Who would Djokovic would be most wary of at Us open for his chances of another grand slam.

Biggest challenge

  • Nadal

    Votes: 42 47.7%
  • Federer

    Votes: 11 12.5%
  • Medvedev

    Votes: 23 26.1%
  • Thiem

    Votes: 3 3.4%
  • Zverev

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Tsitsipas

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Kyrgios

    Votes: 6 6.8%
  • Others

    Votes: 3 3.4%

  • Total voters
    88

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
There are a number of events that have been faster than the USO in recent years. It has not ruined tennis as you suggest. Not sure about this year, but Cincinatti courts are usually faster than the USO. Shanghai, Paris, London and a number of others are typically faster.

Grass, in the 90s, was the biggest problem. However, he has been slowed to the extent that several hard court events appear to be faster than Wimbledon.

A number of other changes have been made since those short rally days of the 90s. Tennis balls are brighter and have a little bit more felt then they did 25+ years ago. Possibly more important, string technology has changed quite a bit. Along with these changes, stroke mechanics and playing styles have you evolved.

So it is doubtful that speeding up the US Open courts a bit will return us to the game of the 90s that were largely determined by service winners or return winners.
Depends what you mean by "speeding up a BIT".

I rarely watch indoor events when they're too quick, so...

When the average rally is 3 shots, I switch the channel to Gordon Ramsey or a Seinfeld re-run.

The 90s were putrid tennis-wise, we never should risk going back, not even a bit.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
Depends what you mean by "speeding up a BIT".

I rarely watch indoor events when they're too quick, so...

When the average rally is 3 shots, I switch the channel to Gordon Ramsey or a Seinfeld re-run.

The 90s were putrid tennis-wise, we never should risk going back, not even a bit.
Speeding up the courts will not return us back to the 90s because of other factors that have been Incorporated. One very important change that I forgot to mention is that most hard court events went with blue courts and backgrounds in the 00s.

This, along with the brighter balls, provides much better contrast and visibility. Most ATP players have more compact backswings. With all these various changes, players are able to deal with faster incoming balls.

There is also more spin employed in the game because I was trying technology and other factors. To the dynamics of the game have definitely changed since the 90s. We dont really need 4 hour matches. Speeding up the courts to something faster then they are now but slower than they were 25 years ago will not ruin the game
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Speeding up the courts will not return us back to the 90s because of other factors that have been Incorporated. One very important change that I forgot to mention is that most hard court events went with blue courts and backgrounds in the 00s.

This, along with the brighter balls, provides much better contrast and visibility. Most ATP players have more compact backswings. With all these various changes, players are able to deal with faster incoming balls.

There is also more spin employed in the game because I was trying technology and other factors. To the dynamics of the game have definitely changed since the 90s. We dont really need 4 hour matches. Speeding up the courts to something faster then they are now but slower than they were 25 years ago will not ruin the game
You're kidding right?

USO has never been worse in terms of ball visibility than in the last decade. There have been matches when I gave up in frustration... I absolutely detest having to guess where the ball is going. Never or rarely had that problem in the 90s for example.

Or is it the HD TV that's ruining it?

FO is where the balls are most visible, followed by AO.

Wimby is worse than it used to be but it varies from year to year, match to match. USO is by far the worst among slams.

Regarding speeding up courts: racket technology is speeding up the game constantly, hence if anything we need to slow down courts every few years. Speeding up courts while rackets still improve makes no sense.

You enjoy aces that match? Most boring winner in tennis.
 

upchuck

Professional
I'm tempted to put Medvedev ahead of Nadal, but won't:

Federer
Nadal
Medvedev
Bautista Agut
Kyrgios
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Depends what you mean by "speeding up a BIT".

I rarely watch indoor events when they're too quick, so...

When the average rally is 3 shots, I switch the channel to Gordon Ramsey or a Seinfeld re-run.

The 90s were putrid tennis-wise, we never should risk going back, not even a bit.
Same here, fast courts are just really boring to watch.
Its a reason why they worked so hard in AELTC to make the grass slower. Less viewers. Most people want to see rallies.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
Same here, fast courts are just really boring to watch.
Its a reason why they worked so hard in AELTC to make the grass slower. Less viewers. Most people want to see rallies.
Rallies are great. But 4 hrs of rallies for a single match is bit much to watch. I'd actually like to see a bit more S&V rather than just grindfests in the back court.

The subject came up because U-Slam insists that the USO tournament officials are conspiring to give Roger a cake draw. I made the statement that if the USO powers-that-be were really consliring to improve Roger's chances, they would make the courts a bit faster -- faster than they were last year, not necessarily as fast as they were 25yrs ago.

From that suggestion, U-Slam goes on a rant about fast courts of the 90s and how that would destroy the game as we now know it... even tho I never suggested that courts go back to that speed.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Rallies are great. But 4 hrs of rallies for a single match is bit much to watch. I'd actually like to see a bit more S&V rather than just grindfests in the back court.

The subject came up because U-Slam insists that the USO tournament officials are conspiring to give Roger a cake draw. I made the statement that if the USO powers-that-be were really consliring to improve Roger's chances, they would make the courts a bit faster -- faster than they were last year, not necessarily as fast as they were 25yrs ago.

From that suggestion, U-Slam goes on a rant about fast courts of the 90s and how that would destroy the game as we now know it... even tho I never suggested that courts go back to that speed.
Thats your taste, but overall its more people watching when its longer rallies.
So far they havent made the courts any faster for Roger. And now its too late for that. Think Federer is done.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
You're kidding right?

USO has never been worse in terms of ball visibility than in the last decade. There have been matches when I gave up in frustration... I absolutely detest having to guess where the ball is going. Never or rarely had that problem in the 90s for example.

Or is it the HD TV that's ruining it?

FO is where the balls are most visible, followed by AO.

Wimby is worse than it used to be but it varies from year to year, match to match. USO is by far the worst among slams.

Regarding speeding up courts: racket technology is speeding up the game constantly, hence if anything we need to slow down courts every few years. Speeding up courts while rackets still improve makes no sense.

You enjoy aces that match? Most boring winner in tennis.
No, not kidding. But it seems that you might be. I was actually speaking about ball visibility for the players rather than for TV viewers. But the two are related.

I actually find it very difficult to track the ball when watching the FO, unless I am watching it on a large screen HD TV. As a viewer and a player, the contrast of a yellow ball against a blue background is considerably easier to see and track.

This is true for most players and viewers. If no so for you, then I would suggest that you either have a color blindness of some sort or perhaps a hypersensitivity to part of the color soectrum. These types of color issues are not the norm but they are not all that uncommon either. Some individuals are very sensitive to the blue or green parts of the spectrum while others might be sensitive to orange-yellow.

True, there are some powerful rackets on the market. But most pros, esp ATP pros, Are not using them. The rackets that these guys use are much less powerful than the rackets used by the average rec player.

While the racket head is somewhat larger, I don't believe that frame that Federer uses is any more powerful than the frame that Sampras used in the 90s. The modern rackets that I have been using actually have less power than the rackets I was using in the 90s.
 
Last edited:

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
Thats your taste, but overall its more people watching when its longer rallies.
So far they havent made the courts any faster for Roger. And now its too late for that. Think Federer is done.
Not sure if you were really following the discussion. I was primarily speaking to U-Slams conspiracy theory. He was claiming that they were fixing the draw to suit Roger.

I indicated that if that was really true, they would have sped up the courts a bit. The consensus is that the US Open courts were the slowest last year that they have been in a long time (or have ever been). Courts speeds at various events have been fluctuating (both up AND down) in the past 15 years or so. So these changes from year to year really aren't that unusual.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Not sure if you were really following the discussion. I was primarily speaking to U-Slams conspiracy theory. He was claiming that they were fixing the draw to suit Roger.

I indicated that if that was really true, they would have sped up the courts a bit. The consensus is that the US Open courts were the slowest last year that they have been in a long time (or have ever been). Courts speeds at various events have been fluctuating (both up AND down) in the past 15 years or so. So these changes from year to year really aren't that unusual.
Oh, I didnt read all the post. And I am staying out of conspiray.
Anyways, for Rafa it is about the bounce, not the speed.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
Oh, I didnt read all the post. And I am staying out of conspiray.
Anyways, for Rafa it is about the bounce, not the speed.
Yeah, I dont really buy into the draw conspiracies. As for Rafa, the bounce can be influenced by the court speed. But there are other external factors as well... ball type, event elevation (altitude), humidity, court temperature, etc.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, I dont really buy into the draw conspiracies. As for Rafa, the bounce can be influenced by the court speed. But there are other external factors as well... ball type, event elevation (altitude), humidity, court temperature, etc.
Yeah, of course the bounce got something to do w the speed, but not everything. Rafa said he doesnt mind roof closed in NY as the court so big it doesnt make any difference, still the same bounce. Its always humid there too so that isnt any worry, still pretty high bounce, its good enough. Still his best HC slam suited for his game. I got no idea what kind of balls used this year, but he has seemed content w them every year as far as I know.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Same here, fast courts are just really boring to watch.
Its a reason why they worked so hard in AELTC to make the grass slower. Less viewers. Most people want to see rallies.
Whoever didn't watch Wimby in the 90s has no idea what I'm talking about. Wimby was by far the most dreary slam, the most predictable in terms of champs and utterly horrible smash/bash tennis. 1992 was an exception, the other years were just bad, especially from the QFs onwards.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
No, not kidding. But it seems that you might be. I was actually speaking about ball visibility for the players rather than for TV viewers. But the two are related.

I actually find it very difficult to track the ball when watching the FO, unless I am watching it on a large screen HD TV. As a viewer and a player, the contrast of a yellow ball against a blue background is considerably easier to see and track.

This is true for most players and viewers. If no so for you, then I would suggest that you either have a color blindness of some sort or perhaps a hypersensitivity to part of the color soectrum. These types of color issues are not the norm but they are not all that uncommon either. Some individuals are very sensitive to the blue or green parts of the spectrum while others might be sensitive to orange-yellow.

True, there are some powerful rackets on the market. But most pros, esp ATP pros, Are not using them. The rackets that these guys use are much less powerful than the rackets used by the average rec player.

While the racket head is somewhat larger, I don't believe that frame that Federer uses is any more powerful than the frame that Sampras used in the 90s. The modern rackets that I have been using actually have less power than the rackets I was using in the 90s.
I could care less what the players see, and you're not a pro either to make these sweeping statements. They anyway struggle the most when it gets dark not when the colours are blue instead of red, or whatever. What viewers see or don't see has more to do with cameras and the technology used to relay the images, it's much less about colour contrasts. OBVIOUSLY, white or yellow background wouldn't work, but we don't have those so...

The fact you actually argue that FO has poor visibility makes me realize that you are joking, or just being a contrarian for the sake of it. Because that's the silliest thing I've read on TTW this entire week.
 

SeeItHitIt

Semi-Pro
How fas5 (err, slow) are the USO courts? I haven’t seen any early reports. It’s hard to overlook a 5th set tie breaker barely a month ago as to the guy you DONT want to see. If they’re slowing it down to favor certain left handed foreign players, it’s disappointing but has some lessers creep into the conversation.
 

Pantera

Banned
Depends on conditions. If very hot, then Nadal ,Thiem would be nightmare draws for him. If it is cool and a lot of indoor matches due to rain then Federer gunning for revenge will be his nightmare.

Cannot really say Nadal a nightmare though (or Djokovic a nightmare for Nadal) as they are the worlds top 2 so they presumably would expect each other to be a really massive test in a final.

I think for both players to avoid in the draw are Thiem, Medvedev, Tsitsipas and Khachanov. Don't think they would lose to any of them, but they could be taken over 3 hours which would have an effect later on
 

BeatlesFan

Talk Tennis Guru
[QUOTE="SeeItHitIt, post: 13661268, member: 730182"
How fas5 (err, slow) are the USO courts? I haven’t seen any early reports.
[/QUOTE]
Gilbert and Cahill said yesterday the USO surface will be slightly faster than last year with a slightly lower bounce. It will not be as fast as Cincy.
 
[QUOTE="SeeItHitIt, post: 13661268, member: 730182"
How fas5 (err, slow) are the USO courts? I haven’t seen any early reports.
Gilbert and Cahill said yesterday the USO surface will be slightly faster than last year with a slightly lower bounce. It will not be as fast as Cincy.
[/QUOTE]

Perfect for Djokovic then isn't it.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
You're kidding right?

FO is where the balls are most visible, followed by AO...
...

The fact you actually argue that FO has poor visibility makes me realize that you are joking, or just being a contrarian for the sake of it. Because that's the silliest thing I've read on TTW this entire week.
Nope, not kidding and not being a contrarian. In fact, I might be tempted to think that of your statements. However, I am well aware that not everyone has the same perception of color & contrast. Some have a hypersensitivity to the yellow-orange part of the spectrum while others have a hypersensitivity to blue-violet or some other colors. Perhaps your own color perception is a bit off. Not to be insulting, but you might consider having yourself tested for this. Some students and employees experience learning or working difficulties in certain environments because of this.

40+ years ago, I noticed that I had quite a difficult time following the ball on TV when watching RG on the red clay. Back then they used white balls. But, as the ball got dirty, it was tough to track the balls. During the 1970s, optic yellow (usually greenish yellow) became the norm. But the visibility against the red clay was not much better. At first, I wasn't sure if I was alone with this problem. But, in asking dozens of other ppl about this in the past 4 decades, I found that it is a very common problem. Nearly everyone I asked about this pretty much had same issue. Higher visibility balls and large screen HD TVs have decreased the problem somewhat in recent years.

Seems to be quite an issue with posters on this forum. Have seen a number of threads posted on this subject. The subject has be discussed in Tennis Mag, ESPN and elsewhere. Ball visibility had been in improved in the past 20+ year. Utra-Vis and High Visibility balls were developed in the late 90s (and early 00s). Blue courts became were introduced at the US Open, US Open Series and at the AO for improved contrast/visibility. More than 50% of rec hard courts in my area have gone blue for the same reasons. Many of us were disappointed that blue clay only lasted 1 year at Madrid. Easy to see the ball but too slick/slippery for Rafa and Novak. Only mountain goat, Roger, appeared to have no footing issues with it.

Help! I can't see the ball on red clay (Peter Bodo)

Seeing the ball against red clay on TV - horrible! (TT)

Can anyone see the yellow ball on red clay on TV? (TT)

Different Color Combinations Enliven Tennis Courts:
"When we did the research for the USTA, we found there was a lot of science to it," says Graham. "Those colors are approximately 180 degrees opposite of yellow on the color wheel. With blue and purple, you are creating the most contrast you can for players, spectators and the TV audience."
 

SystemicAnomaly

Talk Tennis Guru
@SeeItHitIt
Gilbert and Cahill said yesterday the USO surface will be slightly faster than last year with a slightly lower bounce. It will not be as fast as Cincy.
Perfect for Djokovic then isn't it.
[/QUOTE]

According to players, the US Open courts were the slowest they have been in quite a few years (maybe even the slowest ever). So, if they are slightly faster than last year, they can still be relatively slow -- compared to what they were 15 yrs ago. Much slower than they were 25 yrs ago.

Seems the Cincy was not quite as fast as it has been in the past. The court speed index has not been all that high. Of course, humidity, court temp and other factors contribute to ball speed. The elevation of Cincy is around 480 feet so that is a minor-to-moderate factor as well.
 

ForumMember

Hall of Fame
Kyrgios got to play both Nadal and Federer in early rounds in recent gran slams. High time that he runs into Djokovic round 3-4.
 

Djokodal Fan

Hall of Fame
The US open courts have been slow as molasses. So he should be worried about Thiem and Nadal. Thiem would be the danger man
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
Nadal - he has been consistently going deep everywhere for a while now and the US Open is a tournament that he has had a bit of success at against Djokovic.
 

JaoSousa

Rookie
Nadal - he has been consistently going deep everywhere for a while now and the US Open is a tournament that he has had a bit of success at against Djokovic.
But do you really think that Nadal can do well against him on a hard court after what happened to him in Australia? Also, it has been 6 years since nadal last beat djokovic and it is a much different story now. In my opinion, their US Open past is largely irrelevant. If they meet this year, I'm going djokovic in 4.

I think an early meeting with Kyrgios will be the most dangerous for Djokovic. Medvedev played lights out for a set and a half to beat Djokovic and that was only best of 3. His two first serves strategy will not work anymore and Djokovic will come out with a solid game plan. Kyrgios is someone whom it is very difficult to plan against because he is unpredictable.
 

TheGhostOfAgassi

Talk Tennis Guru
But do you really think that Nadal can do well against him on a hard court after what happened to him in Australia? Also, it has been 6 years since nadal last beat djokovic and it is a much different story now. In my opinion, their US Open past is largely irrelevant. If they meet this year, I'm going djokovic in 4.

I think an early meeting with Kyrgios will be the most dangerous for Djokovic. Medvedev played lights out for a set and a half to beat Djokovic and that was only best of 3. His two first serves strategy will not work anymore and Djokovic will come out with a solid game plan. Kyrgios is someone whom it is very difficult to plan against because he is unpredictable.
It was less than 2 months since surgery in AO. He reached a final. That’s more than Novak managed to do after his small surgery.
 

uscwang

Hall of Fame
Novak is troubled by NY's heat and humidity. Other than that, he is the favorite against anyone there with a racquet.
 

titoelcolombiano

Hall of Fame
But do you really think that Nadal can do well against him on a hard court after what happened to him in Australia? Also, it has been 6 years since nadal last beat djokovic and it is a much different story now. In my opinion, their US Open past is largely irrelevant. If they meet this year, I'm going djokovic in 4.

I think an early meeting with Kyrgios will be the most dangerous for Djokovic. Medvedev played lights out for a set and a half to beat Djokovic and that was only best of 3. His two first serves strategy will not work anymore and Djokovic will come out with a solid game plan. Kyrgios is someone whom it is very difficult to plan against because he is unpredictable.
Djokovic will be the favourite if they meet but it won't be an AO repeat. Nadal has a shot. The US Open courts are slower than AO and Rafa enjoys playing there.
 

Sabratha

Talk Tennis Guru
Who cares, it's so mundane and boring when Novak wins everything. Let him lose a match and give a youngster a try.
 

UnderratedSlam

Hall of Fame
Wear and tear still happens, Thiem isn't an ATG and there's more older successful players but Fedalovic are still the outliers. Look at Murray, his career trajectory is normal in comparison to prior eras.
Only because he got heavily injured. Had RF had hip problems like this at 30 he too would have fallen like a rock.

I hope you didn't say the same about Novak in 2017, or?
 
Top