2019 Queen's - Men's Singles Discussion Thread

Who will win 2019 Queen's?


  • Total voters
    37
You stopped at "don't have to be a big server" to be successful on the surface? At least continue the list.

You don't have to come to net.
You don't have to serve and volley.
You don't have to chip and charge.
You don't have to slice.

I think that covers it.
I understand you're kind of getting at the fact that grass is a bit different now, but doesn't all of this apply to tennis in general lately?
 
yeah lopez<3. i was rooting for faa to take the title, but if it wasn't him, i also really like lopez so im glad he took it especially against simon. how nice both the 37 year olds won the grass tournaments just like in 2017.
 
I understand you're kind of getting at the fact that grass is a bit different now, but doesn't all of this apply to tennis in general lately?
Not really. Technology itself has greatly homogenized all surfaces to some extent. But the other surfaces still play like they were designed to. I mean, even the Houston Clay championship is played in the same Har-Tru it always was.

However, grass has been completely neutered. People look so forward to grass as if it is some great variation, but it isn't.

They really just need to pave over grass. The North American hardcourt season doesn't start in August. It truly starts in June on the grass.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Not really. Technology itself has greatly homogenized all surfaces to some extent. But the other surfaces still play like they were designed to. I mean, even the Houston Clay championship is played in the same Har-Tru it always was.

However, grass has been completely neutered. People look so forward to grass as if it is some great variation, but it isn't.

They really just need to pave over grass. The North American hardcourt season doesn't start in August. It truly starts in June on the grass.
Nadal has 12 RG titles and 2 Wimbledon. Federer has 8 Wimbledon and 1 RG. Obviously there is still a large difference between clay grass and HC despite baseliners dominating all the surfaces though.
 
Not really. Technology itself has greatly homogenized all surfaces to some extent. But the other surfaces still play like they were designed to. I mean, even the Houston Clay championship is played in the same Har-Tru it always was.

However, grass has been completely neutered. People look so forward to grass as if it is some great variation, but it isn't.

They really just need to pave over grass. The North American hardcourt season doesn't start in August. It truly starts in June on the grass.
Actually the very fact that you see Lopez in a final - one that he triumphed in - is proof enough that grass is grass. I mean, this was grass too:


And this:


You can further add Connors-Ashe too. Ashe was using S&V sure but a lot of the tennis wasn't very attacking. Ashe's strategy was based on not feeding Connors pace. The arrival of Becker produced a phase of domination of S&V at Wimbledon that is not necessarily consistent with past trends at the tournament. It could be argued therefore that the tournament tinkered with the courts to bring back some variety (though they may not have intended such a sharp swing towards baseline).
 
Whatever happened to the talk about how superior Queens is as a tournament? Anyone care to follow-up mow that a 37 yr old WC ranked 113 won?
You know this tournament had Anderson, Cilic, Wawrinka in the draw, right? If you want to evaluate a tournament's prestige by the winner being a wildcard, what does that make Wimbledon then? After all, the 2001 winner was a wildcard but I bet you are not aware of that or at least didn't consider that when framing this question.
 
You know this tournament had Anderson, Cilic, Wawrinka in the draw, right? If you want to evaluate a tournament's prestige by the winner being a wildcard, what does that make Wimbledon then? After all, the 2001 winner was a wildcard but I bet you are not aware of that or at least didn't consider that when framing this question.
Oh gosh darn, you're right! 18 years ago, the one and only time a WC won Wimbledon (said WC was btw a 29 yr old former #2 coming back from injury, who was also a 2 time finalist) means that Wimbledon is a challenger!

And, thanks for reminding how strong the field was! A 34 yr old ranked 20+, a 30 yr old #15 on a downward spiral, and a 33 yr old who hadn't wo a match in months and after Wimbledon will be out of the top 10!
 
Oh gosh darn, you're right! 18 years ago, the one and only time a WC won Wimbledon (said WC was btw a 29 yr old former #2 coming back from injury, who was also a 2 time finalist) means that Wimbledon is a challenger!

And, thanks for reminding how strong the field was! A 34 yr old ranked 20+, a 30 yr old #15 on a downward spiral, and a 33 yr old who hadn't wo a match in months and after Wimbledon will be out of the top 10!
And the WC you so sneeringly mentioned here was the Queens champion in 2017, beating Cilic in the final. Pl quit when you are ahead, seriously.
 
Nadal has 12 RG titles and 2 Wimbledon. Federer has 8 Wimbledon and 1 RG. Obviously there is still a large difference between clay grass and HC despite baseliners dominating all the surfaces though.
Federer is a bad comparison. He knows how to play clay court tennis. He has all the strokes.

If it wasn't for Nadal... Federer may very well have pulled off the feat of Borg.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer is a bad comparison. He knows how to play clay court tennis. He has all the strokes.

If it wasn't for Nadal... Federer may very well have pulled off the feat of Borg.
How do you explain Nadal then? Look, we're all aware that tennis today is baseline dominant, but that doesn't mean the surfaces don't still have major differences among them. Lopez has now won 4 grass court titles in his career. He has 1 clay court title and this is despite clay being the longer season. It can't be a coincidence that he was pretty useless all clay season and then shows up to Queens and wins a title.

In fact, I just looked up Lopez's activity. He literally lost 1st RD at every single ATP level clay court tournament he played this year.
 
Last edited:
How do you explain Nadal then? Look, we're all aware that tennis today is baseline dominant, but that doesn't mean the surfaces don't still have major differences among them. Lopez has now won 4 grass court titles in his career. He has 1 clay court title and this is despite clay being the longer season. It can't be a coincidence that he was pretty useless all clay season and then shows up to Queens and wins a title.
First, Federer and Nadal should be left out of this conversation. That should be Godwin's Law in any tennis discussion.

I'm not saying there are no differences, but there just isn't as much difference anymore. Very little. Lopez does not have the strokes for clay, that easily explains him. To be successful on clay, you have to have a superb topspin backhand. That is literally the clay stroke. On grass, a slice certainly helps... and a serve certainly helps. But you don't need either. You can mildly baseline the entire time and go to the finals.

Hardcourt and grass can be won with nearly identical skills. In fact, I'd argue that the US Open itself plays more like grass than modern grass does.

It just frustrates me to no end that a guy like Lopez can hit excellent approach shot after approach shot... only to have that slice penetrate but then sit up after the bounce. Hell, Simon didn't even have to bend down that much to get a lot of those.

I just want grass to play like it was meant to. And I want the grass-style point construction back.
 
How do you explain Nadal then? Look, we're all aware that tennis today is baseline dominant, but that doesn't mean the surfaces don't still have major differences among them. Lopez has now won 4 grass court titles in his career. He has 1 clay court title and this is despite clay being the longer season. It can't be a coincidence that he was pretty useless all clay season and then shows up to Queens and wins a title.

In fact, I just looked up Lopez's activity. He literally lost 1st RD at every single ATP level clay court tournament he played this year.
We can add to this Murray's good but not stellar record on clay and Wawrinka's problems on grass. Wawrinka is a good example because he is very comfortable on HC and clay, just not on grass. Grass does not resemble HC though it IS less different than the past (but the two aren't the same things). Lopez wouldn't be able to make those butterknife volleys landing softly and short on the other side on HC. Neither will he get the feel nor will the surface absorb the bounce the way grass does.
 
First, Federer and Nadal should be left out of this conversation. That should be Godwin's Law in any tennis discussion.

I'm not saying there are no differences, but there just isn't as much difference anymore. Very little. Lopez does not have the strokes for clay, that easily explains him. To be successful on clay, you have to have a superb topspin backhand. That is literally the clay stroke. On grass, a slice certainly helps... and a serve certainly helps. But you don't need either. You can mildly baseline the entire time and go to the finals.

Hardcourt and grass can be won with nearly identical skills. In fact, I'd argue that the US Open itself plays more like grass than modern grass does.

It just frustrates me to no end that a guy like Lopez can hit excellent approach shot after approach shot... only to have that slice penetrate but then sit up after the bounce. Hell, Simon didn't even have to bend down that much to get a lot of those.

I just want grass to play like it was meant to. And I want the grass-style point construction back.
Actually he was bending down. Again and again. He was hitting many of those passing shots down on one knee. You and others who make this argument never account for the superior athleticism of these players. They aren't trying to just stand and deliver. They are able to get down again and again without tiring. You're right, there was nothing wrong with many of those approaches Feli hit. But Simon got down again and again and went DTL with piercing accuracy. Consider here the role of poly. It allows you to get underneath the ball and generate spin to thus get passing shots over the net without having to loop/lob them up. This, more than the surface, is the biggest change from the 90s. Today's players can pick off even good slice approaches simply because they don't have to come over, they just go underneath the ball and hit topspin. McEnroe already observed this about Federer's passing shots back in 2003. And everybody else followed his lead on grass, naturally.
 

Steve0904

Talk Tennis Guru
First, Federer and Nadal should be left out of this conversation. That should be Godwin's Law in any tennis discussion.

I'm not saying there are no differences, but there just isn't as much difference anymore. Very little. Lopez does not have the strokes for clay, that easily explains him. To be successful on clay, you have to have a superb topspin backhand. That is literally the clay stroke. On grass, a slice certainly helps... and a serve certainly helps. But you don't need either. You can mildly baseline the entire time and go to the finals.

Hardcourt and grass can be won with nearly identical skills. In fact, I'd argue that the US Open itself plays more like grass than modern grass does.

It just frustrates me to no end that a guy like Lopez can hit excellent approach shot after approach shot... only to have that slice penetrate but then sit up after the bounce. Hell, Simon didn't even have to bend down that much to get a lot of those.

I just want grass to play like it was meant to. And I want the grass-style point construction back.
Doesn't everyone agree that there isn't as much difference anymore though? That's commonly accepted now. My point is that while I accept that there is less difference, that doesn't mean that grass = HC = clay which is a common problem here when people exaggerate the sameness of the surfaces to diminish accomplishments, particularly in the case of Nadal.

The surfaces aren't the same. This is proven easily by players like Lopez, and even Murray and Wawrinka as @Dolgopolov85 points out. Half of the problem (or more) has to do with poly strings as much as the slowing of surfaces. Poly strings have allowed ridiculous angle on passing shots and have basically killed S&V at least as a consistently winning tactic. Hewitt was doing this to Sampras on relatively quick grass and HC back in the early 00's just as an example.

Anyhow, I think we're both happy Lopez won in the end.
 
Last edited:
Well, like that other 37 year old over in Halle, he is a former champion and multiple finalist and has long been a well-known name on the tour. It's not as if he just sprang up out of nowhere!
I guess I missed the part where Federer fell out of the top 100 and needed a WC? Feli is a solid player but he's hardly been active lately and lost a ton.

Also, I'm not saying this means Queen's is mickey mouse, just that it's way overrated.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
I guess I missed the part where Federer fell out of the top 100 and needed a WC? Feli is a solid player but he's hardly been active lately and lost a ton.
Well, Fed ALWAYS plays Halle (so long as he is fit). The other Big 3ers can't be arsed to play anything and Murray has been out of action in the singles. That just leaves the usual bunch of unreliable "top" guys all of whom got knocked out or were forced to withdraw like Delpo.

Also, I'm not saying this means Queen's is mickey mouse, just that it's way overrated.
Who's overrating it? It is and always has been the foremost grass event after Wimbledon sharing that distinction with Halle in the last 2 decades.
 
What a tournament for Lopez, incredible stuff really to be winning singles and doubles. Had a blast watching the tournament.

I wanted Young King to win but Lopez also deserves it, he's good on grass.
 

Red Rick

Talk Tennis Guru
I guess I missed the part where Federer fell out of the top 100 and needed a WC? Feli is a solid player but he's hardly been active lately and lost a ton.

Also, I'm not saying this means Queen's is mickey mouse, just that it's way overrated.
Queens isnt overrated.

The grass field is just at an all time low, especially for tune ups
 
Actually the very fact that you see Lopez in a final - one that he triumphed in - is proof enough that grass is grass. I mean, this was grass too:


And this:


You can further add Connors-Ashe too. Ashe was using S&V sure but a lot of the tennis wasn't very attacking. Ashe's strategy was based on not feeding Connors pace. The arrival of Becker produced a phase of domination of S&V at Wimbledon that is not necessarily consistent with past trends at the tournament. It could be argued therefore that the tournament tinkered with the courts to bring back some variety (though they may not have intended such a sharp swing towards baseline).
FYI, Ashe served and volleyed on every serve in that match, first and second. Yes we've all heard a thousand times about him changing pace, but it wasn't the way we think of changing pace in a baseline oriented match. More like changing pace on his serve, since Connors destroyed the big serve of Tanner in the semis.

Also, 73% of all points in the match were 1-4 shots(Connors also serve and volleyed a ton). The average for the match was 3.58 shots per point. It was an attacking style match in every sense of the word.

What Becker brought to Wimbledon that was new wasn't serve and volley but winning a ton of points outright with the serve.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Congrats to Lopez on winning his 7th ATP title, 3rd at 500 level and 4th on grass. He joins Murray and Cilic as the only 2 active players to have won multiple singles titles at Queen's.

At 37 years of age, he is the oldest player to win the tournament in the open era and 1 of only 3 wildcard entries to go on to take the title (previous 2 being Lendl in 1989 and Sampras in 1999).

He also becomes the 1st player to combine the singles and doubles titles at Queen's since Philippoussis in 1997 and the 1st on tour since Berrettini at 2018 Gstaad.
 
FYI, Ashe served and volleyed on every serve in that match, first and second. Yes we've all heard a thousand times about him changing pace, but it wasn't the way we think of changing pace in a baseline oriented match. More like changing pace on his serve, since Connors destroyed the big serve of Tanner in the semis.

Also, 73% of all points in the match were 1-4 shots(Connors also serve and volleyed a ton). The average for the match was 3.58 shots per point. It was an attacking style match in every sense of the word.

What Becker brought to Wimbledon that was new wasn't serve and volley but winning a ton of points outright with the serve.
I never said what Becker brought to grass was S&V. But he didn't just win a lot of points with serve, he won them with emphatic shot making as well, particularly hard groundstrokes when they were required. This was not an essential feature on grass before. There was more range in terms of the available tactics which narrowed a lot with the arrival of power tennis.

If you want to talk about shot length, even today 60% of points irrespective of surface are settled in 3 shots or fewer. Lopez came in plenty of times yesterday too, especially by today's standards. And this is where I said Becker tennis is not the only grass court tennis because the difference yesterday was once the players chose to stay back, they were going for safe shots from the baseline rather than bang bang. And that is fine. That is how Murray won Wimbledon in 2013 as well. And I bet there would be a lot more complaints about his game style then were he not British.
 
Top