promptly lost. It was the same at the Australian Open, he lost to the first player to provide him any sort of challenge. Sounds like the play of a true hardcourt champion :roll:

Zaragoza
01-09-2009, 07:25 AM
I don't care what you say, Mardy Fish and Sam Querrey do not qualify as hard draws. Nadal was consistent because of his opposition:

Australian Open:

Victor Troicki, Florent Serra, Gilles Simon (not playing like the end-of-year Simon), Mathieu (who retired hurt), Nieminen, and then lost to Tsonga in straight sets

US Open:

Bjorn Phau, Deheart, Troicki, Querrey, Fish, and then lost to Murray

He was consistent at the US Open because he didn't play a seeded player until the semi-finals, where he promptly lost. It was the same at the Australian Open, he lost to the first player to provide him any sort of challenge. Sounds like the play of a true hardcourt champion :roll:

You sure typed a lot for not caring about what I said.
AO: Troicki was a dangerous 1st round, Simon was a good player regardless of what you say, Mathieu was being punished by Nadal as usual, Nieminen beat the guy who beat Roddick (where does it leave Roddick then?)

USO: Troicki beat Roddick one month before the USO and Nadal destroyed him. Querrey liteterally destroyed Berdych at the USO. Fish beat both Blake and Monfils in straight sets, he was on fire at the USO.
I know you would consider Robredo (5 sets against Djokovic), Andreev (5 sets against Federer) and Melzer (5 sets against Murray) easy opponents if they had played Nadal, typical double standards from Nadal haters.
Maybe you want to check Federerīs draw in Roland Garros as well.
Besides that, Nadal beat Djokovic and Murray on hardcourts last year.
This reminds me those Nadal haters saying that Nadal reached the Wimbledon final in 2006 and 2007 because his draw was a joke and he was lucky. I guess 2008 was a great lesson for them.

thejoe
01-09-2009, 09:13 AM
You sure typed a lot for not caring about what I said.
AO: Troicki was a dangerous 1st round, Simon was a good player regardless of what you say, Mathieu was being punished by Nadal as usual, Nieminen beat the guy who beat Roddick (where does it leave Roddick then?)

USO: Troicki beat Roddick one month before the USO and Nadal destroyed him. Querrey liteterally destroyed Berdych at the USO. Fish beat both Blake and Monfils in straight sets, he was on fire at the USO.
I know you would consider Robredo (5 sets against Djokovic), Andreev (5 sets against Federer) and Melzer (5 sets against Murray) easy opponents if they had played Nadal, typical double standards from Nadal haters.
Maybe you want to check Federerīs draw in Roland Garros as well.
Besides that, Nadal beat Djokovic and Murray on hardcourts last year.
This reminds me those Nadal haters saying that Nadal reached the Wimbledon final in 2006 and 2007 because his draw was a joke and he was lucky. I guess 2008 was a great lesson for them.

"I don't care what you say" was regarding the inevitable excuses that you were going to throw my way, claiming that Troicki etc. pose a real threat. This has nothing to do with his draws at Wimbledon, all I'm saying is that he isn't a hard-court God. I wouldn't consider those above draws tough (Robredo, Andreev etc.), but I would call them bad match-ups stylistically, and form-wise. Nadal did not have difficult draws at the hard-court slams and I can't believe you are maintaining that he did. Sure, Federer didn't have a particularly tough draw at Roland Garros, but I didn't make the comment that he was the most consistent player at the clay-court tournaments before the final, did I?

SempreSami
01-09-2009, 09:34 AM
Murray is the form player but Federer still has the Grand Slam winning pedigree.

World Beater
01-09-2009, 09:53 AM
murray is the bandwagon favorite.

alienhamster
01-09-2009, 10:14 AM
I still think Nadal has underperformed at the Aus Open. He does fantastic on slow courts and, keep in mind, he's one of the best (if not THE best) best of 5-set players on tour. He's had a history of being injured or running into a crazy buzzsaw (i.e. Tsonga, who would have beaten anyone playing like that).

If he's healthy and can avoid any bad early matchups (e.g. Gulbis), I think he's going to win this year.

Oui, c'est moi.
01-09-2009, 12:53 PM
Have the odds changed (after today's match)?

Leublu tennis
01-09-2009, 05:22 PM
I am sure the odds have changed and Murray is looking better.

Tony Sideway
01-10-2009, 03:30 AM
Andy Murray for me, playing great....

Sentinel
01-10-2009, 04:50 AM
i think the more interesting question is "who is going to be the surprise finalist?" or is there already a thread on this?
Surprise finalist? Federer. And surprise winner, too.

No way Murray can last 4 or 5 setters. Although, they do get a break every other day, but still ...

Blinkism
01-09-2010, 11:12 PM
Look familiar?

:lol:

Bump!

joeri888
01-10-2010, 12:48 AM
At this point the best bet is probably Davydenko.

fps
01-10-2010, 02:26 AM
Aussie Open 2010 final -Murray vs Djokovic.

rafan
01-10-2010, 03:02 AM
This sounds exactly like the predictions for last year's AO. I don't think for sure any of us have a clue. Nadal may well get it but there is always the chance he won't after his upset last year. Federer is not playing well at all and Murray is always the main runner but can he deliver this time? We have waited and waited.

fps
01-10-2010, 03:14 AM
This sounds exactly like the predictions for last year's AO.

:):):):twisted:

Davy_for _GOAT
01-10-2010, 03:16 AM
Aussie Open 2010 final -Murray vs Djokovic.

No, Djokovic goes out in the 4th round to Stepanek.

Ask the experts

AO-4th round
FO-SF
W-4th round
USO-4th round

namelessone
01-10-2010, 03:32 AM
My favourites for AO according to form:

1)DelPo-sure,we haven't seen him since WTF but with that massive serve and booming forehands he is a definite favourite here. Plus you have to remember that he took Nadal and Fed out so confidence won't be a issue if he meets them. And his stamina has got better

2)Federer-even though his form doesn't look great right now we all know Fed is a beast at Slams and I have no reason to think that he won't make at least semi's here. And you have to remember that he is playing for bonuses right now,he has achieved most of what he set out to do. Perhaps this relaxed attitude+the importance of a slam will make him play better than in the mickey mouse tournaments.

3)Djoker-he is a great player on HC,has the weapons for it and we know that he can take it to most HC players. I place him third because I still worry about his stamina in the hot australian sun.

4)Nadal-he is the reigning champion after that tremendous effort last year but tehnically speaking,HC isn't his thing.Plus,he is just starting to get into his groove right now,he is starting to look like a top10 player unlike the end of last year. If he can avoid the likes of delpo or djoker I can see Rafa making semi's and maybe with a bit of luck maybe even the final,where anything can happen.

5)Davydenko-king of the three setters it seems. He has beaten Fedal twice in a row so I think he will fancy his chances here but I doubt his five set ability. He is the man to beat right now so it will be a very interesting AO for him.

6)Murray-he has been out of the spotlight and that might be a good thing for him. He has recovered from his wrist injury and will enjoy his underdog status. He is somewhat of a darkhorse if you will

Telepatic
01-10-2010, 03:38 AM
No, Djokovic goes out in the 4th round to Stepanek.

Ask the experts

AO-4th round
FO-SF
W-4th round
USO-4th round


Hahah, could've gone with some third rounds as well..

batz
01-10-2010, 03:52 AM
This sounds exactly like the predictions for last year's AO. I don't think for sure any of us have a clue. Nadal may well get it but there is always the chance he won't after his upset last year. Federer is not playing well at all and Murray is always the main runner but can he deliver this time? We have waited and waited.

A couple of points if I may:

1. Murray has never been THE favourite to win a slam with any bookie, ever. The closest he got was co-fave for a short time with Roger at last year's AO. "Murray is always a slam favourite" is a TW meme with no basis in fact.

2. Murray has only been in the top 4 since the last quarter of 2008. He has entered 4 slam events since then. So the 'waiting and waiting' you allude to has lasted all of 12 months and 4 events. It's hardly Mandela on Robben Island now is it.

fps
01-10-2010, 04:06 AM
My favourites for AO according to form:

1)DelPo-sure,we haven't seen him since WTF but with that massive serve and booming forehands he is a definite favourite here. Plus you have to remember that he took Nadal and Fed out so confidence won't be a issue if he meets them. And his stamina has got better

2)Federer-even though his form doesn't look great right now we all know Fed is a beast at Slams and I have no reason to think that he won't make at least semi's here. And you have to remember that he is playing for bonuses right now,he has achieved most of what he set out to do. Perhaps this relaxed attitude+the importance of a slam will make him play better than in the mickey mouse tournaments.

3)Djoker-he is a great player on HC,has the weapons for it and we know that he can take it to most HC players. I place him third because I still worry about his stamina in the hot australian sun.

4)Nadal-he is the reigning champion after that tremendous effort last year but tehnically speaking,HC isn't his thing.Plus,he is just starting to get into his groove right now,he is starting to look like a top10 player unlike the end of last year. If he can avoid the likes of delpo or djoker I can see Rafa making semi's and maybe with a bit of luck maybe even the final,where anything can happen.

5)Davydenko-king of the three setters it seems. He has beaten Fedal twice in a row so I think he will fancy his chances here but I doubt his five set ability. He is the man to beat right now so it will be a very interesting AO for him.

6)Murray-he has been out of the spotlight and that might be a good thing for him. He has recovered from his wrist injury and will enjoy his underdog status. He is somewhat of a darkhorse if you will

i couldn't possibly put murray below rafa and davydenko. while we know what rafa can do, and he is a great champion, indeed the defending champion, i think that was the best he will ever play on hards and i don't see him doing the same this time, even though it's a slow hard surface. his knees are a doubt still, his confidence is down, he's the dark horse because of all the question marks.

davydenko hasn't made a slam final, his stamina over 5 sets is unknown after his injury setbacks and being 28 now. maintaining his level for 3-5 sets for 7 matches when he doesn't have that one big shots that can get him out of trouble, a DelPo serve or Fed forehand, is difficult, so I see the semi-finals as being his best possible result.

murray has made a slam final on hard, unlike davy, and made a semi at wimbledon recently too, plus he's won a lot of tournaments last year and plays his best when coming back from injury, which he will be doing. as long as he's not overtrained in the off-season, i see him as a definite top 4 favourite for the title, and i feel that he has del potro's number if they should meet in the semi-finals.

dlk
01-10-2010, 04:11 AM
Looking right now, you gotta say Davy's chances are up there w/Fed/Nadal. I place him above Djokovic, Murray, Tsonga, etc.. in terms of odds to win.

sosa09
01-10-2010, 04:24 AM
and del potro? i think he is going to win or murray... stupid vegas

chanee
01-10-2010, 04:26 AM
No, Djokovic goes out in the 4th round to Stepanek.

Ask the experts

I thought you dissapeared? Dr. Kalgari. ;)

rafan
01-10-2010, 06:03 AM
A couple of points if I may:

1. Murray has never been THE favourite to win a slam with any bookie, ever. The closest he got was co-fave for a short time with Roger at last year's AO. "Murray is always a slam favourite" is a TW meme with no basis in fact.

2. Murray has only been in the top 4 since the last quarter of 2008. He has entered 4 slam events since then. So the 'waiting and waiting' you allude to has lasted all of 12 months and 4 events. It's hardly Mandela on Robben Island now is it.

Well he is here in the uk. Its slam fever as far as Murray is concerned/ I don't give a toss what the bookies think. Tennis isn't a horse race

djokovicgonzalez2010
01-10-2010, 06:22 AM
Why is Gulbis in this poll???

joeri888
01-10-2010, 06:31 AM
What I miss in yoour analysis people, is ODDS. Best bet is all about weighing value AND likelyhood. Not just who you think will win.

Blinkism
01-10-2010, 06:33 AM
Why is Gulbis in this poll???

This thread is from 2009.

That still doesn't explain how Gulbis got on the poll, I know. I just bumped this thread to illustrate how inaccurate most of the prediction trends are on this site.

joeri888
01-10-2010, 06:35 AM
This thread is from 2009.

That still doesn't explain how Gulbis got on the poll, I know. I just bumped this thread to illustrate how inaccurate most of the prediction trends are on this site.

Predicting is hard. Davydenko of now, was Murray last year. I would probably go with Federer if all odds are even, just because he always goes deep, and delivers something special more often than letting you down in a Slam.

fps
01-10-2010, 06:35 AM
Well he is here in the uk. Its slam fever as far as Murray is concerned/ I don't give a toss what the bookies think. Tennis isn't a horse race

er, the favourite for a tournament is definitely about what the bookies think, because the amount of money put on a player determines who is the favourite. the press have nothing to do with it, he's not getting all this coverage because he's the outright favourite, it's because he might conceivably win a slam and he's british.

JeMar
01-10-2010, 06:38 AM
Why is Gulbis in this poll???

Serendipitous needs something to vote for.

Blinkism
01-10-2010, 06:48 AM
Predicting is hard. Davydenko of now, was Murray last year. I would probably go with Federer if all odds are even, just because he always goes deep, and delivers something special more often than letting you down in a Slam.

I always go with the mantra "once a champion, always a champion" and that's where the "easy" bets come from.

So, if we go by that logic- the favorites should be Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Del Potro

All proven slam champs with HC slams to their names

batz
01-10-2010, 07:47 AM
I always go with the mantra "once a champion, always a champion" and that's where the "easy" bets come from.

So, if we go by that logic- the favorites should be Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, and Del Potro

All proven slam champs with HC slams to their names

That's why I stuck a tenner on Rafa @ 6/1 last week - crazy odds IMO.

batz
01-10-2010, 07:49 AM
Well he is here in the uk. Its slam fever as far as Murray is concerned/ I don't give a toss what the bookies think. Tennis isn't a horse race

Who in the UK makes Murray favourite to win the AO apart from Simon Reed?

joeri888
01-10-2010, 08:33 AM
That's why I stuck a tenner on Rafa @ 6/1 last week - crazy odds IMO.

Those are good odds yes. I think odds are that Federer or Nadal will win. I think I might put some money on both. If one of them wins I'll still make profit.

dlk
01-10-2010, 09:08 AM
Call me crazy, but I took the field over Fed/Nadal.

NamRanger
01-10-2010, 09:16 AM
That's why I stuck a tenner on Rafa @ 6/1 last week - crazy odds IMO.



You probably should have waited for the draw to be released. If Nadal gets Soderling, Del Potro, Djokovic, or Davydenko in his draw it's very likely he doesn't win the whole thing.

Anaconda
01-10-2010, 09:20 AM
In terms of profit then Nalbandian, you would get good cash back and Nalbandian has got the game to win. No matter what the draw is.

joeri888
01-10-2010, 09:20 AM
Call me crazy, but I took the field over Fed/Nadal.

It depends on the odds you get. On most sites atm I think the odds for Rafa and Roger are quite decent, so I think the odds for the field won't be anything spectacular. Me myself I'm probably gonna bet on Fedal over the field.

mandy01
01-10-2010, 09:21 AM
Everyone always underestimates Droopy :cry:

NamRanger
01-10-2010, 09:21 AM
I took the field this one over Federer/Nadal since the odds are stacked against the field once again fairly badly.

Cesc Fabregas
01-10-2010, 09:27 AM
Nadal needs to avoid Del Potro and maybe Djokovic but Djoker could welt under the heat again.

Claudius
01-10-2010, 09:28 AM
Davydenko!

TMF
01-10-2010, 09:34 AM
Nadal needs to avoid Del Potro and maybe Djokovic but Djoker could welt under the heat again.

You forgot Soderling. Just b/c Rafa beat him in exo. doesn't mean he isn't a threat to him. You seem to forget too quickly...Davy just beat Rafa 24 hrs ago, he's owned Rafa on hardcourt.

Cesc Fabregas
01-10-2010, 09:38 AM
You forgot Soderling. Just b/c Rafa beat him in exo. doesn't mean he isn't a threat to him. You seem to forget too quickly...Davy just beat Rafa 24 hrs ago, he's owned Rafa on hardcourt.

Forget Davydenko beating Nadal in a slam, its not happening. Davydenko has never beaten anyone of note in a slam, and hasn't been to a slam semi for 3 years. Soderling beat an injured Nadal, no way does Soderling beat a healthy Nadal in a slam.

dlk
01-10-2010, 09:46 AM
Forget Davydenko beating Nadal in a slam, its not happening. Davydenko has never beaten anyone of note in a slam, and hasn't been to a slam semi for 3 years. Soderling beat an injured Nadal, no way does Soderling beat a healthy Nadal in a slam.

I see your reasoning, but would you say Davy is not now playing the best in his career? Or do you believe he peaked/playing his best tennis in 06?

joeri888
01-10-2010, 09:49 AM
Forget Davydenko beating Nadal in a slam, its not happening. Davydenko has never beaten anyone of note in a slam, and hasn't been to a slam semi for 3 years. Soderling beat an injured Nadal, no way does Soderling beat a healthy Nadal in a slam.

Davy is at the peak of his career imo atm. Davydenko beat Federer in TMF, which Fed really wanted to win I think. I would always bet on Federer or Nadal when they face Davydenko, but sure you gotta say he's got a chance this time.

I can see Soderling beating Nadal in a HC Slam as well. Guys like Murray, Del potro, Gonzalez, Tsonga have done it as well. Verdasco came mighty close.

TMF
01-10-2010, 09:49 AM
Forget Davydenko beating Nadal in a slam, its not happening. Davydenko has never beaten anyone of note in a slam, and hasn't been to a slam semi for 3 years. Soderling beat an injured Nadal, no way does Soderling beat a healthy Nadal in a slam.

you may feel that way, but I think Rafa don't want no part of Davy in his draw. He's got a 5 match winning streak against Rafa on hc. Soderling humbled Rafa on his best surface and then straight set him in WTF. These guys owned Rafa and part of the reason is why Rafa is still titleless for quite sometime. Wake up!

swedechris
01-10-2010, 09:52 AM
My fav is Del Potro.
2nd choice is Rafa.
3rd Fed.
4th Djoko and Muzza shared.
5th Davy.
6th Cilic.
7th Sod.
8th Roddick.
9th Gonzo.
10th Fern.


Potential breakthru for Gulbis ...

joeri888
01-10-2010, 09:52 AM
Everyone always underestimates Droopy :cry:

Who is Droopy?