Cheryl, I think you hit the nail on the head. Federer now has Simon in his head, and will probably always have trouble with him.

Simon vs Nole, there's no beatdowns. Nole had to go the distance to beat Simon, Simon just won't go away, even with cropped legs. Just look at their Shanghai encounter in 2009, Nole was so frustrated during that match. Simon with an injured leg still managed to beat Ljuby in the Paris 2009 Masters. The guy is so tenacious and he never says die.

Rafa also lost a close match against Simon in Madrid 2009 Masters on indoor hardcourt. Each time these top players play against Simon, they have to bring their A game. The only top player least troubled by Simon is Murray, who plays a similar game like Simon but comes with bigger weapons, though not as aggressive as Simon.

I think Simon's game works better against attacking players than fellow counter punchers. He beats Troicki everytime they play against each other, not even allowing Troicki a set in all those encounters, even with the improved version of Troicki!

One player who consistently gives Simon problems is Llodra. It seems that Simon can't handle the pure S & V game, as I think he feels rushed all the time. However, I'm not sure that in a best of five sets match, Llodra can still trouble Simon, given how well Simon played against Fed yesterday, after feeling rushed by Fed in the first two sets.

I saw a clip of match and there's Guy Forget cheering for Simon. Hmmm, can I remind you of a rather stupid decision u made in Davis Cup final? Lucky u should be French coach ;)
ed: where r u ? Hope u r OK. How strange this virtual world is, still wondering what happened to claycourt.

Hi Deuce: Am back with you all again! Just arrived in Spain to spend two months with my sister on the Costa del Sol - beats the miserable weather in Honfleur. Missed the first AO matches because we were driving down for three days but am trying to catch up on all the news now. Tuned in just in time to see Simon-Federer match but stopped watching when he went down in the 2nd set - couldn't bear the agony of seeing the adorable Gilles being crushed in straight sets :-( but then peeked at the scoreline and remained glued for the rest of the match. Couldn't believe my eyes when RF started unravellling and there was that brief moment when it really looked as though the unthinkable was about to happen!!!!

What's your take on Andy so far? Do you think he's in good shape mentally and physically?

Cheryl I noticed too, that Fed's backhand slice couldn't trouble Simon, just like it couldn't trouble Rafa. Does it trouble Murray? I can't remember clearly how Murray handles Fed's backhand slices. I guess it's the movements of these players, they are so quick to get back into position, that Fed can't gain any advantage over them. Also they have good anticipatory skills, good return and retrieving skills and so Fed can't hit winners against them that easily. One more important point, they do not fear Fed and have the belief that they can beat Fed. Ferrer on the other hand, doesn't have that belief and shows too much respect for Fed. He played well against Fed during two recent encounters - at Cincy 2009 and Madrid 2010, won one set both times, gave Fed a bit of problems but still couldn't take the next step of beating Fed. After so many encounters, he should have won those two matches but failed to capitalize on his chances. So I think approaching the match with the right mindset will make a difference in taking that 'next' step.

Did Simon play in a way that forced Federer into unforced errors?
By that logic did Federer play in a way that caused Simon to break down in the 5th set?
A big takeaway for Federer is that if it were a three setter , then he had already won and since it was a five setter he adapted his game to finally take it away from his personal bogeyman!

All the counterpunchers who have given trouble have all been defeated by Federer in the last three professional tournaments he has played. So has Federer become the kryptonite for the counterpunchers. We might not know as Feds body may not keep up with his evolving game.

He is really of a bygone era of the Safins , Hewitts, those were really his compatriots. It is preternatural that we are still are debating how do we get the best of him or still speculating on if he can pull it off. A player has to believe hard so that he can take the "next" step against this old guy!

nirv02, no Fed is not the counterpunchers kryptonite, as he has negative H2H against these guys, meaning they'll beat him most of the time. If you noticed in the fifth set, Simon's serve level dropped, allowing Fed to capitalize on that break opportunity and that's about all Simon gave to Fed. Simon continued to fight off some MPs and Fed had to serve for the match and won the points as Simon was not going to give in to him.

Well when Fed was in his TMF days, no one among his peers was able to push him or beat him, except on clay, saved for Nalby may be, and Safin during that AO semifinal. All these changed a bit when Rafa arrived at the scene and later in 2006/2007 he was joined by Murray and Nole. Simon joined them in 2008, when Fed was arguably no longer TMF but still very difficult to beat. Had this batch of youngsters be in the same age group as Fed and joined the tour the same time as Fed, would Fed still win all those slams he had won?? Don't know. I think none of us can answer that question, so I'll leave it at that and give Fed the credit he is due. After all the fact that at age 29, he still can go around beating up most players and gives the youngsters a run for their money says a lot about Fed as a tennis player.

ed! How lovely 2 c u back! Welcome. Don't talk to me about weather, think here in Dorset probably get the same as u! Was so pleased 4 Gilles. I thought he's lose in 3 but....hope he has a gr8 year. Now we need fan 4t back or is she cruising the 7 seas ;)
Don't know about Andy.Haven't seen much of him yet. Hardly broke sweat in last match. But expect it's another bhind the sofa, nail biting tournament from him!

One more point to add, the next time Fed meets these youngsters in a best of three sets match, it will be harder for him to beat them, as they have all learnt a thing or two about Fed's new game and know what to expect.

Simon troubled Federer with pure GUTS. The simple fact is that Simon played an incredible match . Simon troubled Federer because from the third set onwards, he raised his level and did not let it drop one tiny notch. Simon was on fire, and considering that he STILL lost, I do not consider him Federer's Kryptonite. Which of the top players won't trouble Federer if on fire?

Simon can still play better than he played yesterday. To me he played at a higher level in 2008. Whether he can produce that form again that's another matter. He certainly can move a bit quicker than he moved yesterday. Fed is fortunate to come through a tough match which can go either way. Yes, I agree with Cheryl that Simon is Fed's kryptonite, as he has beaten Fed on two occasions and come close to beating Fed in a slam, if only he can regain his 2008 form....

No wonder Fed half jokingly says that he doesn't want to meet Simon anymore in a match.

Only players like Ferrer who has not beaten Fed has to 'believe hard'. Those three guys who have positive H2H against Fed already know they can beat Fed. The difference between Ferrer and these guys is that these guys simply do not fear Fed and approach their matches against Fed with a positive attitude. They may lose of course, but they can and will win too.

Simon can still play better than he played yesterday. To me he played at a higher level in 2008

Wrong!
"I felt a little better than him to start the fifth set, I think. But then he raised his level a little bit, and I was already at my maximum," Simon said.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/Federer+bares+fangs+hairy+match/ 4136690/story.html#ixzz1BZTjOLm9

We ll take Simons word on that !

Aww its all confusing. Can beat Fed , cannot beat Fed , some need belief , some dont need. Even if you dont need you still may lose.

Now we shall see a scale of 1 - 10 of belief factor that you need to beat the old man !

Nirv02, are you here just to win an argument? Simon said he's up to his limit, of course he was, don't expect him not to put up his best in a slam. Do you think he'll compare his own performance to his 2008 ones?

Why do you need to be confused, after all we are entitled to our opinions. You may disagree
and that's ok with me. Why are you so bothered about how we think about Fed's performance?I'm not here to convince you, just to express my opinion. You may disagree about what Cheryl and others said about Fed and his kryptonite, and many others may have their own views too. So it's fine that you don't agree with me and I'm not going into any argument with you for that matter. I'll just leave it at that.

..as I am here to express mine

he may compare to 2008 and say this was his better performance. How are we ever going to know?

Your guess is as good as mine, so we just leave it at that. We can always have different opinions, that does not affect the players a bit.

Hey ed,
welcome back!
Enjoy the weather, the fresh fish and everything else at the Costa. I have fond memories from down there, too bad it takes a long plane ride for us to reach it.

An entertaining match is coming up in Tomic-Nadal.

Cheryl, is Simon really Federer's kryptonite ... he did lose. Although it was by far the best tennis we've seen so far at this year's AO.
It is great to see Simon back playing so well ... and I think he's wrong when he says we will forget how he played ... and that it is just the second round.
They were both so gracious at the end of the match and Fed was pretty funny in his on court interview.

kryptonite weakened Superman...I think it's actually pretty apt. :)

Perhaps that's why he chose those 'shorts' ? ;)

ahahahahahaha. Maybe so. :D

I don't really agree with the blog. Here's why:

I think 3 matches is too small of a sample to say that you are somebody's kryptonite. Now if you say Rafa is his kryptonite on clay (11-2 if I'm not mistaken) I could agree with that. A 1-2 h2h hardly qualifies.

If you go back and look the first time they played it was a 3 set match and it was Roger's first match after a devastating loss to Rafa the first time at Wimbledon. The second time they played was at the MC at year's end where again it was a 3-set match and the back was probably an issue. Combine this with the fact that Simon was at his best and near his career high rank.

This last match came when Simon was hot having just won a title. What's more Roger did win the match. He's had many struggles at Grand Slams the past few years in early rounds. Remember Tipseravic in '08, Andreev in '08 and '10, Berdych in '09, Haas in '09 and he went on to win the title in 3 of those 5 Slams so I wouldn't read too much into this one match.

numero, it's more what seems to happen to Federer around Simon. I was in Toronto when Roger imploded against Gilles..it was....bizarre is the best way I can put it. Roger fell apart for no particular reason...and then he did it AGAIN. Very nearly did it in Melbourne.

Rafa doesn't get to be Rogi's kryptonite on clay because he beats EVERYONE on clay. He's just a better clay court player. I think you'd be hardpressed to find someone to agree that Simon is a better hard-court player than Federer. it's just that something....happens.

Totally agree with ya numero. a total of 3 meetings IS a rather small sample to judge by, and we've seen Federer play bizarrely in matches before (take Montreal '09 when Federer lost to Tsonga after leading 5-1 in the final set, for example). Federer simply does not like top-calibre counter-punchers.

Totally agree with ya numero. a total of 3 meetings IS a rather small sample to judge by, and we've seen Federer play bizarrely in matches before (take Montreal '09 when Federer lost to Tsonga after leading 5-1 in the final set, for example). Federer simply does not like top-calibre counter-punchers.

Anyone familiar with the game understands that there are a host of reasons that Nadal tends to beat Federer, one of those being that he?s just flat-out a better clay court player.

A win is a win, plus their previous 2 matches were both masters events, this is a slam and however you want to look at it, federer won.


cheryl, against everyone. Not just federer, try and make that a bit more clear. Equally, you could say that it has been federer who has reached the finals of the clay court swing, MORE than any other player, but I suppose to say something like this would be hoodoo. So what about Federer being a better hard court player? even better than rafa.

Simon played an excellent game yesterday, but the true champion that federer is, he changed his game in the fifth, and it worked. I enjoyed the match.

In the 3rd and 4th sets Simon was tremendous... as the commentator on the Australian Open Radio said: "If you didn't know it would be difficult to tell who's the world #2 out there." Shame that he ran out of steam in the fifth taking the pressure off Federer and allowing him to get over his jitters and regroup. Only Nadal and Simon make him that nervous but I think you're right Cheryl, Simon is his true kripptonite and Nadal another Superman.

maxi - I actually DID say that Nadal beats the other top guys too...wasn't having a go at Roger there. I liked the match too. Rog brings out the best in him.

Some real tennis analysis
http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/19/analysis-ho w-federer-survived-simon/

Hello Cheryl,
This certaily is not the one of your best blogs. Had been away on tour but managed to see the four sets. Near the end of the second set Vijay was commenting that a tennis clinic is on and Fed is giving a lesson to Simon. And then suddenly Fed's service fell apart and Simon got the space and time required to return to the game. This continued in the 3rd and 4th sets. I did not see the fifth. Yet Gills is not in Fed's head, he is just a very good player- good enough to win on his day. I still believe that Fed can always beat himself by failing to serve well and shanking BH and FH on the tramlines as he was consistently doing in the 3rd and 4th sets.

newfangkc,

I think you are right.

Fed sometimes fails to keep his first serve in, which causes him a lot of problem a part from his serve he also makes some very expensive errors.

now the problem is Fed is finding his service problem at the wrong time , he is in R16 and from now onwards he will have to keep his serve at his best, if Fed want to put his oponent under fire.

Champ00289,
See what happened in the second set against Tomy Robredo! All of a sudden he started poor serving and lousy errors when finishing a rally all throughout and lost the set 3-6. Strange, very strange indeed! He is just managing to get past lower ranked players with some hard work. Can't imagine how he will handle the quarters and semis if he is still there! Keeping fingers crossed and nails trimmed for the next week.

i wonder if rafa fans think that davydenko is truly nadal kryptonite. That would be an interesting headline - for a change.

newfangkc, nice insight and being as you were actually there, bears more resemblance to what actually happened. thanks.

I've seen it argued, Maxi. I've also seen it argued that it's Polito (Del Potro).

Rafa was the first of the Big Four that Polito beat, down in Miami (though I tend to disdain those who lump his 2009 straight-setter over Rafa in there also; they always seem to forget Rafa had a torn ab muscle during that period. I was at that match. Cried pretty much the whole last set).

My Guy was up a double break in that final set, mara - surely the tears didn't come until mid-way through?

Rafa is 3-0 over Davy on clay though, not sure Davy can be called his kryptonite. Delpo did beat Rafa once at Miami, however the other two times that he beats Rafa, Rafa was just back from his injury and was not back to his best yet, that's why most top ten players beat him during that period. Delpo also beat Fed twice in a row and Fed wasn't injured both time! Well now that Delpo himself was injured and just back from his injury, I doubt he'll be a threat to the top players, at least not yet.

No one should underestimate the dark period Rafa was going through in 2009 with patellar tendonitis and the divorce of his parents, then just as he came back on tour, he suffered a stomach tear. Coping with a career threatening injury and trying to reconcile your parents at the same time is not the place you want to be in when competing in a game like tennis, this is what Rafa told a Spanish newspaper about that period:


?I was trying to keep to myself?, he would later tell a Spanish newspaper. ?I didn?t look at my cell phone or answer messages. I was outside myself, living a period that wasn?t simple.?

That he was able to even make the SF in most of the tournaments during that period, and then come back in 2010 to excel as he did is truly amazing. So let?s not make too much about who beat him at a time when he was clearly not at his best.

stop making excuses for him all the time nadline. He's a grown man. Of course he's a brilliant tennis player, the best right now, so don't make any more tired excuses of injury and 'rafa's tired'. Truly boring.

YAWN!!! Maxi...YAWN.....

so predictable jean. enjoy your moment of glory.

Maxi,
Nadline wasn't making any excuses. Just recounting facts. I hope you know sufficient tennis to realize that when we analyze a past match or try to predict the outcome of a future match, we need to look at not just the players' tennis but also their fitness. Sportsmanship requires players not to give injuries as an excuse for losses but that does not mean analysts should ignore injuries. It is a very important piece of information. And it is real. And fans who are anxious to estimate chances of their idol winning the next match also look at this aspect in analyzing past performance and predicting future performance. Your advice about not talking about injuries should have been given to Federer after he lost Wimbledon 2010. You should have reminded him that he was a grown man. Fans and analysts are entitled to discuss injuries and take it into account.

Well said vij. Analysts and fans are entitlted to analyse the match(es) and see what went wrong. We all know players won't be 100% fit all the time but as long as they take to
the court, they are fit to play. However to be less fit than one normally is does influence one's play and result. Of course the opponent does play a part. If we are not supposed to discuss all these, then there's nothing much to discuss, just simply so and so plays better to win the match, full stop.

vj, go and recount the times that nadline has discussed rafa's injuries and the divorce between his parents. Then you will understand that this is more about his mental state than his injuries. And I really dont need to take advice from a rafa fan about federer, thanks. Luckystar, the same applies. As rafa appeared to be so cut up about his parents divorce, may be he should have spoken to a shrink, but for nadline to keep on and on about this and his darkest time - grow up. He's a top athlete. deal with it.

Maxi, it's absolutely hilarious watching you always lose it when you read Nadline's posts.

What a hold she has on you!!

Maxi, it's absolutely hilarious watching you always lose it when you read Nadline's posts.

What a hold she has on you!!

jean , 2/20/11 11:03 AM


Exactly!

The Dubai is out finally and Federer gets the cup-cake half as usual. The most daunting encounter for Federer up to the final is Gulbis, who might even go walkies before then. Nole on the other hand has got to get past Baghdatis, Berdych and Troicki to get to there.

nadline - not to mention that Nole draws Llodra in the very first round. He's quite a trickster, not always the easiest of matches to play against him. then its baghdatis, berdych, troicki, and then finally fed (if the seeding holds) in order to win the title. yikes.

i'm starting to believe in this draw fixing business too. roger really does get great draws all the time. and muzz too, very often. i have a hard time putting it all down to "luck", because isn't luck supposed to balance out at some point?

The draw was only published this afternoon, normally it's done at least the Friday before, what took them so long, or were they too embarrassed to publish such a lop-sided draw, with a total cake walk in the top half. I bet if Rafa was there heading the top half, the whole thing will have been reversed, and Roger would still have a cupcake draw.

stu, you are right. Rafa and Nole always get the toughest draws, whatever rank they hold.

Now that RF is getting older, ALL of the tournaments are following AO's example of looking after TMF by giving cushy draws and lovely schedules - as I've ALWAYS maintained!!

"stu, you are right. Rafa and Nole always get the toughest draws, whatever rank they hold." nadline

I think you can add Roddick to that scenario. His draws at the Grandslams and masters have been very difficult. Even at memphis, he got the toughest draw as opposed to Verdasco.

I have to disagree with you on the joker, as he's had some very easy/cushy draws at the slams. Look at the USO last year and this year's AO, and quite a few more.

I hate the draws, period. Can anyone tell me why Roddick nearly always ends up in Fed's side of the draw, more times than not?? I literally got my head in the guillotine for saying I think the draws are fixed, but how could anyone explain to me why Roddick, had/has such bad luck to always end up on Fed's side?? I know why, he's American, and the tennis world don't want an American doing well in tennis = Roddick always ends up in Fed's half, as he's been the only big threat to Fed until Nadal came along.

"Well said vij. Analysts and fans are entitlted to analyse the match(es) and see what went wrong. .... luckystar

I don't know why anyone should have a problem with another poster stating the facts about a player's injuries. As a matter of fact, that's why we post on these blog sites to air our opinions. If that weren't the case, then why are we posting our comments?

As I've stated before, EVERYONE has the right to their opinions, and as such they can state ikt as many times as they want to do so. If offends another, then, there's a simple resolution .... don't read the posts of those people whose opinions you don't care about. But, no one has the right to tell another that they can't state the facts as they see fit, or the amount of times they reiterate it -- that's the moderators' job, and I don't see them complaining, or else the posts would be deleted. My only problem with people who are lovers of didactic preaching, is their incongruence. Don't say one thing and do the opposite, as in berating a poster for their honesty. That's not fair.

In sum, Nadline has the right to state anything she feels with respect to Rafa's injuries, and for as many times as she wants to do so, to the tenth/hundredth/thousandth exponent. Haven't we seen Fed's fan state for the zillionth time that he's fantastic and the best, et al??

Write guys, write, and ofen ..... I love to read.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/I-m-not-over-the-hill-insists-Federer/Ar ticle1-664788.aspx

A nice article to read...

@maxi,
if you do not want advice from a Rafa fan , then you should not give advice to a Rafa fan. Besides , I wasn't really giving you any advice. I was just being sarcastic. I don't think you know Roger well enough even to talk to him, let alone remind him that he is a grown man.

Add to the above the overwhelming number of times that (every time but one I believe) that Murray has been in the opposing half from Federer at slams in the last 12 or so draws and you really wonder whether for many (not all) tournaments there is some fixing going on... I don't generally believe in conspiracy theories... but here you wonder whether the tournaments see the $$ ... if Federer makes it deeper into most tournaments it spells more $$ for the tournaments by and large as it will sell more tickets and advertisements.

Ha ha, not to rule out betting syndicates having a hand in fixing the draw! Assuming we believe in conspiracy theories, which would include vested interests trying to further their interests eg, better ticket sales, more revenue for broadcasters etc, I wonder how they would do it. I don't know about the lesser tournaments but in GS, they draw the seeds in public. So, if they are fixing, how are they doing it? Both Fed and Murray are seeded.
As for the unseeded part, they can easily fix it as they simply present the unseeded part of the draw supposedly done by random placement.

It's the random unseeded placements at a bunch of tournaments put together that raise the most suspicion. It is all speculation and just hunches of course, and there may not be any foul play (fixing) or not often... but it has been suspicious to many for a long time... perhaps there is something to it.

Perhaps I am mistaken but I don't think so: I think that which draw seeds 3 and 4 are put into at slams is supposed to be by random draw as well. If so many people have been a little suspicious at Murray being in the opposite half of Federer in all but 1 slam going on three or perhaps more years.... if by random each time the chances of this happening are very close to zero.

There has been talk that Wimbledon manipulates the seeding, and it was evident when they slotted Sharapova at a higher seeding a couple of years ago. They've done that with some other players also.

@cholorostoma
The projected semifinals in slams are almost always federer/djokovic and nadal/murray. Its hard to say which one of the two(djokovic,murray) federer would prefer to play, but it is strange how often it occurs in the slams.

Except the FO, where Nole always ends up in Rafa's half of the draw, saved 2009. It's ridiculous that since 2006, Nole was in Rafa's half at the FO- 2006,2007,2008,2010.

Come to think of it, since 2007, Murray always ends up in Rafa's half at the AO: 2007-2008(Murray not top four yet); 2009-2011. At Wimbledon, he also ends up on Rafa's half: 2008 met in the QF; 2009 also in Rafa's half except that Rafa had withdrawn, replaced by Delpo. Roddick was in that quarter and so he met Murray in the semi. In 2010, they met in the semi. At the USO, Murray was also drawn into Rafa's half since 2008, right through 2010, except that Murray didn't get to meet Rafa in the semis in 2009, 2010.

lucky, as an Andy fan, I'd much rather he met Fed b4 the final, I think that way he'd slay some demons!

deuce, I'm with you here. I hope Murray ends up in Fed's half, on grass and on hard courts. On clay, I hope Nole ends up in Fed's half. Now that Nole keeps beating Fed in a hard court slam, it doesn't make any difference to Fed whether he faces Nole or Murray in the hard court slams. On grass, no difference to Fed too. Only on clay, there's lots of difference between facing Nole or Murray. However, now that Sod is no.4, and have beaten both Fed and Rafa at the FO, so whether facing Nole or facing Sod in the semifinal of FO doesn't make much difference now; maybe its even better to face Nole in the semi.

Yes, it is weird Murray turning up in Nadal's half in virtually all the slams except FO. Considering that Murray has a positive h2h with Fed on hardcourt, this by itself is suspicious. Combined with the fact that on clay, it is Djoko in Nadal's half, it is even more disturbing. Djokovic is possibly at least as good as Fed on clay. Can this convenient placing of Murray and Djoko to maximize Fed's chances of reaching the finals, be just Fed's famous good luck?
The only thing which puzzles me is how, if it is fixed, do they do it in the seeded part when it is done in public? But I guess if magicians can create illusions doing everything in front of us, even the fairness of the seeded draw could be compromized.
Sod is a threat on clay and if he is number 4 then the conspirators, if there are any, might feel that the choice between Djoko and Sod is like between the devil and the deep sea. However, I think Fed will prefer anybody but Djoko because Djoko is not only a great claycourter but has proved twice that he can win slams.

@tj600,
Like others have already ponted out, Fed would prefer to play Murray at a slam ... if it is the FO. At the other slams, until more recently the answer would be the opposite: playing Novak as Novak did not use to defeat Roger often, and certainly not at slams... while Andy was defeating Roger more often and the expectation was each time that he'd fair better against Roger if they met at a slam... an expectation that so far has not come out. And Andy did defeat Roger at a slam last summer... and then again at the AO.

So if some/ most of the slams have been fixed ... a big if... they would have probably been fixed pretty much the way the seeds have turned out to be.

If none were fixed it is a bit suspicious because the chances of the draws working out this way are pretty low although possible.

Perhaps the truth is simply that there has been no fixing... the less likely scenario... or that some but not all slams have been fixed ... the more likely candidates probably being Wimbledon and the French Open.

It's a slippery topic, but again, given the not too likely probability of 'no fixing' plus the many not too likely non-slam scenarios that people found a little suspicious I would be inclined to say that on the whole a number of tournaments, slam and other, have been fixed a bit because too much revenue current and future was at stake.

I still don't understand how Roddick, regardless of what number he's ranked, almolst always ends up in Fed's half of the draw. It blows my mind.

@chlorostoma
" And Andy did defeat Roger at a slam last summer... and then again at the AO."
Murray has defeated Federer in a slam. I think that federer would rather face murray in a grand slam, for the simple reason that djokovic has always played federer tough in the slams(and beaten him on some occasions). The same can't be said for Murray(who has been blown away in straights twice).

Rather ironically...if Andy M's ranking should slip...:( ....he might end up meeting Fed b4 a final....:) However, Andy has defeated Roger at Masters' finals for the first time last year so I am hopeful he can transfer this to slams.
Von, caught your analogy about clay and grass and thought "that's interesting" but your Andy and mine are both good on grass and pants on clay, while Nole is good, and I'd say a far greater challenge to Rafa on clay than Sod, and not so good on grass. Perhaps it's Rafa ;)

deuce: Roddick can play on clay. he's done well in Davis Cup matches and some other tourneys. he hates the surface though because he always seem to get injured. I think clay is a lot more slippery than grass though, and it's why some of the Spanish players are able to adapt to grass. The freshly cut grass is slippery when wet, but not quite as slippery as clay. I read an article once in which the author stated that some players wear different type shoes (soles) for grass. Don't know how true that article was.

Von, I'm pretty sure that shoes' thing is correct, it was mentioned by commentators at Queens, last year I think. BTW have you got tickets for Miami yet :) I remember last year you left it too late :(

deuce: Thanks for the clarification on the shoes.

Re: Miami, unfortunately, I won't be able to do so this year as I've got some other plans. Maybe, next year. I would have liked to go to DelRay and Miami, but the two tourneys are several weeks apart. i wish they'd be scheduled like a week apart, which would make for an ideal vacation. Maybe, one year when you have the time, and/or both our schedules permit, we can meet and get together at Miami. I'll be your guide. This is not lip service, but truthfully meant.

Von: that's a shame, and thanx 4 your offer :)