Thanks for putting this up Ricky.
Just looking at the first round ... you think both Gulbis and Dolgopolov are going out?

Federer makes Nadal favourite:

?I think it's unbelievable what Rafa's been able to do. That in some ways makes him the favourite for this tournament. I mean, he's been playing incredible. It was incredible to see. He's going to be for sure ready for this. I'll follow it very closely. If I get a chance, I hope I can stop him.

?Of course, I won the [Barclays ATP] World Tour Finals, I've been playing really well on the hard courts right now,? added Federer. ?But he's been the one dominating the slams. [He?s] had hardly any tough matches in the last three slams. That makes him the favourite.?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2011/01/2/Austr alian-Open-Federer-Makes-Nadal-Favourite.aspx

Yes, thanx very much Ricky, it always makes for interesting, not to say sometimes very heated, discussions on here. :)
I feel I'd rather have Andy losing earlier than getting another beat down from Fed :'(
nadline: Kevin Mitchell in the Guardian tips Rafa.

Nadline.........this is all a psychological game on both their parts!!!

However, although I have no doubt that Murray will be prepared, I really cant see him beating Rafa, esp in 4, at the AO this year, but i guess we'll have to wait and see!

Another thing, Ricky I see you have not anticipated ANY upsets...........there is almost ALWAYS an upset at a GSlam..........the question is who will it (they) be? How about that for another blog?!

its hard to 'predict' an upset though isnt it, as it is called an upset because no one saw it coming. however, i think de bakker has the best possible chance of causing a first round upset, followed by maybe hewitt?

Another thing, Ricky I see you have not anticipated ANY upsets...........there is almost ALWAYS an upset at a GSlam..........the question is who will it (they) be? How about that for another blog?!

Monalysa , 1/16/11 8:38 PM


Can't you see that Ricky has his perennial upset of Murray beating Rafa?

@ nadline

..............well, if you put it like that.............ure right..........lol.......my bad!!!!

@ mriiidula...........yes but i think it would be interesting to write a blog about it considering what has happened in the past, esp in the last three slams!

I hope we don't get another Federer / Murray final, such an inevitability with only one winner - and it isn't the Scot.

Good break for Rafa that he doesn't have to play both Cilic and Isner

Last time Rafa was beaten in four at the GS is vs. Sod at FO and he was injured back then...are you sensing Rafa to be injured this time around?! If healthy, there is absolutely no way Rafa could be beaten by Murray in 4. He is much stronger than Murray both mentally and physically. It is also worth mentioning that Murray will have to work hard to earn his place in the semis. It will not be easy to overcome Bagdy and Sod, and he may be forced to run a lot especially vs. Bagdy...I am not saying that Rafa will have an easy path to the semis either, but still...When in the semis, with all the heat and other favorable conditions, Rafa is the ultimate winner...If Rafa takes a set from Murray, he will take the match...but, let's take one match at the time...Vamos Rafa!

@ lebsta2

Never say never. Thought Federer would have won USO2009 over Delpo given their H2H... that didn't happen.

Mardy Fish getting killed right now.

Well, suffice it to say that I do not agree with Ricky's prediction of Murray over Rafa in 4 in the semis. I don't think it's a given that Murray will get past Sod. Of course, this is looking way ahead, which I prefer not to do at the beginning of a slam.

I have only one question about Rafa in my mind and that is if he is fully recovered from his recent illness. I think that is the only thing that could stop him here. He will have tremendous motivation to win this and accomplish the historic feat of winning four straight slams.

Just watching the first round matches, we can see that there have already been surprises. Querrey is out and Monfils managed to survive as De Bakker choked big time. I know that Davy lost a set, but haven't kept up on the score. Fed and Roddick seem to having an easy time of it in their first round matches. Fish is in a five setter with Hanescu.

I am convinced that there will be some surprises in the early rounds. That's why I try to focus on Rafa getting through the early rounds without thinking too far ahead.

congrats federer on ur 17th slam title.

nadal is dead meat in this tournament.

nadal is dead meat in this tournament.

attackingtennisrulez , 1/17/11 6:55 AM




I see Rafa's mascot is alive and kicking.



VAMOS RAFA!

Davy is defeated in 4 by Mayer.

So happy when ATR said Nadal is a dead meat and congratulated Roger for this title... because whatever he predicted.... the outcome is always opposite.... Thanks God he said that....

Rafa is the 2nd match on court after midnight GMT, so glad I won't have to sit up till the early hours of the morning for his match to start.


Vamos Rafa!

Simon has had trainer out twice and not moving well :(

I said it before.........the tennis punditocracy is predicting a Fed win (more in hope than expectation me thinks), and the former Slam winners (McEnroe, Wilander, Edberg, Lendl, Agassi), with the broom-cupboard lothario (Becker) excepted, are predicting a Rafa win.

what seems to be the problem deuce? i really want him to come back to his best form..

watching the last few games of simon's match, he really doesnt stand a chance against fed. which is a shame, i love the fact tht he is one of the few players out there who has never lost a match to fed.

mriiidula: trainer appeared to be massaging just above Gilles' right knee. Wonder if he needs some help ;)

@ mriiidula

Yeah, but we all know that Fed is a lucky devil..........of all things for Simon to be injured at this time!

Karlovic has gone down to Dodig in 5 sets.

Much as I like Andy and want to see him do all he is capable of doing I don't expect him to win against Rafa if they meet, and less so in 4. Unless Rafa is injured or something. I'm not saying it's a foregone conclusion if they meet but I think Rafa for the win is highly likely.

Who is Ivan Dodig? He has just defeated Karlovic in 5... and what's more, only one of those sets went to a tiebraker. Very impressive.

smug, smug, had him winning in my bracket ;)....only becos I don't like the way Karlovic plays :)

How come it's never mentioned that Gilles Simon is 2-0 against Federer? Nobody seems to think anything of it. Sure he's slumped due to injuries, but he did win the first tournament of the year. If nothing else a straight set by Federer win seems highly unlikely.

@ ts38, no one seems to think anything of it bcos not one of the matches were played in a GSlam!! Lets see if it makes a difference this time!

@ts38 , 1/17/11 4:10 PM

It was when Federer had mono.........Lol.


Actually, it's often been mentioned, but it was in best of 3 matches although that is not to say he won't trouble Federer in a 5 setter. Simon is very quick and accurate with his shots, he is one of those players that are difficult to shake off, because he is like a fly who is bothering you, however much you try to swat it you miss most of the time.

I doubt if he'll beat Federer in a best of 5 though.

People, Rafa is over his cold.

Simon beat Roger by playing how Rafa used to play 5 years ago : defend, defend and hope for errors. He was a poor man's Rafa to begin with. The new aggressive Roger should blow him off the court.

Thanks for the predictions Ricky. My predictions after the QF are identical to yours, except I have Fed taking out Djoker in 3 sets (not 4).

W.r.t Nadal - I think his toughest challenge in the entire tournament will be the match against Murray. If he wins that match he'll win AO. Fed's not a Murray sized problem for Nadal. However the catch is unless Nadal is 100% recovered from his flu and playing at his UsOpen form (which he hasn't for quite a while), he won't beat Murray. That is Nadal's A game > Murray's A game, but for any other combination - Murray wins. So probabilistically Murray has a much better chance of getting to the final.

What happens in a Fed-Murray final? I expect Murray to have learned from the tears of AO 2010, and put up a better show. However, Fed is playing too well and is generally too confident against Murray in the slams. So it's hard for me to back Murray to beat Fed in a slam final.

It amazes me that some people take for granted that certain players will reach the semifinals. Just look at what happened on the first day of play. Fish had to fight through a five setter to get through, Monfils was down two sets before he managed to beat an injured DeBakker, Querrey is out and so is Davy.

To read anyone discussing a possible Rafa/Murray semifinal before either of them have even played a match, seems absurd to me. I am going to wait until I see how Rafa looks before I make any assumptions. The same goes for Murray. Have people forgotten the USO already? There was all this hysteria over how Rafa couldn't beat Murray in the semis and look what happened. Murray didn't make is past the third round. In no way am I suggesting that history will repeat itself, but it is a reminder about not taking anything for granted.

Once I see Rafa play, then I will have a better feeling about where he's at and how his game looks. For now I am just focused on him getting through the early rounds and making it to the second week.

@ Nativenewyorker.........AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That what Ive said even before the start of the Open!! People were already predicting a huge headache for Rafa in the form of Davy........and look!!!!!! And even after Rafa plays his first match, even if he wins, Im still not taking that as any true indication of Rafa's probability of winning th AO!! Even with Fed's win today...........that still does not say anything much except that he played well!!!

I am with you on this one Native............absolutely!!!

@Nativenewyorker , 1/17/11 7:57 PM


NNY, there is no need to worry, the predictions are just what people think, and they don't necessarily come true. Let's just hope Rafa stays fit and healthy, because when he is firing on all cylinders, he is nigh unbeatable on any surface. As he says, no one can win every single tournamnet, so although we are disappointed when he loses, we have to accept that he can't win them all.

Vamos Rafa!

NativeNeworker; I agree that the potential match-ups may not materialize. But still it would be boring just to look at one match at a time. That's the job of the players. As of now, the most likely scenario is having the big 4 in the SF.

And in my opinion the interesting things is that if Nadal is playing well the guy who is most competitive with him is Murray. Meaning I would expect Nadal to take care of Federer, Djokovic, Soderling etc - in a 5 set match - if he's ON. With Murray it's 50-50. Furthermore, what makes Nadal-Murray fun, is the quality of tennis. I mean, AO 2010 QF 1st 2 sets was some of the best tennis of the year. Anyway, I just can't wait for a Nadal-Murray SF at Oz; it will surely feature some bionic rallies for which one can only say GTFOH!

"... I have Fed taking out Djoker in 3 sets (not 4). "

if he does it like he did it at uso, i'll be one happy spectator.

like chlorostoma, i'm wondering too, who on earth is ivan dodig? never heard of him until now, guess he's made a name for himself.

ts38 - as much as i want simon to beat fed for the third time, its just not gonna happen at the second round of a grand slam.

nadline,

I do understand that these are just predictions and nothing more. It's just getting really old to have Ricky go into standard mode and predict that Rafa doesn't get by Murray in the semis. I don't see Murray as Rafa's kryptonite, although he has always been a tough matchup. I think Rafa has figured out how to best him on hardcourts.

i agree that the only thing that matters is Rafa being fit, healthy and ready to go. Then I like his chances against anyone. I am really anxious to see his first match, so that I can get a feel for where he's at now.

imjimmy,

No one is telling you or anyone what you can or cannot say or think. I am speaking for myself. I would at least want to get a look at the top players before I jump in with absolute statements about who they can or cannot beat. I don't speak in absolute terms, especially where tennis is concerned.

We have already seen a few upsets and the tournament has just started. Everyone is free to look ahead, as you are doing. For myself, I simply choose not to go there. I am well aware of how Rafa's draw could potentially play out, however, I don't wish to waste energy and effort on hypothetical matchups. It's nice that you see the top four getting through to the semis. That would make for some exciting tennis. It may well come to pass, however, I am not going to assume that it will happen.

If I can get a look at the first two matches for the top players, then I have a sense of where their games are at and how they look after playing has commenced.

I am not going to argue about how competitive Murray is with Rafa. That's a given. What I do take issue with is that he can take Rafa out these days in the semis of a slam. If Rafa is peaking and in top form in the second week, then it won't happen.

I just prefer to be cautious and not automatically take for granted that the top players will get through to the semis. If it happens, great. I also am one who prefers to actually see the players and then make some predictions as to how far I think they can go in the tournament.

To each his own!

I wanted to make one more point. I would like to see how Sod looks in his first few matches. I know that he has not done well at this tournament, however, he can be a dangerous player if he is feeling it. I am not going to assume at this point in time, that Murray will automatically get by Sod. We have to see if both of them even get to the quarterfinals.

We have also seen that sometimes a player looks really good in the early rounds, but can falter after that. There is still some unpredictability when it comes to deciding who will get through to the second week. I expect a few more surprises in the first week of play.

Once I see Rafa play, then I will have a much better idea of how he should do here.

Federer went farther into fan mode when, asked about whether Nadal?s Rafa Slam was equivalent to a Grand Slam (yes, this really is how we spend our Saturdays), he said, ?Obviously, the classic one is the one that Rod Laver did twice. That will always be that way. That?s why it?s a very exciting Australian Open, to see if Rafa can do it . . . So I?m excited to see how he goes.?

There was a little bit of a ?Wait, did he just say what I think he said?? sense in the room. Federer is becoming a Nadal backer now? Are we going to see him in a "Got Rafa?" T-shirt soon? I guess it?s only fair, considering that Nadal has always been the president and secretary of Roger?s fan club. Should we be appalled at his development? After some initial reservations during their exo season this winter, I'm liking the idea more. I highly doubt that Federer?s professed fandom will affect his desire or ability to terminate the Rafa Slam. ?If I get a chance,? he said, ?I hope I can stop him, obviously.? (That's not exactly Muhammad Ali material, but whatever.)


- Steve Tignor

Later in the afternoon, it was Nadal?s turn to face the music. He opened with a ?Hello, Happy New Year, everyone.? Then he got down to the urgent business of lowering all expectations. He said he hopes his illness won?t affect him in his first round. He said he?s not worried about the Rafa Slam, because the pressure of one major is enough. Told that Federer had said Nadal was the favorite at this tournament, Nadal, stunningly, disagreed. ?I for sure am feeling less favorite than him,? he said, ?and not more favorite than Djokovic, Murray, Soderling, these kind of players, no?? (With that phrasing, he sounds like a kid who wasn't asked to the dance.) Nadal was most comfortable when he was asked a pure tennis question, about whether he would change his racquet or not. He sat back and crossed his legs and said, ?Maybe you can win more money with a company, but if you lose little bit of your feeling and you lose little bit more than before, you are less happy than before. And is more important to be happy than the money in general. That?s what I feel.? Vintage Rafa.

Later in the interview, Nadal was asked about his ?desire to keep improving all the time.?

?I think the important thing is keep focus, keeping have the right illusion and motivation to improve your tennis even if you are on the top. And I think that?s why Roger was . . . pause . . . is on the top for long, long time, no??

That ?was? was left out of the transcript of the presser, but it?s a key to understanding how Nadal feels about Federer. Even though he?s No. 1 and Federer is No. 2, and even though Nadal has prevented him from continuing to dominate the sport over the last three years, Rafa doesn?t want to think of Federer as having slipped from the mountaintop in any way. You might think this is a clever way to keep the pressure on Federer, and off of him. It?s not. You might think he needs to be No. 2 to play his best. That?s not it, either. Nadal is, as much anything else, a fan of his own newest fan, Roger Federer.

Federer likes/liked Tiger. Nadal likes Spain's soccer team. Federer roots for Nadal, Nadal roots for Federer.

Front-running. So uncool.

- Steve Tignor


two excerpts which i thought puts some perspective for fedal fans.

PS not for rafa or fed fans, but for 'tennis fans' if they exist any more :)

Rafa's Roots
by Joel Drucker

To become a great, Rafael Nadal learned from former greats. Over the past six years the Spaniard has become a titan of the sport.
Champions in full bloom appear strikingly original. From the scintillating shot-making of Rod Laver, to the unwavering steadiness of Bjorn Borg, the counterpunching fury of Jimmy Connors, the touch of John McEnroe, the concussive brilliance of Pete Sampras and the silky-smooth prowess of Roger Federer, the man atop tennis? steep pyramid displays an array of techniques, shots and manners that seem his and his alone.
"Nadal is like a guy hitting to you with two forehands. It's murder."
Behold Rafael Nadal. Among peers, the prospect of playing Nadal is frightening, his game summed up by Tennis Channel analyst Justin Gimelstob in two words: ?absolutely brutal.? Among the public, Nadal-as-champion is endearing, everything from his sportsmanship to his competitive moxie cherished. As Connors says, ?He works hard, goes about it the right way and you can tell when he goes out there and plays, nobody runs out to the baseline like he does.?
That Connors - like Nadal, a left-handed forceful baseliner with off-the-charts intensity - would make such a statement speaks to an overlooked aspect of Nadal?s game. When the champion commands the world, his game?s singular genius seemingly erases history. But as the saying goes, behind every tennis player there is another tennis player. And if in Nadal?s case the most public example of that premise is his uncle Toni, the strands and spins of Rafa?s strokes bear the marks of a great many others.
Step back from the planet Nadal currently presides over. Journey back in place and time to a Mediterranean island off the coast of Spain. Picture 10-year-old Rafa hitting one ball after another. Inside and outside the lines, the Mallorcan hangs on the words of an uncle with insights not just into tennis, but of broader topics that teach the boy about self-reliance, manners and even matters of esoteric philosophy. The boy is also inspired by another uncle, a world-class football player. The boy has already been playing tennis for six years, striking the ball with two hands off both sides.
At which point his uncle is struck by an inspiration from tennis history. Why not have the boy play left-handed? Left-handers may only comprise 10 per cent of the world?s population, but in tennis they have made a significant impact, Laver, Connors and McEnroe among the very best who have turned the tables on opponents with a distinctive vengeance. Though it?s hard to imagine when Toni Nadal had this idea he imagined it would yield a tennis superpower, certainly he tapped into something that could give the boy a distinct advantage. A page from the game?s past had been absorbed. With signature urgency, the boy, flexible in head, heart and body, applied his uncle?s suggestion.
"[Earn] struck it with this whip-like, bolo-like motion. No-one else hit the ball like that."
Of course at first this did nothing in shaping what Nadal struck from his right side. It hardly mattered if at age ten this was now called a backhand instead of a forehand. As a natural right-hander, young Rafa drew on the strength of his right hand to drive his body weight through the ball and fling the ball into play. Or at least that seemed one source of strength. Only well into his pro career would Nadal?s backhand reveal more textured dimensions.
The forehand was another matter. In the late ?40s and early 50s, years before Toni Nadal, there was a touring professional named Carl Earn, a left-hander from Los Angeles who struck his forehand with a pronounced Western grip ? a grip that at that point had been out of fashion for more than a quarter-century. Earn reached the quarter-finals of the 1950 U.S. Pro Championships, losing to Jack Kramer. According to one of Earn?s contemporaries, Hall of Famer Pancho Segura, ?He struck it with this whip-like, bolo-like motion. No-one else hit the ball like that. The vicious topspin was deadly. It was a lot like Nadal?s stroke.?
Fast-forward 30 years and a more visible example emerges ? one Toni Nadal likely saw. Along with Borg, left-handed Argentine Guillermo Vilas (pictured right) was one of the first players to primarily strike the ball with topspin off both sides from the baseline. His forehand was a forceful drive, the ball whipping and dipping in ways quite uncommon at the time. In the '90s another top-spinning left-hander emerged, Austrian Thomas Muster. Both Vilas and Muster had significant runs that earned them the unofficial crown as ?King of Clay,? a title validated further when each won the French Open [at Roland Garros].
Meanwhile, on Mallorca, young Rafa was honing his own stroke. Toni Nadal of course knew about Vilas and Muster. But he also was aware that the boy would find his way to his own distinctive style. That such factors as lighter rackets and, in the late ?90s, the emergence of new strings that aided the increased generation of spin, would all play a role in Rafa building a forehand that, while drawing without likely knowing it from Earn, Vilas and Muster, emerged as completely distinctive and incredibly effective.
"Nadal is able to defend from deep positions in the court because of his phenomenal ability to spin the ball."
According to John Yandell, researcher and publisher of the on-line tennis magazine Tennisplayer.net, ?What distinguishes Nadal?s forehand from others on the tour is the consistently higher levels of spin he generates ? both the topspin and the sidespin that makes it jump to the side after it bounces.? Yandell?s extensive research reveals that on the average, Nadal?s forehand spins 3,300 revolutions per minute (RPM) ? and sometimes well past 4,000 RPM. Says Yandell, ?His average forehand has about 20 per cent more spin on it than most others. His ability to spin the ball is related to his defensive capabilities. Nadal is able to defend from deep positions in the court because of his phenomenal ability to spin the ball.?

So this was the Nadal who at the tender age of 19 won Roland Garros the first time he played it and by the end of the year was ranked number two in the world: a self-made left-hander with a whopper of a forehand, a reasonable degree of competency on the backhand and a serve that ostensibly merely put the ball in play. Added to the strokes was yet another distinct set of elements that at one point were contradictory, but somehow found synthesis in Nadal?s makeup: the poise and sportsmanship of Borg, blended with the fire-breathing competitive makeup of Connors.
What?s amazing, though, is to see how Nadal has continued to enhance his game even upon climbing so far up the tennis mountain ? and in the process, further tipped his hat to greats that preceded him even while he?s concurrently created his own distinctive playing style.
Yandell is fascinated by what he?s learned studying Nadal?s backhand. Says Yandell, ?Everyone talks about the fact that being a natural right-hander gives him an advantage by using his right hand. That might be true. But what?s most interesting to me is the use of his left hand. The vast majority of pros hit the two-handed backhand with the dominant hand in a bent configuration. Nadal hits with both arms straight at contact. One of the very few players ever to do that was Andre Agassi ? one of the best two-handers in history. When you hit with the dominant hand straight, it?s more similar to a one-handed backhand. It?s advantageous for hitting the ball early, on the rise, flat and hard. So Nadal is able to hit flatter, rocket-like lasers off the backhand side ? a weapon of a different type than his forehand.? Segura?s belief is that, ?Nadal is like a guy hitting to you with two forehands. It?s murder.?
And while the Nadal bazooka-like two-hander has similarities to the early-struck, time-robbing drives of Agassi and Connors, consider also his incorporation of the one-handed slice. If hardly elegant in form in the manner of such elegant slice backhands as those struck by Ken Rosewall or his fellow left-handed Spaniard, Manuel Orantes, Nadal?s willingness to deploy this shot shows a tactical awareness. In prior eras, the likes of Rosewall, Orantes and another lefty, John McEnroe, used the slice as a form of probe, foil, approach shot and defence. While a stretched Nadal will use the slice for defence, he is also wise enough to use it as a way of forcing his opponent to apply enough topspin to make the ball slow down and give Nadal a chance to run around his backhand and deploy his forehand.
"He's a student of the game. He appreciates the game."
The shot Nadal enhanced the most in 2010 was his serve. It?s an amazing evolution. Early in his career, Nadal?s delivery was often predictable and attackable ? at least to those who dared take such a chance given how well he backed it up. In this case, he was much like Connors, who?s often considered to have had one of the worst serves ever of a world number one ? but like Nadal, could also back it up with incredible counterpunching. In 2010, though, Nadal stepped near the realm of McEnroe ? the world?s best serve for a good deal of his career. Nadal had altered his motion. With his shoulders, legs and hips more engaged, everything from the delivery?s speed to its variety picked up considerably.
Nadal has enhanced his game by drawing on so many aspects of what?s come before him. As Andy Roddick says about the Spaniard, ?He?s a student of the game. He appreciates the game. I think he knows the history of the game.? It?s hard to imagine what more Nadal can bring to the court in 2011 and beyond. Increased serve-volley? Coming in on his returns? Further deployment of the slice backhand? But in Nadal?s hands, what may seem improbable one day could soon enough become business-as-usual.

Enjoy this article from the tennis experts.....

tettylds, link please?

Here is the link....
http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/DEUCE-Tennis/DEUCE-Australi an-Open-2011/Rafael-Nadal.aspx

NNY, as you know I have argued Rafa's corner with regard to Murray till I'm blue in the face, so I'm resigned to people having their own views that Rafa can't beat Murray, after all it's the results that matter. Ricky always starts off with Murray and Federer in the final pencilled in, and then fills in the gaps before that with whatever, so long as he has Murray over Nadal in the run up to the final, that's his stance and it's become so predictable.

imjimmy, I hope you realize that the top 4 at the moment does not include Murray, who is currently No 5.

Hi nadline! I think you misunderstood my post. Nowhere did I say Nadal CANNOT beat Murray. Of course he can, and he beat him as recently as WTF '10. I just meant that in the current ATP (with Delpo off form) Murray is the toughest matchup for Nadal, as he has shown by beating Nadal in big matches at the slam level. (After all, how many players have beaten a FIT Nadal in big slam matches after 2008?). So Murray is the toughest test for Nadal in the ATP and the probability of others beating Nadal is lower than that of Murray doing the same. Who knows what will happen in the actual match, but I'm inclined to think that if Nadal survives it, he should be able to handle whoever it is he faces in the final.

BTW..when I said Big 4, I did not mean from the current rankings perspective. Big 4 since late 2008 have always been Nadal, Fed, Djoker and Murray. Soderling (or anyone else) haven't shown the capacity to sustain their level and break into the top 4 consistently. Murray has earned the right to be in the Big 4, even if he's ranked 5 temporarily.

Delpo wins a hard fought first set against Sela.

nadline,

We can keep fighting the good fight anyway! It's funny how many forget that Rafa beat Murray in the semis at Wimbledon after having first dispatched Sod! Maybe the fact that it was on grass meant that it didn't count? :)

Yes, Murray has beaten Rafa two times in slams and that is a great feat. However, Rafa is not the same player that he was in the 2008 USO and the 2010 AO. He has evolved and now has a powerful, faster serve that can win him cheap points and get him out of sticky situations. He has become adept at volleying at net. He has shown a willingness to be more aggressive, moving into the court to close out points more quickly.

The key with Rafa is that he is not content to remain static. He is always working to improve aspects of his game and that is why he is where he is today.

imjimmy,

I think you missed the main point I was trying to make. You were the one who said over and over that Rafa would not win the USO because he had to get by Murray in the semis. We both went at it and had an intense discussion. Now you are essentially back with the same argument. The thing that shocks me is that you would make this argument before either Rafa or Murray has even struck the first ball. I think Rafa has shown that he has the weapons to beat Murray on hardcourt, especially this kind of surface which plays somewhat slower and has the high bounce.

I don't mind speculation and predictions. Everyone is free to say what they wish, however, when I hear this same comment about Rafa not being able to get past Murray in the semis yet again, even after he won the USO by beating the kind of player who has given him fits on hardcourts, namely Nole, then I become concerned.

We all know that Murray is a tough matchup for Rafa. I already said as much. They have also produced some spectacular tennis in their matches. I think that Rafa played perhaps his best tennis since his comeback in the 2010 AO quarterfinal with Murray. It's unfortunate that it was all overshadowed by the knee injury that forced him to withdraw.

My belief is that Rafa now has the weapons to compete more effectively against Murray. Of course, the one real advantage he has, the one that you seem to conveniently forget, is that fierce mental toughness, that superb intelligence on court and his ability to make mid-match adjustments. Rafa is a great problem solver, a warrior on court who has won matches through sheer will power.

We will just have to see if this semifinal matchup happens in this slam.

Nativenewyorker: Good post. FWIW, I never said that Murray will DEFINITELY beat Nadal. All I know is that it will be a tight match, and likely Nadal's biggest test of the AO. I think it's a 50:50, but still my ATP bracket picks, are along with Ricky's i.e Murray over Nadal. Of course I won't complain if Nadal spoils my bracket!

I do concede on your earlier point that given his UsOpen performance and new capability with the serve, Nadal has a better chance against Murray than he did last year (all other things being equal), and my argument is weaker now than it was before USOpen. Anyway, it could all come down to the day to day form of both players. Murray-Nadal SF will be the match of the tournament for sure. Let's wait till next Friday :)

imjimmy: I agree with you. If, and it's a very big if as far as Andy is concerned alas, Andy gets there he has the best chance of any of the players of beating Rafa. However, as far as an in form Fed is concerned, Andy has no chance of beating him, whereas Rafa and Novak have very good odds, especially Rafa.
This is why I really wish Andy had the chance of playing Fed b4 any final. It seems this is just not going to happen unless either of their rankings drops right off.

deuce: Well. I had some stats for the majors starting from AO 2008. Basically, Nadal and Murray have been in the same half (or quarter) for an incredible 12 times out of 13 in the last three years. It's just crazy. That means, among other things, that Murray never meets Federer before the final. I too feel that Murray has the tools to beat Federer, but he's got the mental obstacle in the finals where he just doesn't turn up to play as he does in smaller events. So it usually happens, unfortunately, that Nadal and Murray end up playing early and killing each other with the winner as a scapegoat for Fed to deliver the coup de grace.

I think it's a strange triumvirate of Federer-Nadal and Murray. Murray's chances are MUCH better against Nadal than against Federer in majors. Federer's chances are MUCH better against Murray than against Nadal, obviously. And Nadal also would undoubtedly feel more confident against Federer than he does against Murray. A tricky matchup situation.

Anyway, I am waiting for some hardcourt slams when Murray can land up in Fed's half - that way Nadal is sure to get to the final and Fed will have to contend with a Murray who plays with less pressure. It hasn't happened for three years :)

imjimmy: let's hope our wait is not too long :) Mind you, I like Andy's chances on grass too....if it weren't for the damn press pack :(

My beef is that no matter what form Murray is in viz a viz Nadal, there is this fixed idea that Murray is that much better than Nadal, except on clay, that Rafa will always fall to him. Not enough credit is given to Rafa for his achievements, his wins are quickly forgotten, but his losses are preserved to be used against him year after year after year. If Rafa had gone out in the 3rd round at the last USO, no one would give him the time of day regarding beating a top 4 player at the next h/c GS, but Murray is seen in this everlasting perennial light of being the man to beat except on clay, that is what I don't understand. Murray only has to win a 250 title, to be the favourite for everything.

I am not having a go at Murray here, I am just pointing out the different criteria on which Rafa is judged with regards to everyone else. Even the fact that Roger didn't make it to last year's USO final has been brushed aside, as just a blip...........granted he's won enough of them and has earned the confidence people have in him, but Rafa just doesn't get the same kudos for his successes.

imjimmy, when you make statements like Murray's chances are MUCH better against Nadal than against Federer, in majors, what on earth do you base that on? Rafa is 3.2 h2h in GS against Murray, one of Murray's wins was a retirement by Rafa who clearly wasn't 100% going into that match, even granted that Murray was leading by 2 sets and a break, but the knee injury must have been lingering throughout the match, Federer is only 2.0 against Murray, so to make a categorical statement like that on the evidence you've got just shows a readiness to put Rafa down no matter what.

I think if you ask Rafa who is more difficult to play against, esp on the hard courts, I'm sure Rafa will tell you it is Fed, not Murray. How many times do Rafa play against Murray in a final? Rafa in a final is not the same as Rafa in a semifinal. He is very hard to beat when he is in a final, esp a slam final. If Rafa and Murray meet in a final, I'll always give the advantage to Rafa. Just because Rafa vs Fed is 14-8 doesn't mean that Fed is easier to beat, for out of that 22 matches played, only about 8 of them were in straight sets wins.

Rafa vs Murray - most of the time they played in QFs and SFs, only twice they played in a final and they split at 1:1 in finals. Not forgetting that two finals were played in bizarre situations, at IW 2009 in swirling wind, and in Rotterdam 2009 where Rafa was literally on one leg during the sec and third sets. Rafa did beat Murray comfortably on clay and grass, all in straight sets. On hard courts, from 2008 till 2010, they met seven times on hard courts, Rafa won 3 matches, 2 of which in straight sets; Murray won four, two of which in straight sets. There isn't much separating the two on hard courts since 2008. We may argue that Murray did beat Rafa at the hard court slams twice, but do notice that during USO 2008, Rafa was clearly running on fumes, as evident by how he was bothered by Querry, Fish etc prior to meeting Murray. In that 2010 AO match, both played well but the difference to me was a confident Murray vs a not so confident Rafa, resulting in Rafa losing his own serve immediately after he broke serve. Prior to this not so confident period, when did Rafa lose his serves so easily?

To me a Rafa with his A game can best a Murray with his A game, as Rafa is simply more aggressive, more gutsy and more experienced slam player than Murray. Against Fed, Rafa doesn't have all these advantages, well maybe he is more gutsy than Fed. With Fed's backhand now very much a weapon now and his killer serve out wide at the deuce court, I seriously think he is harder to beat than anyone else for Rafa. For everyone else, both Fed and Rafa are very difficult to beat.

Just to illustrate my point, Rafa is 4.0 in GS against Nole, and 5.2 against Roger, but I wouldn't dream of saying that Nole is MUCH more likely to lose against Rafa in a GS than Roger, because that is simply not the case, I would put them both at the same level against Rafa, because it's not as if Rafa goes on court and blows Nole away, they are hardly contested matches.

Should Nole meet Rafa again in the final I wouldn't be rubbing my hands in the belief that Nole doesn't stand a chance against Rafa in a GS, just because he has a 4.0 lead.

luckystar: I don't think Nadal will assume Federer as a tougher opponent than Murray. Nadal is 14:8 and 6:2 vs Fed in slams. In fact Nadal leads Fed, 3-1 in outdoor hardcourts, the only match Fed won was in Miami '05 and even there Nadal was leading 2 sets to love. In 2004 Miami, their first match, 17 yr old Nadal left Federer shaking his head in wonderment. Nadal has narrowed the gap in grass too; he almost won the Wimb match in 2007 and should have closed the 2008 match in 3 or 4 sets, if hadn't choked a little.

Now Federer may be playing more aggressive these days, but the fact is that he's still not as good as he was in prime - and he was troubled by Nadal even then. Furthermore Nadal has also improved his game which further increase his chances. Against Federer, Nadal not only matches him for aggression and tactics but also outclasses him mentally, intimidating him on court. Did you see the recent Abu-Dhabi exho final? As soon as crunch time came, Fed's backhand went haywire.

Fed might win a match here or there against Nadal (as he did in WTF), but I'm pretty sure that he won't beat Nadal in a big slam match, in the future.

Coming to Murray-Nadal: It makes sense to compare since 2008 when Murray matured as a player and broke into the top rankings. Since then Murray-Nadal have split the slam matches with Nadal winning both the grass court matches and Murray winning both the hardcourt ones. This tells us that Murray is no match for Nadal on clay and grass - but the situation could be different on hardcourts.

Sure, I agree about UsO 2008 SF - Nadal was definitely winded after a long season. However, he was still playing very well, and he was super confident those days. I would wager that Nadal would have still beaten anyone else in that SF, and then perhaps taken down Fed in the final too.

Again in AO 2010 QF - I agree Nadal was not very confident - but still Murray won in straight sets. Even in their WTF 2010 match, with a confident Nadal and his pacier serve, Nadal was taken right to the limit.

The thing is, Murray forces Nadal to play outside his comfort zone and change the patterns of attack which work against all other players. Nadal obviously cannot keep attacking Murray's backhand and Murray can also grind it with him in the back court. So Nadal is forced to go for more against his will. Murray also continuously adjusts his tactics against Nadal (S-V on breakpoints for example); and I believe Nadal is guilty of giving too much respect to Murray and sometimes looks a little lost tactically in their matches. Perhaps it's because they went to the same academy, but Murray reads Nadal's game very well, and so their matches feature top tennis.

Finally, I made the same point (as you), above, about Nadal's A game being better than Murray's A game. But how many times can a player be at his absolute best? If Nadal's not at his very best, then Murray has a very good chance against Nadal - as he has shown in their matches. Which is why some people put Murray as a winner in their brackets. It's all fun. All we know is that the match will be close..

""but I wouldn't dream of saying that Nole is MUCH more likely to lose against Rafa in a GS than Roger ""
_______

Actually you could. There is a clear disparity. Djokovic has absolutely obliterated Nadal on some hardcourt matches of ATP 2nd tier events. However, he's never done so on any big occasion including slam matches and the olympics etc. This just tells us that Novak has the tools but not the mental strength to beat Rafa when it matters. In fact, I would be very happy if Rafa faces Novak for a slam final, if I am backing Nadal to win.

It's the same with Fed-Murray. Murray leads Fed in the h2h, but on both the slam matches Murray came up short, and couldn't EVEN win a SET. The fact is, Fed usually brings his A game in the slams, and Murray cannot counter it both physically and mentally. So Fed just blew Murray off the court on both occassions when it really mattered.

That's why I said Murray would be hesitant to face Fed in a big slam match, but would rather face Nadal who he has beaten before.

Imjimmy, I must say Murray would rather meet Rafa before the final, likewise with Fed. As I've mentioned, Rafa in a slam final is very hard to beat. So far only Fed had managed to beat Rafa in a slam final, twice on grass, and Rafa had reached eleven slam finals!

luckystar: disagree there, Fed in a final of a grand slam is well and truly in Andy's head b4 they've even started, whereas I don't believe Rafa is. Whereas of course, Rafa is well and truly in Fed's. Bet I know who Fed would rather face in the final ;)

We are talking about Rafa vs Murray here, not Fed vs Rafa. What I'm saying is Murray would rather meet Rafa in a slam semi than a slam final, just like Murray won't want to meet Fed in a slam final, but he may stand a better chance when he meets Fed before the final. All these players know that both Fed and Rafa are extremely hard to beat in a slam final; Rafa only lost to Fed and Fed to Rafa and Delpo.

sorry kinda new do you provide predictins to like 2nd rounds match etc or only this and quater final predictions and up?

imjimmy,
You've made your point in great detail now and clearly. I still think it is somewhat overstated. Yes, on the day, and possibly quite often, Andy can make Rafa play a different game than he might like to ... and some other players have been able to do that as well and usually lost... certainly at slams. I like Andy a lot and he is definitely a genius in tennis of the kind there are very few in each entire generation. Where your argument is a little overstated is in making a little too much of Andy's last two hardcourt wins over Rafa on hardcourts. I remember the USO '08 well: Rafa was visibly running on fumes... in part by a killer claycourt / grass / hardcourt season that included flying to Bejing for the olympics and a week later back to the Eastern timezone. Rafa stood miles behind the baseline to return Andy's serves... I guess he felt that was his only chance on that day ... but I don't think we'll see that repeated. He was quite spent. And twelve months ago at AO Rafa was clearly far from playing with confidence and calm and sustained an injury during their match... so, no, you can not draw too many conclusions from these two matches. One was over 2 years ago which is a lifetime in a tennis player that keeps improving especially one like Rafa. I wish I could write that Andy has improved his skills and his mental strength by as much as Rafa has but no. Rafa's hardcourt game at the USO '10, a more difficult surface for him, was far better than his game at AO '10. If they meet next week and they are both more or less fit Andy will still give Rafa a hard time but I don't see him giving the kind of hard time he has in the past. Rafa in 4.

I meant: Andy's last two hardcourt wins over Rafa *as slams*.

tettylds, 1/18/11 1:27 AM

thank you for the fantastic article!

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP)?

To get an assessment of how much better Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer are than most of the competition in men?s tennis, look no further than Marcos Daniel.

At the Australian Open on Tuesday, Daniel was on the other side of the net from Nadal, who is attempting to win his fourth major title in a row?the ?Rafa Slam.? Daniel saw, ever so briefly, why the top-seeded Nadal is among the best ever in the game.

Only briefly, because the Brazilian?s left knee gave out, forcing him to retire from the first-round match while trailing 6-0, 5-0.

?If you see all the top five guys, they improve so much,? said Daniel, who has also lost to Federer. ?They are one step forward, faster than the others, they hit the ball harder than the others, they can stay very focused for four hours, different than the others. Imagine Federer and Nadal, they are the same.?

Nadal?s limited court time should hold him in good stead for the rest of the tournament, but he wasn?t counting his blessings as the result of another player?s misfortune.

?I am a professional and I try my best on every point,? Nadal said, explaining why he didn?t hold back in the match. ?That?s the best thing, to respect the opponent in that situation. If you do something and you let him win a game, it is worse.?

nailed Becker, just barely missed Hewitt-Nalby!!!

what about the Davy bandwagon, Ricky?

Just for fun, here are my predictions, starting with round 4

Fourth round
Nadal over Cilic in 3
Ferrer over Youzhny in 3
Tsonga over Soderling in 4
Upset watch! Baggy over Muzza in 5

Verdy over Berdy in 4
Djokovic over Almagro in 3
Upset Watch! Monfils over Roddick in 5
Federer over Tommy in 3

Quarterfinals
Nadal over Ferrer in 3
Baggy over Tsonga in 5
Djokovic over Verdasco in 4
Federer over Monfils in 3



Semifinals
Rafa over Baghdatis in 3
Federer over Djokovic in 4

Final
Nadal over Federer in 5

I forgot to put the upset watch! sign next to Tsonga over Soderling. Just assume it's there.

Very unlikely Baggy will bag Andy, much more likely Delboy will bag Baggy ;)

Grafight.............i like what i see from ure predictions, esp the "upset part"...........it is a lot more fun and realisitc than the other predictions......nice!!!

@nadline
, 1/18/11 5:19 PM

Re : Daniel's hard court career record is 1-22. He's lost against almost everybody he's played. He played challenger events on clay last year. In short, he's a tomato can.

chlorostoma , 1/18/11 3:59 PM : Good post. Whether or not, Nadal beats Murray was not my point, for we can make compelling arguments for either man. And they would all be justified.

My point was that Murray is a TOUGHER opponent for Rafa than anyone else in the ATP (save a peak Delpo). For whatever reason,Murray always plays his A+ game against Nadal because he feels at home against Rafa. For all their matches, Murray's serve stats have been through the roof, especially given that his serve percentage is low on average. Ditto for the winners.

As Ricky Dimon eloquently stated during his UsOpen article - "Federer, Djokovic (or whoever else) is not a Murray-sized problem for Nadal". So if I am backing Nadal, I would be more worried about a potential Murray-Nadal match than I would for a potential Fed-Nadal or Nadal-Djokovic - match for ex.

Quite frankly, I don't see Nadal being beaten by Federer or Djokovic in a big slam match in the near future. That ship has already sailed.

thank you, imjimmy
as for all you've written in your last post here I agree... safe perhaps for the last point, re Federer and Djokovic is pretty strong and I am not as convinced as you are, no matter how much of a Rafa fan I am... but you might be right there too. I had not known or thought about Andy's exceptional serve stats against Rafa... very interesting. When you write that he feels at home with Rafa that has the ring of truth. And they have produced superb matches when both were in OK form. So yes, Nadal will have to bring something near his A game if they meet in the semis... and I'm sure he will :-).

I know Baggy being the dark horse of this tournament is a long shot, but hey, if it happens you heard it here first!
I would like to see other folks throw their predictions in... as I said, just for fun. Nobody is going to think you are a moron if your prospective champion gets steamrolled in round 3. These things happen and anything is possible. Waiting to set 3 of the finals to make a prediction doesn't require as much foresight.

It is true that Murray plays Rafa with an intensity that he saves for Rafa and Rafa alone, not even for Federer. Watching him play Beck earlier today, he looks so casual, and he does that against anyone else, which is probably because he knows that his laid back defensive style just won't work with Rafa.

The question is, why only put on your best performance for Rafa, why not play like that all the time? Probably because it's not natural for him to play aggressive.

I am not one who likes making predictions before anyone has even played a match. I prefer to at least see some of the tennis in the early rounds before giving my thoughts as to who can win. Things can change once you are in a slam. Already we have seen Querrey and Davy knocked out in the first round. Fish and Monfils managed to get their wins in tough five setters.

I think it's fun and harmless to make predictions. I just don't engage in it much. I prefer to watch what happens on the court, get a sense of which players seem to be playing their best tennis, who is peaking at the right time, who appears to be confident, in the zone, etc. Sometimes I keep my feelings to myself.

When it comes to Rafa, I have a mental list in my head of the things I look for as I watch him in each match. The goal in the early rounds is to get through, to win and move on as efficiently as possible. It's not necessary to play your best tennis in the first week. The point is to be peaking in the second week of a slam. As I watch Rafa, I tick off in my mind all of the elements of his game and then I know where he's at and the state of his game. He can be a slow starter in slams. I think Rafa had enough match play in Doha and Abu Dabai. The only issue is any lingering effects from the bug he had. His first match didn't reveal much and I expect to know more after his second match.

I also am not one who waits until the final to make my prediction. If I feel strongly about a player, then I may reveal my thoughts as to how far I think he can go. I don't even call it a prediction. Sometimes it's just a sense or a feeling. There are no sure things in slams. We see upsets in every single tournament.

What I love is how Rafa keeps it simple. He won't let the media draw him into any speculation or discussion about the possibility of winning his fourth slam in a row. He is smart and wise beyond his years. He knows that thinking about winning four in a row would be a huge mistake. I know that he is aware of what is at stake in this slam. However, I also know that he won't let himself be overwhelmed by expectations.

NNY, you are right, Majors are a whole different animal and performance in previous tourneys is not as much of an indicator as people may think.
Also about Rafa, he has payed his dues and knows he can cash out in the toughest moments, when it matters most. "I just keep improving and do my best in every single match, and the rest takes care of itself". That humility and zen-like peace of mind translates in an iron-clad mental toughness when it counts.

I disagree that Fed and Nole won't be able to beat Rafa in a slam. What applies to Murray also applies to Nole/Fed, ie Rafa will have to bring his A game in order to beat Nole/Fed in a slam, anything less, Nole/Fed may be able to capitalize.

As I've mentioned, Fed and Rafa always meet in the slam final, so it makes it difficult for Fed to beat Rafa. Murray always meet Rafa in the semifinals, and it may be a different story if they meet in the final. If we talk about matchup, then I'm afraid Nole is even more difficult to handle on the hard courts, more so than Murray. Rafa still has a negative H2H against Nole on the hard courts! Nole has the honor of meeting Rafa in a slam final and lost. Murray has not that honor yet. We also haven't seen Rafa/Nole or Rafa/Fed in a hard court slam semifinal to make a comparison against Rafa/Murray semifinal. All I can say is Rafa is definitely better in a final as he'll go all out, ie without holding back anything, to win; whilst in a semifinal, there may be some holding back, in view of a possible final match looming next.

I also believe that if Rafa gets to that 2008 USO final, he'll be beaten by Fed. Rafa in those conditions simply can't beat Fed, especially on a fast hard court; we have to be realistic. The USO then was the last chance for Fed to redeem his season, while he might be nervous against a fit Rafa, a tired Rafa won't have any mental edge over Fed. Fed was experienced enough to capitalize on that.

We may think that it's a match up problem for Rafa against Murray. However, their matches on clay and grass say otherwise. Rafa can beat Murray in straight sets on grass but can he beat Fed in straights on grass? If Rafa does not accord too much respect for Murray on the hard courts, and plays with patience and controlled aggression against Murray, like what he has done on grass or like Fed has done at the 2010 AO final, I'm sure it will make life a lot easier for Rafa when he meets Murray on the hard courts.

Rafa was also rather edgy during that WTF tournament last year. I actually think that Rafa was affected very much by his losses, esp in important tournaments, much more than we might have thought. Those heavy losses on the hard courts to Nole/Davy/Delpo would have a psychological or mental effect on him, and he'll be tense each time he faces them on the hard courts. Likewise when he faces Murray on the hard courts, his losses at the AO and the USO to Murray will be on his mind; he has to overcome such mental effects and goes out there to play his game, if not we'll see another tense moment like that WTF semifinal, when having match points, he played poorly to lose the edge.

There is a reason why I don't automatically think that Rafa will lose to Murray in the semis or obsess about it. It goes back to what happened at the 2009 AO. As I watched Rafa in the early rounds, I realized that he was in exceptionally good form after he had to take some time off at the end of 2008 for knee tendinitis. I could see that he had improved his game. Although the ESPN commentators and everyone else were talking only about Fed and Murray, I knew that Rafa had a good shot at winning. The one thing that bothered me was a possible semifinal meeting with Murray. I remembered how Murray beat Rafa at the 2008 USO and wondered how he would get by him.

I actually made myself sick with worry about this possible matchup. I intended to watch Murray and Verdasco play their quarterfinal match, but missed most of it. I managed to catch the last few games. Of course, I was shocked to see Murray losing to Verdasco. Murray was playing very well, but Verdasco somehow had an answer for everything he threw at him. When Verdasco won, I breathed a sigh of relief that Rafa would not be meeting him in the semis. If I only knew what lay in store for Rafa!

That is the moment when I learned a lesson. There is an old saying - be careful what you wish for. It applies in this case. Verdasco's great play against Murray gave me a bit of nervousness, but never in my wildest dreams did I expect the kind of match that we saw in the semifinal. Verdasco played probably the best tennis of his career and really took it to Rafa. At times he was clearly outplaying Rafa.

I watched Rafa go to another level to get that victory. He made some insanely good shots. It was also a brutally physical match. I got tired just watching it! After it was over, the only question was whether Rafa could possibly find the physical strength to play against Fed in the final. Well, we all know how it turned out. It was one of the most unforgettable moments I have seen in the decades that I have watched this sport.

From that point on, I stopped making myself crazy any time I saw Murray as a possible semifinal matchup for Rafa. That semifinal match with Verdasco also proves that Rafa does play his best before a final. He had no choice if he was to get past Verdasco. Rafa also played his best match at the 2010 Wimbledon when he met Murray in the semifinal. He knew that he had to be at his best to beat him. Rafa played well in the final against Berdych, but not as well as he did against Murray. So these comments that Rafa always does this or always does that, are not necessarily borne out by reality.

Rafa does what he has to do to win. In the second week of a slam, Rafa turns on the afterburners. He gets better with each match as he closes in on the final. It's true that he is difficult to beat when he gets there, but he also gives it his best effort in the semifinals. If you don't play your best in a semifinal, then you may not get the chance to reach the final. That was certainly the case in the 2009 AO.

I will never know how Rafa managed to play those back-to-back five set matches. Maybe even Rafa doesn't know how he did it. He found something deep inside him that enable him to make his body do what it could not. I will never forget it.

That's why I am not going to kill myself worrying and obsessing about a possible matchup with Murray in the semifinals. As Rafa would say, it will be a good thing because it will mean that he has reached that point in the tournament. I am trying to think like Rafa. I was not nearly as smart when I was only 24 as he is now. He has taught me a great deal!

You see NNY, sometimes doing your best at the semifinal is not enough, if your spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. At the 2008 USO semifinal, Rafa knew deep down after he lost the first two sets, that it might be too much for him to win that match. I'm not saying that he purposely holds back anything, but he'll pace himself nicely to see himself through the semifinal, before having a chance at the final. However, in cases like that AO 2009 semifinal, pacing himself nicely was simply not enough. Who knows, had Rafa come out all guns blazing and played aggressively from the word 'Ready, play' things might be a lot easier than what it actually turned out. Rafa allowed Verdasco to be aggressive and controlled the match from the start and Rafa ended up doing more defending than attacking. Imagine Verdasco having 95 winners against Rafa's 53 or so. Likewise for that 2008 USO semifinal, Murray was aggressive, serving well with 22 aces, Rafa hardly had any time to breathe.

Fast forward to Wimbledon 2010 semifinal, Rafa knew that he had to be aggressive against Murray and took his chances whenever possible in order to beat Murray. He knew that he had to do it fast, for he would not want to end up like Gasquet in that 2008 Wimbledon 4th round match against Murray. Furthermore, the knowledge that Fed won't be the one he would face in the Wimbledon final should he get there might have prompted him to go all out to beat Murray in the semi. We also saw how he came out all guns blazing against Berdych in the final, never even allow Berdych to break his serve, not even once.

Overall, I think it has much to do with Rafa's mindset. He learnt from his experiences. I believe the next time he faces Davy or Delpo, he'll be all guns blazing, regardless of whether it is a SF or a QF or a F.

grafight: u should set up a private bracket challenge with your friends. They r gr8 fun and u can be a wacky as u like! Is there one somewhere on tennistalk that I've missed.
nadline: I'm sure you're right about it not being Andy's natural game and Andy's said as much. Of course I think he needs to play like that all the time to embed it in his game. I wish he'd practise against "lesser" players but keep his mouth shut if he does!

luckystar: Liked your post overall. I'd still like to point out a few things.
First, I was only speaking of the Nadal-Murray matchup on hardcourts. You can't compare grass with hardcourts. Nadal is truly a phenomenal grass court player- and his game on grass is 3x better than it is on hardcourts. Only one man has beaten Nadal on grass (in 5) sets since 2006. Murray, on the other hand, is a hardcourt specialist. On grass against Murray, the match will ALWAYS be on Nadal's racquet because Nadal's game is soo much more effective on grass (serve, forehand, movement - everything).

That said, the Murray-Nadal Wimb 2010 SF, still, was as close a straight sets victory as you'll ever see. Nadal was playing well in that tournament, particularly in the 2nd week. I think set 2 and set 3 against Soderling in the Wimb 2010 QF was close to the best tennis of Nadal's career. Had the Fed of Wimb 2010, not been beaten by Berdych and played against Nadal in the final, it would have been MURDER! I can promise you that. So, Nadal was playing excellent, and quite honestly, I expected him to have handled Murray more easily, which just goes to show that Murray is also in Nadal's head.

Again you talk of Nole's hardcourt record against Nadal. Let me ask you this..How many of these were big matches? The 2 biggest: Olympics and the UsOpen were handily won by Nadal. A lot of folks have handed Nadal beat-downs in smaller tournaments. Davydenko has done it, Nalbandian a few times. Heck, even Marin Cilic has done so!! Did any of these guys win a BIG MATCH against Rafa? Nope.

Nadal is a different animal in slams. Herein is the key; for Murray has beaten Nadal both times in big hardcourt slam matches. As I mentioned above, for whatever reason Murray ALWAYS plays his best tennis against Nadal. Take EVERY single match that Murray has won against Nadal. His stats are through the roof - compared to what he produces normally. Heck, I've seen matches where Murray has served 75%+ first serves for entire sets against Nadal!! In the WTF 2010 match at one pt,. Murray won 96% of his first serve pts against Nadal! Furthermore, Murray has tons of forehand winners against Nadal - which he almost never has in his usual matches. Seriously, IF Murray did this regularly against everyone on tour, he would have been #1 sometime ago!

Again in the WTF 2010, Murray played like a dud against Federer and got thrashed. Honestly,. I was expecting Nadal to get sweet revenge given the way Murray was playing. But we saw again, Murray played a blinder against Rafa and almost won. Furthermore Nadal looked a little tentative for parts of that match, and missed several opportunities. It reminded me of the AO 2010 QF where Nadal had leads in both sets but could not close it out. Thankfully, Nadal won the WTF match, but he did it the hard way, and as usual Murray made him uneasy. It's just a matchup issue; and it will be interesting to see how a more confident Nadal approaches the AO 2011 SF. All that said, I'm pretty sure, beating Murray in a slam for Nadal will be a much bigger challenge than beating Nole for ex (who can't stand mentally with Rafa on equal terms). RickyDimon was exactly right in his Nadal will win UsO 2010 article, once Wawrinka took out Murray.

Imjimmy, as I've mentioned, all those losses or beatdowns that Rafa suffered would have a psychological effect on him, and that's why we see him feeling edgy during the WTF. I've to say that had Rafa not lost that USO 2008 SF against Murray, he would be in a mental state of mind each time he faces Murray. In fact, all losses suffered by these top players do have an effect on them. Take Nole for eg, why do you think he can't perform against Rafa in a slam, even a hard court one? It's because Nole had suffered under the hands of Rafa time and again at RG, no matter how hard he tried, he couldn't beat Rafa there. So I'm not surprised that even on hard courts now, Nole may be mentally affected. Fed is another example, need I elaborate any further about Fed vs Rafa? Going forward, when Rafa is facing Delpo in a hard court slam, I believe he'll also get nervous, given the beatdown he rec'd from Delpo at he USO.

For Rafa to overcome all these mental problems, he has to face them and learn to conquer them. That's why all his wins at the WTF are so important to him, and esp that win over Murray. It gives him the confidence the next time he meets Murray on the hard courts. I do agree that Murray plays his best tennis against Rafa, that should be viewed as a compliment to Rafa, for Murray knows that anything lesser than his best, he will end up losing the match. Against Fed, I feel that Murray sometimes feel a bit complacent, as he had previously beaten Fed, in 2006 Cincy, when Murray was just 19 and an upstart. Of course Murray paid the price for that, when he failed to raise his game during his AO final, or maybe he did raise it but a bit too late.

Correction: had Rafa not lost to Murray in that 2008 USO semifinal, I think he won't have that mental state of mind each time he faces Murray.

After that loss, I could somehow feel that Rafa was a bit tense in that Rotterdam final match against Murray. Had he not injured his leg, that would be another close fight. I was glad though when Rafa won that IW final the same year and shown us what a wind wizard he was. He probably won Murray's respect even more when he played so well under such conditions while Murray had to curse and swear all the way and argued with the umpire.

Simon has broken Roger 3 times now, Roger broke back once. I still think Roger will take the match.

After day 3 all my guys are still in play! Well done.
Ricky, sorry about Kohlschreiber over Berdych, Tipsarevic over Verdasco, and Fish over Robredo. All 3 fought hard and are through. Vamos!

Nalbandian is 6.1 4.0 down to Berankis, Hewitt mus t have knocked the stuffing out of him, and wishing he had had the opportunity to play in the 2nd round.

Nalbandian says he is feeling weak and dizzy and his legs are giving way because he has no energy, so he might throw the towel in.

Nalbandian retires! Blooming predictable and blooming shame for Hewitt. He'd never have done that! Feeling very cross =:[

Do you guys watch how his Berankis boy plays. Don't you see some similarities between him and Nole, the way he strikes the ball and the way he hits his backhand? Even the movement along the baseline looks so much like Nole.

Delpo salls the trainer for his right wrist, but didn't receive treatment. He lost his racquet trying to return serve.

^^^^^Sorry, Delpo was serving, not receiving serve.

Delpo is out.

Looks like it will be the "top 4" in the SF's again. Dont see anyone beating them

grafight, sorry cannot resist...Baggy over Andy M and Monfils over Andy R ;)

deuce, OK, I admit it was a looong shot. Just replace Monfils with Wawa and Melzer for Baggy. There will be upsets still...
Good thing I'm not a betting person. ;-D

Rafa will fight and make it to the SF's....then he will lose as he is not physically 100%. Fed will win the tournament

atul,

Have you been watching both Nole and Murray? They are playing some of the best tennis I have seen from them in a long time. It's true that they haven't really been tested, but that will come soon enough. I wouldn't count either of them out. I also wouldn't count out Rafa.

After watching both Rafa's and Fed's matches, I'm not sure that one or both of them will be in the final. Rafa may be affected by his illness and judging by how poorly Fed played against Robredo, I think Fed may be physically exhausted too. Fed has been playing too much tennis lately, starting from Shanghai to AO, he played 7 tournaments plus three exho matches, all within three and a half to four months. I don't think both Rafa and Fed have sufficient rest during their short off season.

Nole, Berdych, Sod and Murray are all playing well at the moment, and most likely two of them will be in the semifinals. Not forgetting Stan and Ferrer are also playing very well, and Roddick and Cilic still have outside chance of making it to the QF and beyond. Unless Rafa and Fed show up and play positively differently from their previous matches, it will be a tough ask for a Fedal final come next Sunday.

I'm not sure about a Nole/Murray final either, judging from how well Berdych and Sod played so far. Those four are no.3 to no.6 guys, so any day anyone can beat anyone. Hard to predict anything for this AO, as there are exceptional or unexpected things happening, who would foresee an illness to have weakened Rafa and may jeopardize his chance of a Rafa slam? And we also have another Swiss, not named Fed, who seems to be on a mission here. He may do some damage here and I won't be surprised that with his aggressive play he may take down Roddick and goes on to challenge Fed.

Who knows, we may have Stan/Berdych and Cilic/Sod semifinals, free of Fedal and Nole/Murray! As a Rafa fan, I certainly don't look forward to that!!

Rafa is not going beyond SF, unless his health improves.
If he is back to his best, then he is favorite. But I doubt if he will have the rhytm to hit his shots even if he recovers.

:((

luckystar,

I actually agree with your potential scenarios. I am not sure that either Fed or Rafa will get to the final here. I saw Fed's match with Robredo and he is simply not playing his best. He practically gave that second set to Robredo. Malisse was up 3-1 in the second set against Fed, but couldn't keep it up.

I was wondering if Fed is just having problems because now it's best three out of five matches. People have been waxing poetic about his play in recent months, forgetting that it has been in best two out of three tournaments. I see him having lapses of concentration and a dip in his level of play in his matches.

Nole has been looking extremely good. He will get a real test against Berdych, who played a brilliant match against Verdasco. Sod is looking good and Murray is playing great tennis.

I agree with you about Wawa taking out Roddick. After I saw Wawa take apart Monfils, then I realized how hard he has been working on his game and how much he has improved overall. He does seem like a man on a mission. He gave up a lot to focus on his tennis, so I don't think he plans on losing in the fourth round.

I never thought of the fact that maybe Fed played too much tennis. I thought he wanted to gain some points and get into great form for this year. You may be right about that, though. He is 29 and there are no miracle strategies from Annacone to cure that. Even as fit as he is now, there is no question that the second round match with Simon had to take something out of him. He hasn't played anyone really difficult since then, but still he is having lapses.

As far as Rafa is concerned, I am taking it one match at a time. We will see if he has been able to get some rest and looks any better in his next match. He simply has to serve better against Cilic. He admitted that he is sweating too much and lost a few pounds in the match against Tomic.

Indeed, who would have thought that Rafa would get this bad viral infection so close to the AO. I could live with him playing his best and losing out to someone who was better on the court, but to have him lose out on his fourth slam due to the lingering effects of an illness will be hard to take.

Federer was just interviewed on ESPN2. If I heard it right, Rafa's physio had a cold in Abu Dabi and that's where Rafa got the cold from.

Okay, enough negative thoughts. Didn't Rafa also struggled in early rounds of Wimbledon last year? He was pushed to 5 sets in the 2nd and 3rd round if I remember correctly and he won the whole thing. He usually struggles in early rounds.

Now his physical condition is different. But since the virus is gone. he just needs a bit more rest. A bit more practices, he may start peaking in the 2nd week. Hopefully, Cilic is tired. That will put Rafa in equal footing. The more matches Rafa get through, the more time he buys to recover. Positive thoughts!

I watched Federer's match with Robredo. Fed really has major lapses at a time. I think Djokovic has a very good chance beating Fed in the semi, if both of them advance that far.

Fed is definitely not playying very well.

He is having issues with his first serve, some forehand and backhand errors.(he hit 40 UE today).

He will have to improve it in QF or get ready to be sent packing by other seeded players.(But Fed usually raises his bar at the later stages of the tournament, so i hope we will see all the required on time to make him through to final).

great predictions, but for me it's Fed over Ferrer (yes...Ferrer!) in the Final. SD f Atl.

interesting predictions here, homos going for Berdych from that side and scoot going for Ferrer on the other! Now a Berdych Ferrer final would certainly be beneficial to the book makers!

@Latennis , 1/23/11 9:03 AM
---Federer was just interviewed on ESPN2. If I heard it right, Rafa's physio had a cold in Abu Dabi and that's where Rafa got the cold from---

I have learned to doubt everything Fed tells.
Rafa sayd he caught a cold while playing "water tennis" in Doha. [Q &A, The Times]

imjimmy, 1/17/11 7:52 PM

"Thanks for the predictions Ricky. My predictions after the QF are identical to yours, except I have Fed taking out Djoker in 3 sets (not 4)."

the best post on this blog!

watch Djokovic's presser. he means business this time.