Federer : "Halle has been my best hunting ground"

[RS]

As I thought...
these are generic speeds that they are supposed to be.

not the actual measured speeds during the tournament.

by adding sand, the courts can be slowed down quite a bit.

seemed ok ? it was an abomination for an indoor court.

You are complaining about CPI, but CPI is more accurate than CPR.

Read this ...

"Please note this is a Court Pace Index and comes directly from Hawkeye data. So it's actually a true representation of the court speed for the speed of the court that year at each tournament. As it's an index it also factors in the climate / weather conditions not just the surface. This is a far better way for fans to see the true speed rather than relying on a dated classifications not carried out on site at the tournament."

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/tennis-court-surfaces-and-court-speeds/

CPR

As I thought...
these are generic speeds that they are supposed to be.

not the actual measured speeds during the tournament.

by adding sand, the courts can be slowed down quite a bit.

seemed ok ? it was an abomination for an indoor court.

You are complaining about CPI, but CPI is more accurate than CPR.

Read this ...

"Please note this is a Court Pace Index and comes directly from Hawkeye data. So it's actually a true representation of the court speed for the speed of the court that year at each tournament. As it's an index it also factors in the climate / weather conditions not just the surface. This is a far better way for fans to see the true speed rather than relying on a dated classifications not carried out on site at the tournament."

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/tennis-court-surfaces-and-court-speeds/

It said Cincinnati wasn’t quick which it clearly is. It says 2012 Cincy was medium on the CPI. The figures are very misleading. Cincy is known to be very fast. The figures are often unrealistic.
If CPR is worse then why do ITF the many body use it. They have been using it for a long Time it provides a more detailed explanation and use more scientific formulas to measure the speeds.
Also they take into account sand and resurfacing. USO said this 2017 that the courts that are resurfaced every year are medium-fast. If you want to find the article google players are divided on the court speed of USO last year.
Also as the tourney goes on the courts usually gets er due to the slica paint wearing off yet the CPI doesn’t always reflect this.

 

[Djorau]

I was talking about mono for AO 08.Fed had pretty much recovered from most of the effects of mono before the clay season started. Wimbledon was even further ahead. But go ahead with rubbish statements if that's what you really want, I tell ya !

What I know is that many Fedfans blamed mono for his loss against Nadal in the W final. If that was the case, then Ancic and Safin were total garbage

 

[abmk]

CPR

It said Cincinnati wasn’t quick which it clearly is. It says 2012 Cincy was medium on the CPI. The figures are very misleading. Cincy is known to be very fast. The figures are often unrealistic.
If CPR is worse then why do ITF the many body use it. They have been using it for a long Time it provides a more detailed explanation and use more scientific formulas to measure the speeds.
Also they take into account sand and resurfacing. USO said this 2017 that the courts that are resurfaced every year are medium-fast. If you want to find the article google players are divided on the court speed of USO last year.

because there are other factors like altitude - the ball flies faster at altitude -- ex : Madrid, Cincy.
Ball flies through considerably faster at IW than at Miami. so even though Miami CPI is higher, overall conditions wise, IW is faster

Also, CPI doesn't measure the bounce. Stuttgart CPI may have been in the range 33.5 to 36, but due to the low bounce, the conditions were effectively faster than what the CPI indicates.

Why does the ITF use CPR ? As guidance, to get a marker. It isn't used to measure conditions live.

"As a guide, the tolerance in the mean CPR value for a court installed by experienced contractors using quality materials and conventional methods at a reasonable cost is ± 5 CPR points from the quoted value. This tolerance applies to a new court as/unless specified by the end-user. The variation in CPR between the test location means, excluding the court markings, should not exceed 10 CPR points."

Also as the tourney goes on the courts usually gets er due to the slica paint wearing off yet the CPI doesn’t always reflect this.

it does reflect it.

for instance :

another instance :

For those eagle-eyed readers you'll notice that in my second table both Miami and Paris have different ratings to the 2016/2017 comparison. E.g. Paris 2016 has a CPI of 38.9, but in the chart above has one of 39.1. The 38.9 comes directly from a TennisTV screenshot taken mid-tournament, and the 39.1 comes from the latest numbers that Nick Lester got directly from Hawkeye during the Paris tournament. The discrepancy is because the speed of a hard court changes over a tournament depending on conditions and the roughness of the surface underfoot (it gets smoother the more it's played on). So the 38.9 number is the average speed at a certain point in the tournament whereas the 39.1 is the average speed once the tournament is done and dusted. Same for Miami.

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/[/QUOTE]

 

[abmk]

What I know is that many Fedfans blamed mono for his loss against Nadal in the W final. If that was the case, then Ancic and Safin were total garbage

you will find a few crazy Fed fans, just like you'll find crazy DJokovic or Nadal fans, so ?

I was talking about AO 08, so stick to that and stop jumping to conclusions.....

 

[abmk]

Also they take into account sand and resurfacing. USO said this 2017 that the courts that are resurfaced every year are medium-fast. If you want to find the article google players are divided on the court speed of USO last year.

I was there at the USO last year.
Ashe was at good enough speed (apart from when it rained - it got slower)
The outer courts were slower.
Grandstaand was slow - match b/w delpo and thiem ...

So not a surprise players were divided.

CPR is guidance for what the speeds should be ...it does take into account sand et. al ...but only at the time of standardized testing.

CPR isn't evaluated through the tournament (where things can be different)

 

[limmt]

YEC is worthless unless locations/surfaces are switched every year. It needs to at least be outdoor hard/clay/grass if it were to really mean anything in the goat debate.

It's exactly the opposite... It's the only big tournamenet playing indoors. And you want to change it because Nadal can't make it...

What would you have told Fed fans in 08 saying "RG needs to be played on grass to mean anything in the GOAT debate", stupid right?

 

[RS]

It's exactly the opposite... It's the only big tournamenet playing indoors. And you want to change it because Nadal can't make it...

What would you have told Fed fans in 08 saying "RG needs to be played on grass to mean anything in the GOAT debate", stupid right?

Paris is indoors. Shanghai close the roof sometimes.

 

[RS]

its not unlucky if you play sh*t/below par and lose like Fed did in Miami 11 or Dubai 11. nor if your form dips considerably in the final after strong QF+SF (Shanghai 10)

bringing in Miami 11 is a joke considering the sh*t performance in the semi. Nadal was just solid....federer was an error machine. he beat stepanek, monaco and rochus in straight sets (&Simon retired) before the semi vs Nadal ...big whoop....
Federer often struggles against Nadal at Miami. He lost in 2004 to Nadal at Miami and nearly lost in 2005 2 points away. It is slow. Federer has often made many UFs vs Nadal because Nadal forced him to make errors. The point was coming into the match he showed form but Nadal took him of his game.
shanghai - like I said, was very good in the QF and SF, but form dipped considerably in the final.
Yes but Murray blew him off the court though. Federer wasn’t allowed to play well dictate. You face these opppenents often in prime.
duabi 2011 - he straight setted devvarman, granollers, stakhovsky and gasquet...big whoop.....was below par in the final.


that sort of stuff rarely, if ever, happened from 04-07.
The field was stronger in 2011 generally so players had a greater chance of beating Federer. 2007 was ATG Level while 2004-2006 were good. Federer had these oppenents in 2007. He nearly lost to Hewitt at Cincy and Nadal and W2007 despite clearly being better on the road to the F. He came through more times than not but 2011 had Nadal and Novak and Murray playing better than in those years. I

wim 11 --- didn't return well enough and was more passive than he should've been ....again, difference from prime

Already said YEC 2010, FO 11 were prime level tournaments.

2010 was hardly a strong year..... it was a relatively weak year , similar to 2006.
The 2nd half was strong to me. Djokovic played well in the 2nd half. So did Federer with his post Wimbeldon form and Nadal nearly throughout. 2006 was very strong on Clay and Grass to me. I agree it was below other years though.

only 1 major out of the 4 was really good from start to finish (more importance to later stages)- FO 11.
USO 2011 was clearly good even in the Djokovic match. Just because he lost that doesn’t mean it wasn’t good. It took a peak Djokovic to stop him in a close match.
AO 11 -- inconsistent, just decent, USO 10 - threw in a below par perf. in the semi out of nowhere, Wim 11 - was good, but not that great. But this is a question mark. If he had gotten past Tsonga by returning a tad better, it could've gotten very interesting. But he didn't.
His 57winners and 11 UFs in the Tsonga match suggest great play. That is insane to hit that much. Returning wasn’t as good as we saw in the past but net and serve and FH were amazing. That was more than good.

Look at what was actually happening rather than just going by the names.



nope, similar form in Rome as well.[/QUOTE
He was fine in set 2 vs Novak in Rome 2012. Not Federer at his best.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

He means the groupie chicks in Halle

 

[Deleted member 716271]

It's exactly the opposite... It's the only big tournamenet playing indoors. And you want to change it because Nadal can't make it...

What would you have told Fed fans in 08 saying "RG needs to be played on grass to mean anything in the GOAT debate", stupid right?

It's not a slam though, in a sense you could argue it should reflect tour overall and change year to year.

But I agree more with you overall since it is the only indoor tournament. Rafa shouldn't be able to duck that.

 

[RS]

because there are other factors like altitude - the ball flies faster at altitude -- ex : Madrid, Cincy.
Ball flies through considerably faster at IW than at Miami. so even though Miami CPI is higher, overall conditions wise, IW is faster

Also, CPI doesn't measure the bounce. Stuttgart CPI may have been in the range 33.5 to 36, but due to the low bounce, the conditions were effectively faster than what the CPI indicates.

Why does the ITF use CPR ? As guidance, to get a marker. It isn't used to measure conditions live.

"As a guide, the tolerance in the mean CPR value for a court installed by experienced contractors using quality materials and conventional methods at a reasonable cost is ± 5 CPR points from the quoted value. This tolerance applies to a new court as/unless specified by the end-user. The variation in CPR between the test location means, excluding the court markings, should not exceed 10 CPR points."



it does reflect it.

for instance :

another instance :

For those eagle-eyed readers you'll notice that in my second table both Miami and Paris have different ratings to the 2016/2017 comparison. E.g. Paris 2016 has a CPI of 38.9, but in the chart above has one of 39.1. The 38.9 comes directly from a TennisTV screenshot taken mid-tournament, and the 39.1 comes from the latest numbers that Nick Lester got directly from Hawkeye during the Paris tournament. The discrepancy is because the speed of a hard court changes over a tournament depending on conditions and the roughness of the surface underfoot (it gets smoother the more it's played on). So the 38.9 number is the average speed at a certain point in the tournament whereas the 39.1 is the average speed once the tournament is done and dusted. Same for Miami.

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/

[/QUOTE]
I saw a video which Paris said they asked for a CPR on YT. I don’t think ITF has been specifically told to measure using CPR day by day like CPI. But they do use the advice on the courts that ITF advice because they are experts. So it is would be similar a lot. It is a shame we have no CPR ratings as much as CPI to get to the bottom of it.
Also CPI have differing figures quite a lot. Once it said Miami has 33 CPI. Then it said 34.4. Another time it said 30. It doesn’t seem very steady. I have seen IW at 27 and 30 too. They keep changing so it makes you wonder how accurate it is. Some same WTF was 34.8 in 2015. Another say 34. If the numbers were more steady I would trust it more.
It should really take into a account Amplitude like you said and bounce. As we agree the overall affect of IW due to the weather could be faster but this won’t be reflected in the CPI. When the Tornaments main responsible court speed people like Craig Tiley for AO he didn’t mention CPI or SPR he talked ITF and were it ranked on the scale.
As for the day to day yes I was wrong.

 

[jelle v]

Rafa lost only 2 matches at RG.

It's incredible.. biggest dominance ever imo..

Not sure about your signature by the way.. Vegata is pretty bad ass in terms of discipline and intelligence compared to Goku.. One could argue that maybe he had the most heroic scenes in DBZ (haven't watched GT much or the latest series though).

 

[abmk]

Federer often struggles against Nadal at Miami. He lost in 2004 to Nadal at Miami and nearly lost in 2005 2 points away. It is slow. Federer has often made many UFs vs Nadal because Nadal forced him to make errors. The point was coming into the match he showed form but Nadal took him of his game.

in-form coming into the match based on what ?
wins over Stepanek, Rochus and Monaco ?

none of them tested him much.

yes, Fed can make quite a few UEs vs Nadal at Miami. doesn't mean he has to be cr*p as he was in the Miami 2011 SF.

Yes but Murray blew him off the court though. Federer wasn’t allowed to play well dictate. You face these opppenents often in prime.

take your "strong era" blinders off and think properly for a moment. Federer's level dipped badly in that final. As awesome as Murray was, no way does a federer playing remotely well win only 5 games in a Masters final. and it wasn't just because Murray didn't allow him to.
not even Nadal can make him do that on clay, let alone Murray on HC

 

[RS]

I was there at the USO last year.
Ashe was at good enough speed (apart from when it rained - it got slower)
The outer courts were slower.
Grandstaand was slow - match b/w delpo and thiem ...
Okay thanks. Some people were saying the it was slow throughout though.

So not a surprise players were divided.
It could also show they don’t all agree as they do this in a lot of tornaments. With every tornament one players says slower one says faster etc etc.

CPR is guidance for what the speeds should be ...it does take into account sand et. al ...but only at the time of standardized testing.

CPR isn't evaluated through the tournament (where things can be different)

The problem is CPI has it medium-slow/medium
Yet the organisers said it was medium-fast which is another CPI contraction.

 

[abmk]

I saw a video which Paris said they asked for a CPR on YT. I don’t think ITF has been specifically told to measure using CPR day by day like CPI. But they do use the advice on the courts that ITF advice because they are experts. So it is would be similar a lot. It is a shame we have no CPR ratings as much as CPI to get to the bottom of it.
Also CPI have differing figures quite a lot. Once it said Miami has 33 CPI. Then it said 34.4. Another time it said 30. It doesn’t seem very steady. I have seen IW at 27 and 30 too. They keep changing so it makes you wonder how accurate it is. Some same WTF was 34.8 in 2015. Another say 34. If the numbers were more steady I would trust it more.
It should really take into a account Amplitude like you said and bounce. As we agree the overall affect of IW due to the weather could be faster but this won’t be reflected in the CPI. When the Tornaments main responsible court speed people like Craig Tiley for AO he didn’t mention CPI or SPR he talked ITF and were it ranked on the scale.
As for the day to day yes I was wrong.

yes, CPI changes ..

As it should..

"Please note this is a Court Pace Index and comes directly from Hawkeye data. So it's actually a true representation of the court speed for the speed of the court that year at each tournament. As it's an index it also factors in the climate / weather conditions not just the surface. This is a far better way for fans to see the true speed rather than relying on a dated classifications not carried out on site at the tournament."

you can't take CPI as the only measure for how fast the conditions are. its only for the surface.

you need to take into account the balls used, the altitude and the bounce to see how "fast" the conditions are.

 

[abmk]

The problem is CPI has it medium-slow/medium
Yet the organisers said it was medium-fast which is another CPI contraction.

CPI for USO 2017 was 35.7 (I'm thinking this is for Ashe only)

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/

which puts it as medium.

organisers may have been using a subjective term - medium fast , not necessarily with respect to any set of ranges for the speeds.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Don't know if I'd say Fed struggles against Rafa @ Miami--2005 was actually a bad line call in 3rd set, Rafa may have won without that I think he would have gone up 0-40 and have 3 BP's to break late in the 3rd.

BUT, Fed' won that set and the next 2. He still had to do that. For someone who had struggled so much early with Rafa on clay and slower courts, the fact he took 3 sets in a row off Rafa there makes it seem like not a particular struggle for Fed who lost to Rafa in Dubai for example.

A faster HC, at least a more lively one (and the 2 usually go together although they dont have to) suits Rafa btw. It is the low bounce that kills him more than speed of court. The 2 are related but not synonymous (think vertical vs horizontal bounce)


'

 

[abmk]

The field was stronger in 2011 generally so players had a greater chance of beating Federer. 2007 was ATG Level while 2004-2006 were good. Federer had these oppenents in 2007. He nearly lost to Hewitt at Cincy and Nadal and W2007 despite clearly being better on the road to the F. He came through more times than not but 2011 had Nadal and Novak and Murray playing better than in those years. I

disagree. 2004, 2005 were up there with 2007. only 2006 was relatively weaker. 2011 was more top-heavy (thanks to Fedalovic and to a lesser extent Murray), but 2004-07 had more depth.

Federer had those opponents in 2004-05 as well...A peaking Roddick in Wim 04, Nalbandian playing very well in AO 04, Kuerten turning back the clock in their RG 2004 match, Agassi playing very well in USO 04, Safin in AO 05, Nadal in Miami 05& RG 05, Hewitt in USO 05, Agassi in USO 05 etc.

As far as Wim 07 goes, that was arguably Nadal's best match on grass. Certainly considerably better than his Wim 11 final...so your point is irrelevant.
and he most certainly was playing considerably better on clay in 2007 than in 2011.
only on HC, I'd take 2011 Nadal.

Murray was consistent enough in 2011, but his level wasn't higher than Hewitt/Roddick in 04/05, in fact, he produced peak level performances less than they did in 2004-05.

 

[ak24alive]

It's incredible.. biggest dominance ever imo..

Not sure about your signature by the way.. Vegata is pretty bad ass in terms of discipline and intelligence compared to Goku.. One could argue that maybe he had the most heroic scenes in DBZ (haven't watched GT much or the latest series though).

My friend I am a big fan of Vegeta and his character arc has been a pleasure to watch but when you think of him in terms of greatness Goku stands out by far.
I don't like what the writers did to Vegeta in the last series i.e. DB Super(don't worry no spoilers here).

Spoiler: But this might have some DBZ spoilers for those who haven't seen it

You know that to even become a SSJ 2 Vegeta had to take help of Babidi. This guy never became SSJ3. And he was far inferior to Goku in terms of power level(character wise they are both equally great). But just to have him chasing Goku(which is one of the themes of DBZ too) the writers increased the Vegeta's power level so much in such a short span in DB Super that it looks really bad TBH. It is almost a plot hole. I mean here is a guy who can't become a SSJ2 after 10 years(2+8) of training goes God Level in DB Super just to fulfill a stupid agenda. Vegeta is still one of the best characters in DB Super but there is this huge flaw in the way his power level was raised.
Also I chose this signature after I had this Vegeta Goku debate with my brother .

 

[abmk]

The 2nd half was strong to me. Djokovic played well in the 2nd half. So did Federer with his post Wimbeldon form and Nadal nearly throughout. 2006 was very strong on Clay and Grass to me. I agree it was below other years though.

nadal nearly throughout ?
you might want to revisit.
got routined by Murray in Canada, lost to Baghdatis in Cincy....no indication he was going to be that good at the US Open.
clowned away BPs vs GGL in Bangkok
lost to Melzer in Shanghai.

only Wim 2010 2nd week, USO 2010 and YEC 2010 were really good from him in the 2nd half.
(&maybe Tokyo - didn't watch that tbh)

As far as Djokovic is concerned, a well below par SF vs berdych at Wimbledon.
got routined by Roddick at Cincy.
did put up a fight in Toronto vs Fed , but wasn't that high a level.

Recovery only started from USO onwards and IMO, no better than 2007-08 level (probably a tad worse)

the other thing is losing these guys -- davydenko due to injury , delpo out due to wrist injury.

USO 2011 was clearly good even in the Djokovic match. Just because he lost that doesn’t mean it wasn’t good. It took a peak Djokovic to stop him in a close match.

I was talking about USO 10 to Wim 11 (that's 4 slams) since the period under discussion was Cincy 10 to Wim 11.

Yeah, USO 2011 was pretty good, no doubt.

 

[abmk]

He was fine in set 2 vs Novak in Rome 2012. Not Federer at his best.

put up one last ditch effort in the 2nd set ...could've lost easier than that.
not anywhere close to prime level considering the whole match.

 

[abmk]

His 57winners and 11 UFs in the Tsonga match suggest great play. That is insane to hit that much. Returning wasn’t as good as we saw in the past but net and serve and FH were amazing. That was more than good.

firstly, IMO those UE stats are atleast slightly off. I think he had more errors than that. Match was quite serve dominated+with those many approaches ...so you wouldn't have that many UEs if both are playing at a good level, which they were.

federer was serving great in that match, but I don't think recall his net play/FH being amazing per se.

it was a good performance from fed and Tsonga played really well to take him out.
But not quite prime level from fed, he didn't have the return/defense of his prime years ...was more passive than he should've been as well.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Vulterer

 

[Djorau]

Vulturing ground

 

[Deleted member 756486]

Fed’s draw at Halle is pathetic but it’s still tougher than Rafa’s USO 2017 draw.

 

[Mainad]

Fed’s draw at Halle is pathetic but it’s still tougher than Rafa’s USO 2017 draw.

The quality of the draw in Halle may perhaps account for the rather bored and irritated expression on Fed's face this week and the fact that he has struggled to get through most of his matches because he just can't get motivated enough to play his best against the likes of Paire and Ebden. Next up for him is world #109 Denis Kudla so it doesn't look as if things are going to improve much in that respect before his week is out.

 

[Deleted member 756486]

The quality of the draw in Halle may perhaps account for the rather bored and irritated expression on Fed's face this week and the fact that he has struggled to get through most of his matches because he just can't get motivated enough to play his best against the likes of Paire and Ebden. Next up for him is world #109 Denis Kudla so it doesn't look as if things are going to improve much in that respect before his week is out.

I wish he was tested before Wimby.

Del Potro on the opposite side of the draw would’ve been interesting.

 

[Sorry_to_tell_you_mate]

Imagine if Halle was a M1000, Fed would lead the M1000 title race for sure.

The level of the players entering it would have been higher, then.

 

[MasturB]

The level of the players entering it would have been higher, then.

Halle is way faster than Queens. Arguably the fastest pre-Wimby tourney. And probably plays faster than Wimby too.

 

[AceSalvo]

Every draw ends up as cupcake for Fed on grass.

Fed took out King K and Prince R just like that. And then seeded players keep falling like pins. I dont think crying over the draw is going to help.

 

[Rafa24]

It's exactly the opposite... It's the only big tournamenet playing indoors. And you want to change it because Nadal can't make it...

What would you have told Fed fans in 08 saying "RG needs to be played on grass to mean anything in the GOAT debate", stupid right?

RG is a slam and doesn't change venues or surfaces. WTF has changed venues and surfaces so it's hard for me to count it in the goat debate. it's been on indoor hard, outdoor hard, carpet and one year on grass.

 

[Deleted member 756486]

RG is a slam and doesn't change venues or surfaces. WTF has changed venues and surfaces so it's hard for me to count it in the goat debate. it's been on indoor hard, outdoor hard, carpet and one year on grass.

@Federer and Del Potro put it best:

World Tour Final is an EXHO

Until Nadal wins it then it is the 5th slam

 

[MeatTornado]

I wish he was tested before Wimby.

Del Potro on the opposite side of the draw would’ve been interesting.

He already got through Kyrgios and Raonic in Stuttgart.

If it were up to me, I'd say that's enough practice for Wimbledon and he could've skip Halle.

 

[Deleted member 756486]

He already got through Kyrgios and Raonic in Stuttgart.

If it were up to me, I'd say that's enough practice for Wimbledon and he could've skip Halle.

He can’t skip Halle tho. Has a career contract there I think.

 

[Mack-2]

I wish he was tested before Wimby.

Del Potro on the opposite side of the draw would’ve been interesting.

The savior of tennis’ future, Coric, will provide a tough test in the final.

 

[MeatTornado]

He can’t skip Halle tho. Has a career contract there I think.

He's still allowed to withdraw with any "injury" he chooses.

 

[Rafa24]

@Federer and Del Potro put it best:

I've always called it an exhibition. And for the fred fans who say otherwise would fed pull out before a slam final for a sore back? No. Did he in the WTF exho? Yes.

 

[Tennisanity]

The level of the players entering it would have been higher, then.

For sure, but Fed is still winning the majority of them.

 

[RS]

firstly, IMO those UE stats are atleast slightly off. I think he had more errors than that. Match was quite serve dominated+with those many approaches ...so you wouldn't have that many UEs if both are playing at a good level, which they were.

federer was serving great in that match, but I don't think recall his net play/FH being amazing per se.

it was a good performance from fed and Tsonga played really well to take him out.
But not quite prime level from fed, he didn't have the return/defense of his prime years ...was more passive than he should've been as well.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/13958561

 

[RS]

nadal nearly throughout ?
you might want to revisit.
got routined by Murray in Canada, lost to Baghdatis in Cincy....no indication he was going to be that good at the US Open.
clowned away BPs vs GGL in Bangkok
lost to Melzer in Shanghai.
I meant throughout the year for the most part. Then joined by Federer and Djokovic and Murray in the 2nd half.

only Wim 2010 2nd week, USO 2010 and YEC 2010 were really good from him in the 2nd half.
(&maybe Tokyo - didn't watch that tbh)
Nadal won Tokyo in 2010.

As far as Djokovic is concerned, a well below par SF vs berdych at Wimbledon.
got routined by Roddick at Cincy.
did put up a fight in Toronto vs Fed , but wasn't that high a level.
Berdych blew him off the court. Djokovic still reached the SF though.
Canada and Cincy was not his highest but he was still solid but lost on quick surfaces to Roddick and Federer.


Recovery only started from USO onwards and IMO, no better than 2007-08 level (probably a tad worse)
Possible. He still reached 8 of the last 10 events of the year at least the SF and won DC for Serbia.
the other thing is losing these guys -- davydenko due to injury , delpo out due to wrist injury.



I was talking about USO 10 to Wim 11 (that's 4 slams) since the period under discussion was Cincy 10 to Wim 11.
Okay

Yeah, USO 2011 was pretty good, no doubt.

I agree

 

[Mainad]

I've always called it an exhibition. And for the fred fans who say otherwise would fed pull out before a slam final for a sore back? No. Did he in the WTF exho? Yes.

He only did that so he would be fresher for the Davis Cup final against France the following week, knowing it was almost certainly going to be his last chance to win it and fill one of the few remaining significant gaps in his resumé. He has always turned up to play the WTF though whilst happily skipping a certain Slam for the last 3 years!

 

[mightyjeditribble]

He only did that so he would be fresher for the Davis Cup final against France the following week, knowing it was almost certainly going to be his last chance to win it and fill one of the few remaining significant gaps in his resumé. He has always turned up to play the WTF though whilst happily skipping a certain Slam for the last 3 years!

He also could hardly play on the Friday after, losing against Monfils of all people. He had clearly genuinely hurt his back.

Sent from my Moto G (5) using Tapatalk

 

[RS]

disagree. 2004, 2005 were up there with 2007. only 2006 was relatively weaker. 2011 was more top-heavy (thanks to Fedalovic and to a lesser extent Murray), but 2004-07 had more depth.
2004 and 2005 players were not good enough to consistently challenge. He rolled over them a lot more than 2007 opponents. 2007 was the first year of the Big 3 era. Nadal improved off Clay and Djokovic all round they gave Federer tougher matches. I do not think depth always overwhelms the strength at the top. 2011 did have depth IMO.And had streaky opponents like 2004-2006.
You said before Djokovic did not have it tough in 15-16 and 2014 but you do not apply it to Federer in any year barring 2006 of his dominant years.
Federer had those opponents in 2004-05 as well...A peaking Roddick in Wim 04, Nalbandian playing very well in AO 04, Kuerten turning back the clock in their RG 2004 match, Agassi playing very well in USO 04, Safin in AO 05, Nadal in Miami 05& RG 05, Hewitt in USO 05, Agassi in USO 05 etc.
They did not bring this form as much as the latter. Players could do this far more often in 2007.
Djokovic MO2007,Nadal W2007,Hewitt Cincy 2007,Nalbandian did this in the indoor swing.
Federer nearly losing W2007 and struggling and having to save SPs in USO 2007
He could have gone slam less had he not been in his Prime.
2007 had 2/4 prime ATGs while 2004-05 had one
20111 had at least 2/4 prime ATGs with Murray and Federer who might have been in it but that depends on how you look at it.

As far as Wim 07 goes, that was arguably Nadal's best match on grass. Certainly considerably better than his Wim 11 final...so your point is irrelevant.
and he most certainly was playing considerably better on clay in 2007 than in 2011.
2011 and 2007 are close. The problem was Novak at MC/Rome. He won every other tournament. In-Form Murray at MC and FO SF and Federer at Madrid/RG. In 2007 he did have a peak Federer and tough matches with Hewitt. It is tight.
Grass is tight too. Nadal problem was Djokovic he may not have found it as difficult against Nadal 2007. I would pick Nadal 2007 to win in 5 but again to me it is close.
only on HC, I'd take 2011 Nadal.
I agree. But if Nadal 2007 brings his IW/Paris form he can win too.

Murray was consistent enough in 2011, but his level wasn't higher than Hewitt/Roddick in 04/05, in fact, he produced peak level performances less than they did in 2004-05.

It was better on slow courts though. And in my opinion his Wimbeldon 2011/USO 2011 and Cincy 2011 and Tokyo was on par with their form.

 

[RS]

CPI for USO 2017 was 35.7 (I'm thinking this is for Ashe only)

https://www.perfect-tennis.com/court-speed-2017/

which puts it as medium.

organisers may have been using a subjective term - medium fast , not necessarily with respect to any set of ranges for the speeds.

On images another one has it in the 32.5 range and i think another had it 36.2 and 35.4
They said it is usually Medium-Fast and it is not slow.
Centre Court was 32.5 and 35.4 according to some.
It did not use a day to day breakdown though.

 

[limmt]

RG is a slam and doesn't change venues or surfaces. WTF has changed venues and surfaces so it's hard for me to count it in the goat debate. it's been on indoor hard, outdoor hard, carpet and one year on grass.

The US Open and the AO changed surfaces in the past, so we can't count them in the GOAT debate either, right?

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

He only did that so he would be fresher for the Davis Cup final against France the following week, knowing it was almost certainly going to be his last chance to win it and fill one of the few remaining significant gaps in his resumé. He has always turned up to play the WTF though whilst happily skipping a certain Slam for the last 3 years!

More like knowing it'd be Switzerland's last and only chance of winning it.

 

[Sudacafan]

FWIW, if Federer wins Halle finals tomorrow, I believe it would be the first time in many years that he defends his #1 ranking by winning a tournament.

 

[Mainad]

More like knowing it'd be Switzerland's last and only chance of winning it.

That too of course but he still wanted to add a DC title to his name like all the other greats of tennis.

 

[smoledman]

Coric was a beast in Indian Wells, but this is grass.

 

[abmk]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/13958561

Yeah, I had the stats. I am saying the official statisticians were lenient with their evaluation of UEs... From what I saw, fed made more UEs.