What is the criteria for a "cakewalk" draw?

nadal_slam_king

nadal_slam_king

Banned
I hear it referred to often that a player had a "cakewalk" draw. Does this mean the player's original draw on paper was easy? Or does it mean they handled their draw easily? And how much value is placed on the player's Finals opponent?

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2010-06-18/4449.php
The Wimbledon men’s draw has been released and six-time champion Roger Federer has to be pleased with his section, at least through the early going. 2008 winner Rafael Nadal figures to have a much tougher task, while Andy Murray has the easiest of the Top 4 seeds.

Federer opens (again) with Alejandro Falla with his third round seed in the form of Tommy Robredo. In the fourth round Federer could meet either Jurgen Melzer or Feliciano Lopez and in the quarterfinals his likely opposition would come from Tomas Berdych, Stan Wawrinka or Nikolay Davydenko. All in all, Federer has to like what he sees from his quarter.

The toughest section I think is the Novak Djokovic, Andy Roddick quarter. Not only are those two former Slam champs in there but so too are Lleyton Hewitt, Marin Cilic, Ivan Ljubucic, Gael Monfils and even Mardy Fish. Djokovic begins with the dangerous and diminutive Olivier Rochus. Then could face Taylor Dent, then a breather in the third round before running into Hewitt in round four.

Roddick will also be tested. After Rajeev Ram in the first round, the 2009 finalist may get Michael Llodra in the second then the pesky Phil Kohlscrhrieber in the third followed by Cilic, Ljubicic or Fish in the 16s.

The third quarter is all Murray’s. The Scot will be the heavy favorite in group with high seeds Fernando Verdasco, Jo Tsonga, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Sam Querrey. Murray could meet Simon in the third round, Querrey in the fourth before Verdasco or Tsonga in the quarters. Tsonga could be the biggest obstacle for Andy.

While Nadal’s section isn’t necessary loaded with top contenders, it is home to players who have fared well against the Spaniard. Nadal begins his journey against Kei Nishikori, then against sometimes crutch James Blake followed by Ernests Gulbis. In the fourth round Mikail Youhzny or John Isner could await with Robin Soderling lurking in the quarterfinals. Not an easy road at all for Nadal with guys like Blake, Gulbis, Youhzny and Soderling in his way.

So the draw looks good for Federer and Murray while Roddick and especially Nadal are in for a serious battle. And Federer v. Roddick would be a semifinal this year.

Fourth round by seeds: 1 Federer v. 16 Melzer, 12 Berdych v. 7 Davydenko, 3 Djokovic v. 15 Hewitt, 11 Cilic v. 5 Roddick, 8 Verdasco v. 10 Tsonga, 14 Ferrero v. 4 Murray, 6 Soderling v. 9 Ferrer, 13 Youhzny v. 2 Nadal.

Quarterfinals: Federer v. Davydenko, Djokovic v. Hewitt, Cilic v. Roddick, Verdasco v. Murray, Soderling v. Nadal.

Semifinals: Federer v. Djokovic, Murray v. Nadal.

Some quick initial thoughts. First Federer look very strong out to the semifinals. The only players in his section who can beat the Swiss on the grass are Berdych (quarterfinals) and maybe Lopez (16s). I think Murray should also breeze at least until the fourth round where he could end up with Querrey and then Tsonga or Verdasco, but like Federer he’ll be the heavy favorite in just about every match.

I think the Djokovic/Roddick section is really tough to call with Cilic and Hewitt also in there. Any of the four could get through. Right now I’m almost think about Hewitt as the guy.

And the draw really did Nadal no favors with potential matches against Gulbis then Youzhny/Isner with Soderling possibly in the quarterfinals. I like Soderling’s draw, and I think he might just be the class pick in that section.

I’ll have a some predictions later this weekend.
Click to expand...

Forgive me if my novice response to the term "cakewalk" is frustrating to read. I personally have never used the term, yet witness it's use often; but still lack an understanding of whether it truly applies so regularly to the winner's draw or is being used to slander one's achievements.
 
But but but but but but but but but but but but but but but...


....Nadal has the blood spinning thingimy. :razz:
 
Last edited:
Going by how much Nadal fans whine about Fed's draws before slams the obvious definition would be-Any draw that Federer gets is a cakewalk draw :mrgreen:
 
Xemi666 said:
The player you don't like being in it.
Click to expand...

What if you get a tough QF opponent, a tough SF opponent, but a really easy F opponent? Or what if you get a comfortable QF/SF opponent but a player with a great surface head2head over you in the F? How do you weigh the F opponent compared with the other round opponents?
 
For a Fed fan :- Any draw that Nadal gets is a cakewalk draw IF Nadal wins that tournament.

For a Rafa fan :- Any draw that Fed gets is a cakewalk draw IF Fed wins that tournament
 
gunnd5000 said:
Reallu what the nadal fans are trying to say is that federer is so good that anydraw is easy and the want him to play against a wall in every match. Nadal fans really think fed is better and show this by saying every match is easy for fed
Click to expand...

Better at what? Winning slams in 2010, or....?
 
gunnd5000 said:
a better tennis player. In the grand scheme, currently nadal is still someone who federer beat and lost to in slams. No better than roddick hewitt and safin who all were other people that just played federer. Only difference between them and nadal is nadal is insanely good on clay and there fore has many more slams. Also helps to be playing a past peak federer.

When nadal gets around the 13 slam mark or equals the record for most weeks at number one i will consider him asa goat contender. I am sure he will atain both of these. But as of the current moment federer is a better tennis player.
Click to expand...

Well we'll see when that "better" kicks in, and whether it helps on the slams. If it doesn't, then we're talking Laveresque Rafa. And that can't be good for Federer's "betterness".
 
Last edited:
danielrios said:
USO 2010 Nadal. That is.
Click to expand...

So that would imply that the Final is irrelevant to cakewalk physics. Djokovic has the best hardcourt h2h vs Rafa in the world (apart from Davydenko whom I don't count in matters of the slams because he's proven to not threaten). On top of that, Djokovic didn't have to suffer the fate of most semi-finalists in USO history, as he didn't have to play any tennis on Sunday, and got the Final on Monday, and he moved great in the Final and converted 3 of 4 breakpoints and saved 20 of 26 breakpoints on his own serve. So nothing went Rafa's way in terms of the Final, yet still a 4 set win over the opponent many people thought would hurt Rafa at the US Open. But I get it, the Final isn't part of the cake, cool. But that also means that Rafa's 2010 Wimbledon Final vs Berdych doesn't count. So we'd be looking exclusively at his matches vs Murray and Soderling.....as well as the big servers he faced early on.....
 
nadal_slam_king said:
So that would imply that the Final is irrelevant to cakewalk physics. Djokovic has the best hardcourt h2h vs Rafa in the world (apart from Davydenko whom I don't count in matters of the slams because he's proven to not threaten). On top of that, Djokovic didn't have to suffer the fate of most semi-finalists in USO history, as he didn't have to play any tennis on Sunday, and got the Final on Monday, and he moved great in the Final and converted 3 of 4 breakpoints and saved 20 of 26 breakpoints on his own serve. So nothing went Rafa's way in terms of the Final, yet still a 4 set win over the opponent many people thought would hurt Rafa at the US Open. But I get it, the Final isn't part of the cake, cool. But that also means that Rafa's 2010 Wimbledon Final vs Berdych doesn't count. So we'd be looking exclusively at his matches vs Murray and Soderling.....as well as the big servers he faced early on.....
Click to expand...

No. It doesn't mean that. Everyone knew Rafa was the HUGE favorite against Djokovic. I mean Djokovic hadn't beaten a top ten player in months. You really thought he was the toughest opponent to meet in the final? Get real.
 
HunterST said:
No. It doesn't mean that. Everyone knew Rafa was the HUGE favorite against Djokovic. I mean Djokovic hadn't beaten a top ten player in months. You really thought he was the toughest opponent to meet in the final? Get real.
Click to expand...

O_o_O....touchy......No, I said Djokovic had the best hardcourt h2h record vs Rafa of any player in the world outside of the slamless Davy. And it's not like Djokovic can't win slam Finals. And as it turned out he was perhaps the clutchest US Open Finalist in recent times, converting 75% of breakpoints and saving 77% of breakpoints on his own serve. That's superb, and that's more than we can say for Federer when he faces Rafa in slam Finals after 2007 when Rafa learned grass and the rest followed. Federer's greatest weakness is poor breakpoint conversion rate vs Rafa. And that's why I was hoping Federer made the Final (to aid Rafa's US Open title chances).
 
See Rafael Nadal's US Open 2010 draw.

Knackered Verdasco, a pitiful and tired looking Youzhny and then Djokovic who ran out of puff after one hour. Rafael Nadal beat who was put in front of him and quite convincingly at that but he really couldn't have hoped for a much better draw.
 
Ocean Drive said:
See Rafael Nadal's US Open 2010 draw.

Knackered Verdasco, a pitiful and tired looking Youzhny and then Djokovic who ran out of puff after one hour. Rafael Nadal beat who was put in front of him and quite convincingly at that but he really couldn't have hoped for a much better draw.
Click to expand...

That doesn't differ from most top 2 seed draws. I don't know what you expect, there is often a hole in a quarter and somebody has to get it. Rafa sure didn't get it at the AO when he got Murray in the QF. And he sure didn't get the hole at Wimbledon when he met Soderling and Murray. Had to happen one day, but even so, Youzhny beat Rafa at Chennai, Dubai (twice), 2006 US Open, so the draw could have been easier. Verdasco, all but beat Rafa at the 2009 Australian Open. There aren't many threats in the entire tour, so we can't expect a QF to be that threat every slam for Rafa. But definitely, Rafa had the toughest AO and Wimbledon draw imaginable in 2010. And it's not like he played Baghdatis or Gonzo in the US Open Final.
 
Last edited:
Ocean Drive said:
See Rafael Nadal's US Open 2010 draw.

Knackered Verdasco, a pitiful and tired looking Youzhny and then Djokovic who ran out of puff after one hour. Rafael Nadal beat who was put in front of him and quite convincingly at that but he really couldn't have hoped for a much better draw.
Click to expand...

Even if we added federer to Nadal's draw it wouldnt make it tough. After all Nadal has 14-8 (then 14-7) advantage over Federer. Putting Murray isnt going to help as Nadal is (9-4) against Murray.

Simply put unless we add a few TW forum members into the draw, any ATP draw is going to be a cake walk.
 
1. Select a player you don't like.
2. Make disparaging comments about the players said player had to face (X was injured/sick, Y was tired from that 5-setter, Z just gave up/is a bad player, etc.)
3. Your player is now has a cakewalk draw, enjoy your trolling.
 
Eternally_damned said:
I guess *********s are still insecure about Rafa's fluke US Open win, hence the initiation of such threads.
Click to expand...

You have such garbage logic. I can guarantee you that if Rafa had beaten Murray on his way to win the USO hardly anyone would call it a fluke. Murray is to Rafa what Rafa is to Fed. Fed has won many of his titles without facing Nadal. Does that mean they are flukes?
Face it, in his prime, Fed pretty much owned the whole field, in essence no draw was too difficult for him. So if you will let him keep his titles w/o accusation of them being easy wins, then don't talk nonsense about other players and their easy draws. It isn't Nadal's fault Murray and Fed didn't make it to the point where they would face him. Just the way it isn't Fed's problem that Nadal didn't make the USO finals when he made them.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
I hear it referred to often that a player had a "cakewalk" draw. Does this mean the player's original draw on paper was easy? Or does it mean they handled their draw easily? And how much value is placed on the player's Finals opponent?

http://www.tennis-x.com/xblog/2010-06-18/4449.php


Forgive me if my novice response to the term "cakewalk" is frustrating to read. I personally have never used the term, yet witness it's use often; but still lack an understanding of whether it truly applies so regularly to the winner's draw or is being used to slander one's achievements.
Click to expand...

Disingenuous post of the year award. :-/
 
Do you really need a system to replace thought for yourself? Listen, you look at the draw and if it looks easy, you tell yourself that this guy has it bagged for an easy run. Alright? If the New England patriots are playing the Kansas City Chiefs or the Jets after a bye, I don't have to look at their overall records or head to head records to know that it's an easier schedule for them than say a Baltiomore or Indianapolis team.

Yes I have brain cells that I rub together so I don't have to use systems to determine what cognition could easy compute in minutes or even seconds, and I don't need to gather input from people by creating dumb threads to answer "no duh" questions either.
 
cork_screw said:
Do you really need a system to replace thought for yourself? Listen, you look at the draw and if it looks easy, you tell yourself that this guy has it bagged for an easy run. Alright? If the New England patriots are playing the Kansas City Chiefs or the Jets after a bye, I don't have to look at their overall records or head to head records to know that it's an easier schedule for them than say a Baltiomore or Indianapolis team.

Yes I have brain cells that I rub together so I don't have to use systems to determine what cognition could easy compute in minutes or even seconds, and I don't need to gather input from people by creating dumb threads to answer "no duh" questions either.
Click to expand...

Wow... just... wow...
 
nadal_slam_king said:
O_o_O....touchy......No, I said Djokovic had the best hardcourt h2h record vs Rafa of any player in the world outside of the slamless Davy. And it's not like Djokovic can't win slam Finals. And as it turned out he was perhaps the clutchest US Open Finalist in recent times, converting 75% of breakpoints and saving 77% of breakpoints on his own serve. That's superb, and that's more than we can say for Federer when he faces Rafa in slam Finals after 2007 when Rafa learned grass and the rest followed. Federer's greatest weakness is poor breakpoint conversion rate vs Rafa. And that's why I was hoping Federer made the Final (to aid Rafa's US Open title chances).
Click to expand...

I don't care who you wanted to make the final or what you think of Federer's chance against Nadal in a final.

The thread was about what makes a draw difficult or easy. You can't claim a draw is difficult based on a technicality. That would be like saying Nadal would have had a tougher draw if he got James Blake in the final than if he got Federer. JB has a better record, but Fed is the tougher opponent. It's obvious.

Djokovic was not the toughest opponent for him in the final. He wasn't a pushover by any means, but not tough enough to nullify Nadal's very easy draw.

By the way, I don't think an easy draw lessens the achievement of winning the GS or obtaining a CGS. You can only beat who is put in front of you.
 
HunterST said:
I don't care who you wanted to make the final or what you think of Federer's chance against Nadal in a final.

The thread was about what makes a draw difficult or easy. You can't claim a draw is difficult based on a technicality. That would be like saying Nadal would have had a tougher draw if he got James Blake in the final than if he got Federer. JB has a better record, but Fed is the tougher opponent. It's obvious.

Djokovic was not the toughest opponent for him in the final. He wasn't a pushover by any means, but not tough enough to nullify Nadal's very easy draw.

By the way, I don't think an easy draw lessens the achievement of winning the GS or obtaining a CGS. You can only beat who is put in front of you.
Click to expand...

Nadal leads Blake 4-3 on hardcourt. Nadal has won their last 4 meetings.....whereas Djokovic has always owned Rafa on hardcourts more than Federer did.

On top of that Djokovic delivered major clutchness in the Final, and clutchness is the aspect he sometimes lacks in big matches.
Djokovic had 75% breakpoint conversion, 77% breakpoints saved, 67% first serve%, and on top of that he moved well.

The Final turned out to be a higher standard than the Djokovic-Federer match, which lacked consistent shot-making.
 
Last edited:
I think a cakewalk draw is when you get players that don't have the heart to beat a certain player, in general, those who go out on the court thinking they're beaten, and play according to the script.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Nadal leads Blake 4-3 on hardcourt. Nadal has won their last 4 meetings.....whereas Djokovic has always owned Rafa on hardcourts more than Federer did.

On top of that Djokovic delivered major clutchness in the Final, and clutchness is the aspect he sometimes lacks in big matches.
Djokovic had 75% breakpoint conversion, 77% breakpoints saved, 67% first serve%, and on top of that he moved well.

The Final turned out to be a higher standard than the Djokovic-Federer match, which lacked consistent shot-making.
Click to expand...

Man, what is your point? The thread isn't about Fed and Nadal. You really think Djokovic, who has never won a US open, is such a tough opponent that it makes Rafa's draw tough?

The only top 10 opponent he faced before the final was Verdasco, who had not been putting up stellar performances. His semifinal opponent was Youzhny. I mean c'mon.

Again, nothing against Rafa. It's not his fault guys like Murray lost early, but you can't deny that's a cakewalk draw if there ever was one.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Nadal leads Blake 4-3 on hardcourt. Nadal has won their last 4 meetings.....whereas Djokovic has always owned Rafa on hardcourts more than Federer did.

On top of that Djokovic delivered major clutchness in the Final, and clutchness is the aspect he sometimes lacks in big matches.
Djokovic had 75% breakpoint conversion, 77% breakpoints saved, 67% first serve%, and on top of that he moved well.

The Final turned out to be a higher standard than the Djokovic-Federer match, which lacked consistent shot-making.
Click to expand...

He faced 26 break points. I think that says enough.
 
cork_screw said:
Do you really need a system to replace thought for yourself? Listen, you look at the draw and if it looks easy, you tell yourself that this guy has it bagged for an easy run. Alright? If the New England patriots are playing the Kansas City Chiefs or the Jets after a bye, I don't have to look at their overall records or head to head records to know that it's an easier schedule for them than say a Baltiomore or Indianapolis team.

Yes I have brain cells that I rub together so I don't have to use systems to determine what cognition could easy compute in minutes or even seconds, and I don't need to gather input from people by creating dumb threads to answer "no duh" questions either.
Click to expand...

what are those ?
 
HunterST said:
Man, what is your point? The thread isn't about Fed and Nadal. You really think Djokovic, who has never won a US open, is such a tough opponent that it makes Rafa's draw tough?

The only top 10 opponent he faced before the final was Verdasco, who had not been putting up stellar performances. His semifinal opponent was Youzhny. I mean c'mon.

Again, nothing against Rafa. It's not his fault guys like Murray lost early, but you can't deny that's a cakewalk draw if there ever was one.
Click to expand...

Exactly, this thread isn't about Federer and Nadal. So why object to me referring to Djokovic? LOL you just ruled out Djokovic as a tough opponent. The former Australian Open Champion.The same player who just beat Federer at the US Open (and Australian Open). Enough said....
 
nadal_slam_king said:
Exactly, this thread isn't about Federer and Nadal. So why object to me referring to Djokovic? LOL you just ruled out Djokovic as a tough opponent. The former Australian Open Champion.The same player who just beat Federer at the US Open (and Australian Open). Enough said....
Click to expand...

uhhh, no. That's not enough said. You completely ignored the bulk of my argument.

Look at Rafa's draw. It's obviously about as easy as a draw gets for a grand slam. His record with Djokovic will not change that.
 
HunterST said:
uhhh, no. That's not enough said. You completely ignored the bulk of my argument.

Look at Rafa's draw. It's obviously about as easy as a draw gets for a grand slam. His record with Djokovic will not change that.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. Often in a slam the top 2 seed only gets a tough opponent in the SF or F, not a tough opponent in both SF and F, and Djokovic is undoubtedly tough and more credentialed than anyone outside of Rafa/Federer, and I know a lot of people were predicting that Federer would be the more comfortable opponent for Rafa for a US Open Final (and as I said, I myself was hoping Federer would make the Final). By your standards you'd call about half the slams won by top seeds in history a 'cakewalk'. Look how rarely Agassi and Sampras met in slams compared to the number of slams they played.....
 
Last edited:
nadal_slam_king said:
That makes no sense. Often in a slam the top 2 seed only gets a tough opponent in the SF or F, not a tough opponent in both SF and F, and Djokovic is undoubtedly tough and more credentialed than anyone outside of Rafa/Federer, and I know a lot of people were predicting that Federer would be the more comfortable opponent for Rafa for a US Open Final (and as I said, I myself was hoping Federer would make the Final). By your standards you'd call about half the slams won by top seeds in history a 'cakewalk'. Look how rarely Agassi and Sampras met in slams compared to the number of slams they played.....
Click to expand...

Good points.
 
nadal_slam_king said:
That makes no sense. Often in a slam the top 2 seed only gets a tough opponent in the SF or F, not a tough opponent in both SF and F, and Djokovic is undoubtedly tough and more credentialed than anyone outside of Rafa/Federer, and I know a lot of people were predicting that Federer would be the more comfortable opponent for Rafa for a US Open Final (and as I said, I myself was hoping Federer would make the Final). By your standards you'd call about half the slams won by top seeds in history a 'cakewalk'. Look how rarely Agassi and Sampras met in slams compared to the number of slams they played.....
Click to expand...

It's not about the top two players meeting each other, it's about the entire draw. Djokovic was his toughest opponent and he hadn't beaten a top 10 player in months before the win over Federer.

Lets put it this way, how could Nadal's draw have been any easier? By facing a five time champion instead of Djokovic?
 
interesting nadal ****s have continually talked about federer's weak competition in slam finals etc. but now that someone has implied that nadal had a cakewalk or to we get such responses



nadal_slam_king said:
That makes no sense. Often in a slam the top 2 seed only gets a tough opponent in the SF or F, not a tough opponent in both SF and F, and Djokovic is undoubtedly tough and more credentialed than anyone outside of Rafa/Federer, and I know a lot of people were predicting that Federer would be the more comfortable opponent for Rafa for a US Open Final (and as I said, I myself was hoping Federer would make the Final). By your standards you'd call about half the slams won by top seeds in history a 'cakewalk'. Look how rarely Agassi and Sampras met in slams compared to the number of slams they played.....
Click to expand...
 
Federer had a cakewalk draw on his way to his first Wimbledon in 2003. That was horrendous. 1 top ten player the whole way and that was Roddick at no. 6 in the SF.

Nadal's USO draw this year was just as lame.

There is nothing wrong with a cakewalk draw. Im sure Federer and Nadal are more than happy to see their pigeons floating around in their draws.
 
Do you really need a system to replace thought for yourself? Listen, you look at the draw and if it looks easy, you tell yourself that this guy has it bagged for an easy run. Alright? If the New England patriots are playing the Kansas City Chiefs or the Jets after a bye, I don't have to look at their overall records or head to head records to know that it's an easier schedule for them than say a Baltiomore or Indianapolis team.

Yes I have brain cells that I rub together so I don't have to use systems to determine what cognition could easy compute in minutes or even seconds, and I don't need to gather input from people by creating dumb threads to answer "no duh" questions either.
Click to expand...

The point though is to establish a criteria for debate. Every once in a while people will whine about 'why is so-and-so in the Top 10' or 'how come so and so made the YEC' -- saying they obviously didn't deserve it. But then when you ask who should have been there instead ... there's never a good answer.

Same deal here. If you establish a standard for what a cakewalk draw is, you can more easily point out the foolishness of lame accusations when they come up.
 
Sid_Vicious said:
Federer had a cakewalk draw on his way to his first Wimbledon in 2003. That was horrendous. 1 top ten player the whole way and that was Roddick at no. 6 in the SF.

Nadal's USO draw this year was just as lame.

There is nothing wrong with a cakewalk draw. Im sure Federer and Nadal are more than happy to see their pigeons floating around in their draws.
Click to expand...

Yes! Thank you. People act like somehow getting a cakewalk draw (and winning) implies something negative about the player. All it means is that they got a little bit lucky and they took advantage of it. Isn't that the nature of sports?
 
If you put someone on your ignore list, shouldn;t his threads be hidden too.

And if someone quotes his posts, shouldn't the quotes also say "Hidden" or something.

Sorry for the rant.
 
Last edited:
Sid_Vicious said:
Federer had a cakewalk draw on his way to his first Wimbledon in 2003. That was horrendous. 1 top ten player the whole way and that was Roddick at no. 6 in the SF.

Nadal's USO draw this year was just as lame.

There is nothing wrong with a cakewalk draw. Im sure Federer and Nadal are more than happy to see their pigeons floating around in their draws.
Click to expand...

Yeah except Federer won Wimbledon another 5 times to prove it didn't matter what the draw was.
 
oh dear, now that they are about to ban me, I'll probably have to spend more time at work.

So long everyone, and wish you all a great year !
 
Sentinel said:
oh dear, now that they are about to ban me, I'll probably have to spend more time at work.

So long everyone, and wish you all a great year !
Click to expand...

I wonder what sentinel did to get banned. Seems like I've noticed several posters who've been banned lately even though they haven't (from what I can see) posted anything inordinately offensive or anything like that.
 
HunterST said:
I wonder what sentinel did to get banned. Seems like I've noticed several posters who've been banned lately even though they haven't (from what I can see) posted anything inordinately offensive or anything like that.
Click to expand...

Sentinel has not been banned. He has just put a new avatar which says Banned. Its just another one of Sentinel;s great tricks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
2009 US Open Quarterfinals
Replies
43
Views
3K
CocaCola
CocaCola
D
cakewalk draw for Muurya
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
Sentinel
Sentinel
GasquetGOAT
^^The US Open 2009 - Men's Singles Draw Thread!^^
5 6 7
Replies
304
Views
28K
Serendipitous
S
Halba
4th rd picks
Replies
1
Views
694
Bud
Bud
jamesblakefan#1
French Open Men's Draw
3 4 5
Replies
212
Views
14K
volleynets
volleynets
Back
Top