Ricky, do you 'reeaalllly' class soderling and querry as "not dangerous" players - i would have to disagree - 'soft' up until the QF's i agree, but you know, early round players have nothing to lose, everything to gain, but QF's onwards, (soderling, hewitt and querry will all be dangerous). I just trust that Federer will hang tight and stay mentally alert!

I dont know a lot about Pat Cash - other than seeing him regularly as a broadcaster at Wimby events (showing a bit of chest hair - as always!) - and he has never been particularly complimentary about federer - but i read this, this morning from the online times - and thought federer fans would be interested. (not the full article). He also refers to the rest of the top 5 players.

Times Online Sunday Times August 30, 2009
Roger Federer is back to his attacking bestPat Cash

Roger Federer answered my pleas along with those of many like me. The world No 1 is back doing what he does best; playing attacking tennis again.

Time and again I privately wondered and publicly asked why has Federer been so reluctant to go forward. Sure, he is a truly great player sticking to the baseline, but he is blessed with gifts of athleticism and reflex that mere mortals can only dream about. Until the day I die I?ll advocate that it?s a crime for a top-flight tennis player to not use all the weapons in his armoury and I've lost count in the times I?ve yearned for the No 1 to attack the net a little more.

Last weekend my requests were answered. Personally I was in action in another part of the United States, winning the senior tournament on America?s only grass court of note, in Newport, Rhode Island, and I did it by playing serve-and-volley tennis. Watching television back in the locker room, I saw Federer was doing plenty of the same as he won the last big build-up tournament before the US Open, the Masters 1000 title in Cincinnati.

For the sport of tennis in general this is great. The more positive approach seems to be born out of the confidence of winning back to back French Open and Wimbledon titles, beating Pete Sampras? record of fourteen major titles and reclaiming the world No 1 spot that was Federer?s property for the small matter of 237 consecutive weeks. Only he will know whether that is the case. But for the rest of the US Open hopefuls, it can only come as bad news because it makes the Swiss an even hotter favourite to win his sixth successive singles title on the cement of Flushing Meadows.

Quite simply there are many more players who are potentially a threat to him on hard court than there are on grass. It long been viewed as the great equalising surface.

Let?s be honest, the likes of Nikolay Davydenko, Fernando Verdasco or Gilles Simon are not going to give him a hard time on grass in the same way that Andy Roddick is never going to be a threat on clay. But they can all muster plenty of resistance on cement and yet Federer has proved himself unbeatable in New York.

This year the conditions are going to be even more favourable to him. The courts are going to be quick and the balls are extremely fast. The decision to make Wimbledon considerably more medium paced a few years ago means the Open is now the speediest Grand Slam. It's the reason Rafa Nadal has never been particularly happy because his top spin does not have a huge effect in the same way they do on Paris?s clay or the much slower hard courts at the Australian Open.

And let?s not shy away from the fact; Federer absolutely blazed into a below-par Andy Murray in last week?s Cincinnati semi-final and showed what he could do to the world?s second-best player when the conditions are swift and he?s in an attacking frame of mind.

Murray is a big contender in this tournament and I don?t subscribe the point of view that he might be going into the event perhaps a little overcooked after another period of hard preparation work in Florida followed by a Masters title win in Montreal and the semi in Cincy. I believe he?s strong enough and his game is getting better all the time but whether it's good enough to live with Federer, I await to find out.

Similarly with Roddick, he did supremely well at Wimbledon and was desperately unlucky to lose the final. He?s finally appeared to eliminate the facets of his game that were holding him back such as the poor volley and suspect sliced backhand. Let?s see if he can maintain the sort of form and focus he showed at the All England Club.

Through it all, Federer is the man of the moment. Five years ago I had just finished speaking in a corporate entertainment engagement on the day of the US Open and stood watching the first set with the 1971 champion Stan Smith as Federer took on my compatriot Lleyton Hewitt. It was the battle of the new world No 1 against the player he had just deposed and from the outset it wasn?t hard to see how the balance of power had shifted. Federer was just supreme, his attacking play pulled Hewitt to shreds and within eighteen minutes of a Grand Slam final he had wrapped up the first set 6-0. I turned to Stan Smith and we agreed that had been one of the most emphatic displays of aggressive tennis that we?d ever seen and if Federer was capable of such excellence then who knew the extent of his potential.

***The memory of that afternoon has been the reason I have been accused of being over-critical of Federer in recent years. ***

I know how he can torture the leading players; he did the same to Roddick in a set at the Australian Open a few years ago. And there have been occasions when he?s appeared to err on the side of caution. Here?s hoping he is now going on the offensive and if that is the case, the only message to the rest of the US Open field is, "Watch out."

Some interesting reads:


Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Are The Draws Fixed?
by Helen W

This year's Australian Open has again raised this question. To some posters, it appeared that Roger Federer got a cakewalk to the quarters, whereas Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal got a much tougher half. In addition, for reasons that Tennis Australia has not elucidated, contrary to tradition, the bottom half of the men's draw played first. This means that the player who reached the final from the bottom half of the draw would get an extra day of rest in comparison with the player who reached the final from the top half of the draw. The beneficiary of this unexplained break with tradition was the winner of the bottom half of the draw, in this case Roger Federer.

At first glance, it appears ridiculous to claim that there is any bias in the draws. People who even suggest it are likened to those who see black helicopters flitting about and fancy that every microwave oven exerts thought control over its household.

But to dismiss everyone who questions the impartiality of the draws as some kind of nutcase, without even considering some of the questions raised over the years, is tantamount to an ad hominem argument. Naysayers need to at least attempt to answer some of the outstanding questions, and to explain why the people that could answer them, don't.

Here are a few of the draws that make me wonder:

1. US Open 2007 Women's & Men's Draws

Many tennis followers questioned this draw. WTA "Golden Girl" Maria Sharapova was in the bottom half of the draw, and her stiffest competition was Svetlana Kuznetsova and Nadia Petrova.

From The NY Times Patrick McEnroe, the tennis analyst and Davis Cup captain, said he picked six players capable of winning the womens tournament. And out of those six, he said, five are on the top half of the draw. These included Justine Henin, Serena Williams, Venus Williams, Jelena Jankovic and Ana Ivanovic.

On the Men's side, here was Roger's draw, (see Straight From The Horse's Mouth: US Open Draws ):

Federer, Roger (1)
Qualifier
Qualifier
Qualifier
Qualifier
Qualifier
WC: Isner, John
____

I did an order-of magnitude calculation of the probability of this draw, and arrived at the following figure: You can actually calculate the probability that positions 2 through 6 are filled with qualifiers pretty easily. There are 128 positions to be filled, and 16 qualifiers, so the probability =16/128 * 15/128 * 14/128 * 13/128 * 12/128 = 0.0000153

i.e. 0.0015%

Improbable things do happen, just as probability theory says they must. But if they keep happening, and the same people always seem to wind up the winners, I think it is at least legitimate to question the process.
2. Wimbledon 2007 Men's Scheduling

Most tennis buffs will remember this Wimbledon as the Wimby with the worst rain ever. Again, you can read about it on this blog. I'm not going to repeat everything that was said, but it certainly felt that most of Roger's competition was "thrown under a bus" in order for the AELTC to maintain its schedule. And one other item received not a word of explanation: When Rafa was playing catch-up because of all the rain delays he suffered, he was relegated to Court 2 (no Hawkeye) instead of Court 1, even though the match on Court 1 was a lower seed. The beneficiary of this process was, again, Roger Federer.

Roger was also the beneficiary of the "emergency" scheduling due to hurricane conditions at last year's US Open.

If you do a few Google searches on these issues, you will find a lot of thoughtful people asking the same questions.

When this kind of stuff happens, and people ask, Why? and they don't get any answers -- what's your explanation?

http://craighickmanontennis.blogspot.com/2009/02/consp iracy-theories.html

Straight From The Horse's Mouth: US Open Draws

Okay, people. Here you go. Spin this any which way you want, but something is amiss in The Jungle. Thanks to Kathleen McElroy, we get a glimpse of just how "out in the open" the draw is conducted.

August 22, 2007, 3:45 pm
Live From the 71st Floor, Its Tennis!
By Kathleen McElroy

Of course, there were no jokes about the high drama of the United States Open draw even though the United States Tennis Association held it in a small conference room of the 71st floor of the Empire State Building. A view of the Statue of Liberty was framed by oversized photographs of Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe.

But todays draw, which started at about 11 a.m. and was over about an hour later, was a relatively tame, polite affair because only 30 seeded players not the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds and the other 96 are drawn out of an Open trophy. Placed near the door were two already printed draw sheets for the men and the women, with those selections having been made the night before with representatives of the International Tennis Association and the mens and womens tours.

Before the draw began, Davis Cup captain and tennis commentator Patrick McEnroe, looking quite spiffy in a pinstriped suit, was already speculating about a potential matchup between 6-foot-9-inch John Isner and 6-foot-10 Ivo Karlovic. Now that would be taking tennis to new heights.

Alas, we later learned that Karlovic will face the significantly shorter Arnaud Clement in the first round, but he is in top-seeded Roger Federers quarter of the draw. Before the ceremony, Federers drawsheet read like this:

1. Federer, Roger (1)
2. Qualifier
3. Qualifier
4. Qualifier
5. Qualifier
6. Qualifier
7. WC: Isner, John
8. ____________

When Novak Djokovic was drawn to No. 2 Rafael Nadals side, Richard Deitsch of Sports Illustrated said under his breath, Federer just went back to sleep. The No. 8 spot was filled with Jarkko Nieminen, the 26th-seeded Finn.

Deitsch was also sitting next to The Times Liz Robbins, and the two traded comments and quips about the mens draw as it continued. The question is, of course, who ends up on whose side? The draw works like this: No. 3 and No. 4 are chosen for one side or the other. Then 5-8 are decided, next 9-12, followed by 13-16. The last seeded players to be positioned are 17-24, ending with 25-32. So instead of facing Nieminen in the third round, Federer could have faced Marat Safin, seeded 25th, a former Open champion.

Everyone was buzzing after Andy Roddick was put in Federers quarter. If they both get that far, its a safe bet that USA Network will ensure that match will never see the light of day (wink).

Read More

So. Unless I'm missing something, Raja didn't draw five qualifiers "randomly." The ITF and the ATP put together the drawsheet the night before the 30 seeds were drawn before the audience. One would think that if the ITF and ATP were interested in a balanced draw, those five qualifiers after Raja's name would've been redistributed. But they weren't.

So. If anyone wants to claim that a draw can't possibly be fixed or rigged or whatever word you want to use, then tell it to someone who can't see, can't hear, and can't read.

http://craighickmanontennis.blogspot.com/2007/08/straight-fro m-horses-mouth-us-open.html

hi homos, a really interesting read from both articles. but i just dont get it. earlier on this year, i saw on tv (and later on youtube), Ana ivanesovic and someone whose name i forget, actually doing the draw for the mens singles tourny at the AO, so unless they were "in on the deal", how could it be rigged? and also, who is Kathleen McElroy? and Craig hickman? are they heads of tennis? anti-federers? I kind of trust in the American system (isnt theres supposed to be "the best?") and believe that they would do everything "above board" else otherwise, it brings the "gentleman's game into disrepute").

homos, ive found out who those people are, craighickman/Kathleen McElroy - apparently KM is editor of NY Times and CH is the following: (a blogger) -

Craig Hickman?s Tennis Blog - Irreverent musings from a tennis fanatic -
FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 2009
US Open 2009 Live Updates
For yet another year, I will not be making the trek to Flushing Meadows to see live action at the US Open. Of course, Savannah, who lives there, will provide her take on the live action with lots of "backstage" reporting.

I remember Ricky Dimon commenting before the RG draw this year, that the published draw one year, bore no resemblance to the live draw. Ricky correct me if I'm wrong.

There is the other fact that Roger only ever plays on Centre Court wherever the tournament is taking place, and he always has the most favourable slot. Past champions at Wimbledon, at least, have been put on outside courts over the years, I remember John McEnroe shoved to No2 court as defending champion and was beaten by Tim Gullickson. That court was known as the champions' graveyard. Both the Williams sisters are regularly put on that court whether they are defending champions or not. When was the last time Roger was put any any court other than Centre Court?

But as so many people have been brainwashed to proclaim Roger as a their favourite, obviously, the organisers think they are pleasing the majority of the tennis fans, thereby increasing their ratings, and because Roger gets preferential treatment everywhere, he continues to win and continues to gain more fans, so the organisers continue to want to please them it's a vicious circle.

I hope Rafa gets back to where he belongs at No1 where he got without a little help from anyone, and inspite of the obstacles put in his path and that of others. There might even be some surprises this year at the USO.................watch Sam Querry!

e&oe

Oh carrie you never get tiered do you?
He has the" favorable slot" seriously? Where not your guy bet on his arena at center court on RG why it didn?t help him? Does the ball boys and the 23.000 thousands spectators play with Roger against the opponent in Arthur Ashe? Do you remember Roger playing against Roddick in 07 when the whole stadium was cheering against him? When he played Aggasi? It is two way street honey, He plays on the center court because he has been a defending champion for the last 5 years, there were times when his match starts at 1 pm because he was scheduled there? And even if you are right: do you think that makes him a stronger opponent? After the QF all the matchs take place there so there is no point of discussing this point here. This year Spanish media was comparing how many times Nadal and Roger played on Phillip Chatiere that there darling played less than Roger there? do you think that what made Soderling the un beaten guy that afternoon ? that Nadal didn?t play the previous match there? For your guy sake I hope your not serious!
First the draw being fixed, now the courts? Are you for real!

hi carrie, i think someone said some thing about TV ratings? I think its not only roger, but at wimby this year, murray played all his matches on centre court and he was then no. 3 - he even beat roger to playing on centre court for the FIRST TIME with the "new roof" - that surely had to be planned? but i have only ever seen rafa/roger play centre or court no. 1 - and also the coverage on sky is biased - no one can argue that - i remember coming home from work, wanting to watch the federer match (checked the listings), when i got home it had been changed and murray's match was brought forward (as it hit the 6pm finish time for workers getting home) - i thought that was a bit unfair - but i guess TV ratings must have something to do with it all - and until recently, i hadn't really given it too much thought.

maxi thanks for checking up on them - saves me the trouble :)
I put it there for anyone interested. No one need agree with the writers. But I do find some double standards suspect - this has happened at AO 2009, USO 2008, Wimb 2007 just to name a few. It makes interesting discussion.

Carrie - court 2, the Graveyard court, even Sampras got put on it against the Swiss (!!! :) George Bastl. Pete was shocked to be assinged court 2 by Alan Mills when he noted past champs had been given centre court or court 1 and felt he deserved better - there were solid practical reasons for that including security. Court 2 also cops the noise from adjacent court 3 which players don't like. So Graveyard court claimed Smapras as well because Bastl buried him! Sampras decided than that the All England Club puts their own interests and glory first.

say what u want ...the atp draws are all fair and square regardless of what people think . The only thing thats subject to organizer scheduling is where the players play ...and the top seeds playing on center court every time is no unusual thing.
what i find interesting is that you nad fans keep complanin about the draw .....but when rafa get a walkover i hear pin drop silence ...in fact then u start complaining that the poor guy did not get enough time on court ....when will you be happy ? geezzz

Have we all forgotten the French Open so quickly .....the one where the underdogs were bouncing seeds out left right center ...remember that ?? the draw , no matter how it might turn out does not make anyone one bit comfortable regardless of whom their idol is facing ! if fed had the toughest draw ..would i worry...yes ...but i believe that he will prevail simply cos he is the best there is out there ...

Let us alll stop taking out the all famous insurance policies shall we ...blaming the draws ..to the weather ...to the scheduling ..to the fans ....its ALL part of being a professional tennis player ....you put it aside and do ur thing on court .

Federites ...one match at a time ...all over again ..unite !!!!
C'MON !!
USO09...where we celebrate our sweet 16th !

tennislover, it's people who are in a better position than you who are suggesting that the draw is not all it appears to be, not me. Don't forget that Rafa was already suffering from his knees when he was beaten by Soderling.

maxi, it is normal for a player to have preferential treatment on his home turf. Ruzedski and Henman were treated the same, in fact the deeper they went into Wimbledon the less likely it was to see any other matches on TV, it used to be so frustrating. Roger gets it everywhere.

Fedexfan! I've noticed that one of my posts welcoming Zoey back somehow got lost is cyber space
(strange as it is...) Roger sounds "so" positive these days. He has mentioned how in shape and psychologically ready he is for the US Open this year (as opposed to last year) in at least one interviewer I read about.

He is very excited about his chances in New York...

and so he and "WE" should be! :)

Would love to see a Rafa/Fed final.

Cheers! C'MON!


carrie, if I recall correctly Roger matches were not covered as well as I would have liked (or thought fair) on tv at Wimbleton 09. I remember a lot of William sister stuff though... I ended up "not" watching tennis as much as I would have liked to...

Very interesting post people!
It is hard to believe that a draw can be fixed at this level but one does wonder when it almost always shines brighter for a particular player - in this case Fed over the rest. His draw this year is simply a joke.
Thanks to Ms. Hellen W for a very interesting article (even eye-opening).

Roger's name has already been engraved on the trophy. The fight now is for runner-up!

sky, i have to agree with you on this one - roger's matches definitely took backstage and the williams sisters (always crowd pullers but surely not over fed?), took "centre stage", also i have to say that watching the FO earlier this year, i found it highly annoying that i would be watching Federer's matches, only for eurosport to cut it "mid match" to go to another match on a different court (usually the women's). I was screaming at my TV - I couldnt believe what was happening!

the draw is the draw. in my view, it isnt rigged. just accept it and homos - am glad you posted it cos it has generated a lot of discussion! but i trust in the American way, the French way, The aussie way and the british way.

carrie you appear to have "enormous" confidence in Roger! :) Roger is "good", no scratch that, Roger is a "GREAT" tennis player, perhaps the best that has ever been... but he must as always "WIN" each game before a match (multiple times) before holding "any" trophy in his hands, and when he does Roger has earned every bit of it! Nothing is a given, but I would agree "yes" Roger is the BEST, and hard to beat (even un-beatable) when he is playing at his BEST. C'MON! :)

Let the US Open games begin... :)

carrie's that's funny! But "m" comes before "r", and with all the favouritsm out there, it's definitely a murray fest right now - not a fed fest, or even a rafa fest - let's just see what happens and root for our own player to lift the trophy.

Cant wait! Cant wait! Cant wait! what's the slogan sky? "Do it for the twins?"

sky, I just think Roger has to win with his path laid so smooth before him, how can he lose? Noooooooooooooo, not my faith in the great Rog, but he's got all the help he needs as usual. I will be very surprised if he doesn't win.

My faith is with Rafa, but I think every thing is skewed in Roger's favour.

yes maxi I would AGREE wholeheartedly. Do IT for the TWINS Roger! Do it for the TWINS...! Does have a BEAUTIFUL/MAGICAL INCENTIVE ring/pazazz to it! C'MON Roger! C'MON does too :)

carrie there is no doubt Roger is right "ON" his game right now, and will be a dangerous opponent to any other player out there, but everyone has a chance, and in the end the "BEST" player will "WIN". For me I want it to be ROGER! For you it is RAFA! May the BEST Man win! No matter..., it will be FUN to watch... :)

The organizers of all the slams always bend over backwards to make sure that the arrogant jackass Federer gets a smooth ride to the semis. But Federer will not the USO this year - in fact, he will never win another slam until the rest of his career. I'm getting fed up with Fed!

maxi - No, Querrey, Soderling, and Davydenko are not dangerous QF opponents, relatively speaking. Sure, say if one of them was unseeded and Federer had to play one of them in the first or second round, it would be a bad draw.

But QUARTERFINALS. When he could have been slotted to face someone like RODDICK or DEL POTRO? Heck no they aren't dangerous!

Then don't watch Fed, samdaman! It's that simple. There are a few players I cannot stand, and I simply don't watch them. Issue solved.

federer has the easiest draw by far..........he will reach semi's easily......nd the finals too.........all good for the swiss

I think it's really odd people like carrie are penciling in Fed for the trophy. What a difference a year makes. Last year people thought he was done winning Slams. I like the fact that people realise Fed should be the favorite (for all Slams except FO); as for the built-in excuses about the draw and easy path before the first match is played that's just sour grapes. I think he will win but it won't be a slam dunk : there's just too much competition now. Maybe carrie's just pulling a Nadal by down-playing his chances. In any case, talk is cheap ; you have to perform on the court. And if Fed wins give credit where credit is due. Rock on Fed Nation!

People will think what they want to think but as long as your favorite player is getting all the advantages then it is all good..and that goes for any fans favorite player.
But in reality all of this show of favoriteism is hurting the sport because people are starting to take notice and ask questions an people are being to think that the sport is tainted.
Just like tomorrow,Federer half plays .fed plays.no Novak ! watch..Novak will probably have to play 2 matches in 1 day or play at 10:00pm and he to tired if or win he has to play fed.
An really i would respect federer more if he had to fight to win.like a 4 hour semi then a 5 hour final or something...idk

Hi Ricky!
could you tell me, what the likelihood would be for Roddick or Delpotro to EVER be in the first round of a draw agaisnt fed/rafa? I would say zero %. I have never seen a top player seeded against either fed or rafa (when rafa was no. 1 or no. 2), drawn against another top player in rounds 1 or 2 - they usually meet in 3rd round or QF's and thats always been the case - so i dont get what you are saying here.

I still disagree with you ricky. i have spent the last couple of hours reading about sam querry in particular, and watched his video take at the USO and gone over some of yours and cheryls previous posts on querry and you have ALWAYS referred to him as "dangerous". so why now change your tune? I agree in terms of soderling but only to an extent - he "had" an injured elbow. He has missed tournys since wimby so i think enough time to recuperate - unless you know something we don't? I would NEVER write off soderling. EVER.

chr18, I'm not pencilling Roger in at all, it appears my sarcacsm backfired. All I'm saying is, that's what the organisers want, and that's what is going to happen. They've done their bit with the draw, now they just have to look after him in the schedules, and what do you know, Roger is holding the trophy ................ again!

This is not sour grapes, eye witness account, read on:

August 27, 2009, 1:19 pm
The ESPN-ization of the U.S. Open Begins
By Lynn Zinser
Roger Federer and Serena WilliamsFrank Franklin II/Associated Press Roger Federer and Serena Williams, the defending men?s and women?s champions, at the 2009 U.S. Open draw.

The first indication of a new television era of the United States Open came Thursday, when the draw came as a packaged-for-TV event for the first time. It was held in the Times Center, the same setting as last year, but the similarities ended there.
From The Times
Federer and Nadal on Opposite Sides

The five-time champion Roger Federer could potentially meet Rafael Nadal or Andy Murray in the final. The Williams sisters would face each other in the semis if they make it that far.

First, there was no ?drawing? going on. The pulling of names and placing them in the bracket was done Wednesday night, so everything could be printed and ready for the noon broadcast. The ESPN analysts ? Patrick McEnroe and Mary Joe Fernandez ? did not have to do any on-the-spot analysis because everything was known ahead of time. Not that there is much mystery to the draw in the era of 32 seeds in each bracket, but now it seemed just to be an excuse to put more pictures of the Williams sisters, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal on the screen.

The news was the Williams sisters, as the Nos. 2 and 3 seeds, landed in the same half of the draw. That means no all-Williams final: they will meet in the semifinals if they get that far.

Federer?s Wimbledon final opponent, No. 5 seed Andy Roddick, is in his half of the draw, and they cannot have a rematch in the final, either. Nadal, at No. 3, landed in the other half, so if his health holds, he can meet Federer in the final.

Federer came to the draw, posed for pictures and answered some television questions, as did Serena Williams, who did her best to sidestep a query about whether she was disappointed a meeting with sister Venus would not come in the final.

Serena blushed and drew laughs during a clip of her staging a dance-off with Venus in Bryant Park on Wednesday (she thinks she lost) and Federer drew a reaction by saying how much he liked ?the wild parts? of the Open compared with, say, Wimbledon.

You got some video clips, a bull rush through the two fields by McEnroe and Fernandez, and it was all over. If you were looking for depth, it was hard to find. If you were looking for ESPN?s thumbprint, it was everywhere.

Oh, well. I would not waste any energy getting all beserk over the draw, already been there, done that during Wimbledon 09 and cannot forget how useless that was.

You know the saying: "the best laid plans of mice and men...."

...which did not make a Wimbledon champion of Andy Murray yet. Seemed to many, RDimon included that Murray had been given a sweet draw and Fed had a difficult one. Was that accidental? Maybe yes, maybe no.

Just goes to show what I already said: regardless of what the desires of the tournament may be to increase ticket sales or TV ratings or whatever the motives, in the end it comes down to fitness of the favorite, whether he/she can execute, and try as strategists, plotters, bookies may, paving the way in the press or through the draw or placing the favorite on center court, there are no guarantees.

Thankfully, it all comes down to who is the fittest, finest and best on the day.

Another thing I cannot understand is why experienced players play against each other, and qualifiers play against each other, in the first round. Ricky or cheryl, could you explain this to me.

e&oe

I think if the draw were fixed then Serana and Venus would be on different sides if the draw as they are Americans and the U.S. Open would want an all Williams final. Also Roddick would not have been in Fed's draw; it would have been set so they could only meet in the final. I think they prefer Roddick to win and Serana/Venus so I don't think it was fixed. Americans would favour Americans.

My bad...Serena.

just picking up on zoey's point really. i think it is important to keep a hold on the mindset of ALL the players, whatever round they are in and whoever they are playing. If they dont perform- they IS OUT! riggin' or no riggin' (and i dont think there is a riggin' goin' on). I posted roger's mindset on a different thread and rather than going over it again, i have just inserted it here - i am happy that roger is not feeling "too comfortable", respects his opponents and knows that he "has to play great tennis" to win ALL his matches-first round OR final.

I still put my faith in federer tho and i like his mindset right now - federer is ready.

Federer, Williams sisters among US Open 1st-day matches
By Jim Slater (AFP) ? 13 hours ago
Federer, who has won the past five US Open men's titles and has not lost at the US Open since the fourth round in 2003, begins his quest for six in a row against 18-year-old American Devin Britton in the second match at Ashe.
"Doesn't matter who you play, where you play. If you think the guy is not going to make a game that's absurd," Federer said. "That's how tennis is. You have to be very careful. I have to make sure I put in a good performance."
Federer recalled being shocked at 17 when he faced Andre Agassi in his hometown of Basel, so he can relate to Britton's situation.
"You try to enjoy it, put in a good fight," Federer said. "Best-of-five-set match is maybe something Britton has never played before, but a good thing in tennis is you always have a chance."

maxi , 8/30/09 2:03 PM

maxi - if you have ready any of my previews for the U.S. Open, you know that I consider Querrey a potential surprise. Possibly even to the quarters.

But Querrey as a potential QUARTERFINAL opponent for Federer? That would be one of the least difficult QUARTERFINAL matchups of this entire Grand Slam season. Querrey in, say, the third round? Now that would be a relatively bad draw.

i have read your previews ricky - i am just "reading between the lines" - i watched querry in montreal and cinny and think he is very strong right now. so if he is a first rounder,second rounder, third rounder or QF, he is ALWAYS dangerous. thanks for replying tho'.

sure, in general Querrey is a dangerous player

he's just not dangerous to Federer

and he's certainly not dangerous to Federer in the quarterfinals of a Grand Slam!

okay ricky - thanks for that.

How do you decide if a draw is 'cupcake'? By having a lot of players that have a losing h2h to a player? Nadal has a better H2h to everyone except Nalby and Blake so he gets 'cupcake' draws all the time, isn't it?

In AO2009, b4 it started I wouldn say Verdasco is a cupcake draw for Nadal, it's just that Verdasco played so superbly at that point. And in Wimby, Fed has a much tougher draw than Murray.

And in FO, i would also say Soderling is 'cupcake' to Nadal but wooopss, Nadal lost to a player he just beaten 6-1,6-0.

Blame the players, not the draw.

hi torres, i think that zoey mentioned a point earlier (not sure whether this blog or another) - but whatever draw is given to whatever player - i think its dangerous to "assume" that things are going to be easy - yes, by the law of averages, a more "accomplished" player should beat the underdog - but it doesn't always work out that way - does it? so i reckon as long as each and every player gets on the court "to win" regardless of who they are playing - then really - anything can happen - clearly federer/nadal/murray/djokovic "should" win their matches because of their skill BUT, the opponent got nothing to lose against these guys, so it's like "what the hell" - am gonna pull my best tennis out the bag and do some damage - i think (rafa fans correct me if i'm wrong), but Youznhy beat rafa in 2008, when he was seeded 165 and rafa was No. 2 - so really - everyone gotta be careful.

torr ...i love how you are ridiculously blunt ...cheers !

C'MON !!
USO09...where we celebrate our sweet 16th !

torres, I take your point, but it's probabilities we are talking about. It is probable that a player you have beaten 12 out of 12 times will beat for the first time, but highly unlikely. I still don't think the Soderling/ Rafa match is a good example, as Rafa already had tendonitis, and it was just one match too many.

If the draw is a pure lottery, then good luck to anyone who ends up with an easy ride, but if someone is deliberatly given an easy ride, then that's not good.

e&oe

tennis is no different than life in many respects, we are presented with challenges and we make the best of it. I don't buy into this fixed draw theory. The bottom line is you give it your best shot/effort, and if you are "good enough" you come up on top. Go Roger go! C'MON! Do it for the TWINS! :)

I should have written if you are good enough and have perseverance you will end up on top... Go! Make it happen! :)

whether you are good enough or not, if you are 'helped' along the way with an easier draw, of course it makes life easier than it otherwise could be. Those with tougher draws and a schedule that works against them because the Fed should get dealt with first (e.g. in case weather turns bad or whatever) than, like carrie says, that's not good.

hi homos. did you not think that federer had a tough draw at wimby or at FO (look at his route to the final - was NOT easy) - rafa's draw is not so bad either. Murray had an easier route at wimby than either rafa or roger, so its kind of 'pay back' time - dont you think? but i also feel that every player is dangerous and if anyone of the top 4 'relaxes' for just a second - then david will kill goliath. so goliath got to remember that. didn't a 19 year old fed beat a 29 year old agassi? and am sure there are more. Personally, i would prefer it for fed to have had higher ranked players to play against initially, but i still think he needs to be careful, even tho' he playing more freely and more relaxed recently.

sky ...people tend to forget that in both the slams he won ..he was 2 sets down and had to come back from the brink of an earth shattering early exit .....but he fought...and i mean fought to stay in ...just refused to give up .

he made it easy some say ...just cos he makes the impossible look easy does not make his feats any easier than it really is .

C'MON !!
USO09...where we celebrate our sweet 16th !

Carrie, that theory still doesn't apply. The probability that Soderling beating Nadal was also very small. And Rafa did beat Hewitt in str8 sets the match before so I am not buying the 'tendonitis' excuse.

He just wasn't good enough to beat Soderling on the day. He always had pain in his knees ( which is entirely his own doing).

And Rafa's probability of beating everyone except Blake and Nalby is also very high.

So what are you talking about here? There is no proof whatsoever that the draw was fixed. The ceremony was done in front of the players. Why are they not complaining about it?

becoz all the players know winning a Slam is always tough how easy the draw might look like.

torr ....you hit the nail on the head ....soderling was just better than each of his opponents that he beat ... the knee excuse is a bunch of bs that his fans start to make up . i dont recall one interview that nadal himself said he was suffering from a knee problem when he got beat ....soderling played an attacking game...he hit winners ...no waited for the UE ....

in fact ....now he is saying he is 100% for the USO....i reckon if he looses we are gona here a lot of talk about knees all over again . haha....so typical...he says one thing....his fans say a whole other thing...

slams are only easily won only if fed wins it i guess ..even though 2-3 of the matches played are 5 setters !!

C'MON !!
USO09...where we celebrate our sweet 16th !

fedexfan, mono and bachache spring to mind. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

I asked this elsewhere, but I'll ask it here, too: Has there ever been a worse player to win 15 Slams than Federer? To hear it from the whining Nadalites, you'd think that Federer probably wouldn't have won even a single Slam if the draw and schedule weren't rigged for him ahead of time -- EVERY TIME.

This of course begs the automatic followup question: How bad is men's tennis today given that Federer has 15 slams despite winning only because the promoters had to rig it for him, and still 15 times no one, including Nadal twice, could beat him? I suppose the Nadalite argument is that any good player -- you know, like Roddick -- would have 22 Slams by now given the same blatant favoritism showed Federer.

The real problem with this argument is that it somewhat discounts the "accomplishments" of their preferred player.

Can't have it both ways, Nadalites: Either your boy is great because he's been able to beat Federer -- who is great if not THE greatest. Or your boy is merely the best of a very mediocre period in men's tennis and would've gotten his butt handed to him on a regular basis by true greats such as Sampras, Agassi, Edberg, Becker, McEnroe, Lendl, Borg, Connors, etc.

Which is it, Nadalites? Either give the Devil his due or your boy doesn't have a leg to stand on -- even with a good knee.

SP, for someone who refers to a whole section of fans as whining nadalites, you sure blow a very loud and useless trumpet!
Get over yourself. You're not that important.
Thank god for few level headed Fed fans like maxi whose posts I enjoy reading.

Federer has lost a game against No 1370!

"SP, for someone who refers to a whole section of fans as whining nadalites, you sure blow a very loud and useless trumpet!
Get over yourself. You're not that important.
Thank god for few level headed Fed fans like maxi whose posts I enjoy reading."

Flame-o-meter reading: 1.8 out of 10. Nice try, pithy, but stay out of the majors, kid.

he's not gonna be playing top notch tennis - probably gonna help the guy feel a bit better about himself carrie, its hardly riveting tennis.

Federer has been broken by No 1370! :)

Federer is broken by Britton!!!!!

fedexfan: " i dont recall one interview that nadal himself said he was suffering from a knee problem when he got beat"

I can say the same thing about fed and his mono at the AO 08. I've already posted awhile back where he talks of the virus but says clearly it is not affecting his tennis...........that is, until he LOST to Nole! Then, he was quick to blame his sickness on his loss.
torres: You love saying 'Rafa's self-inflicted injuries.' Well, same also goes for fed. His back problems are self-inflicted (he kept playing while he was hurting...he admitted it). Is why he withdrew from tourneys after the AO he said. And mono can be considered 'self-inflicted' if you are not diligent about hygiene (washing hands, touching things, around infected people). The EBV virus is TOTALLY preventable with good hygiene (that's why not ALL tennis players were affected.)

i hate watching fed in early rounds of tennis - its just too "jittery". ridiculous!

fan4tennis...my point was the player says ( or does not say anything in this instance) one thing and the fans say a complete different thing ....
you and i agree that fed and fed fans are on the same page with regards to his mono .....rafa and rafa fans are sooo not on the same page with regards the whipping he took at the 4th round in the french ...that was my point ...you are doing a good job in proving me right. duhhhh......

and yes ....fed back problem was his own doing...i agree .....sickness....i think thats pushing it , dont u ?.... nad's knee problems is his own doing also .....

C'MON!

Federer has been broken by No 1370 - TWICE! :)

sheeesh-just tuned in

fed 'donating' to britton

Bah! 1,3 and 5. Fairly routine. Win and advance. Nothing to see here ...

On the other hand, Isner-Hanescu seem to be having a good one going on Armstrong.

SP, i am detecting "flame throwing" already - this IS just like tennis.x!
Am not a big fan of it, got to say, want to really try and enjoy the matches but will always stick up for federer - i love him - (not ashamed to admit it). Have got to say, I have been watching (of course) as many federer matches as I can and I know that early rounds when he plays, I always feel jittery - because i know he never plays his best tennis. And its during those moments that i feel edgy and uncomfortable - but i do know it passes - i then trust more in his game, once an hour has passed and he has found his rhythm.
he always steps it up, round by round, because that is what he has to do. he is relaxed and happy and very much "in a different place". I think all the shackles are off him, he hasn't got anything to prove (of course i want him to win the USO). I dont think the fact that he "gifted" games to Britton is a big deal.
I was trying to think of the times that any of the other players have actually lost to a lower ranked player - and I do remember Rafa at No. 2 losing massively (being bagelled by Youzny). I was utterly shocked because NO-ONE bagels rafa! I think at the time Youznhy is NOT the player he is now, he was either seeded 165 or 465 (I cannt remember). And he was comprehensively beaten by Mikhail Youzhny in the final of the Chennai Open in 2008. But. Anyway, the match is over. fed has won. he did what he had to do to win. Britton must be glowing. He just played the best player he will ever play in his life - something to tell his kids!

Britton was nervous to start with, but for No 1370 in the world to take 9 games from the 'GOAT' is very good going for Britton and a bit embarrasing for the 'GOAT'. Next time Britton will take the match.

e&oe

carrie, i think i am getting your humour - very funny! as if!

I feel a jacket with No 16 coming on.

fedex: When Rafa said he was dealing with the pain for MONTHS, that DOES include the FO--duh! The player said it, not a fan. But at least Rafa waited until his tests were ran and said it a week AFTER he was beat. Fed blamed his mono on his loss to Nole in the post-match interview. Didn't take him long to turn from the virus isn't affecting my tennis (pre-match interview before Nole) to I lost because I was sick (post-match).

Many sicknesses, including EBV (mono) can be attributed to lack of proper hygiene. Not all tennis players got it! I've worked in a hospital around sick people for almost 20 years and proper hygiene keeps us from getting all those sicknesses we are around! So it's not pushing it as you claim. It's the simple truth.

maxi, do you remember the scoreline of the final of the FO 08? ("I was trying to think of the times that any of the other players have actually lost to a lower ranked player")

who knows carrie? but i do feel a rafa/roger final coming on! sweet.

Q. You are a facing 18-year-old Devin Britton in the first round. You were 18 years old once probably facing people higher ranked than you. What kind of advice do you have for a young kid in a situation like that facing the No. 1 in the world?
ROGER FEDERER: Well, I went through maybe something a little bit similar when I played Agassi when I was 17 in Basel, in my hometown where I used to be a ballboy. So that was a big deal for me to get a wildcard into the main draw. I played Agassi. That was disbelief. I thought people were kidding me when they told me I was playing Agassi. There were a few guys in the draw I didn't want to play. I knew I still had a lot of work to do from the baseline, and I was playing maybe one of the best players of all time in that match.
I was in shock, but you try to enjoy it and try to put in a good fight. This is a bit different, this is a Grand Slam. Best-of-five-set match, maybe something Britton has never played before, but I think it's a good thing in tennis is you always have a chance. Doesn't matter who you play, where you play. If you think the guy's not to make a game is absurd. That's how tennis is. You have to be very careful. I have to make sure I put in a good performance.

all wrapped up in 1 hr 28 mins. no evidence of how the guy played before. I just cant wait for the next round now.

maxi, how could you whip up any excitement about Federer's matches in his draw, they are all a foregone conclusion. The only excitement is to see how many times Fed is broken. I's all been laid out for him perfectly to reach the SF.

The tailors are working on his outfit for the final right now. At Wimbledon he was in an officer's mess kit, for the USO I think an astronaut's shell suit complete with space helmet would be just ideal................with the §16 embroidered on it of course. I can't wait!

e&oe

carrie, i guess its because i never take anything for granted. ever.

Next up for Roger is world §65 Simon Greul...............how gruelling is that?

"gruelling", funny carrie.

maxi, do you remember the scoreline of the final of the FO 08? ("I was trying to think of the times that any of the other players have actually lost to a lower ranked player")
fan4tennis , 8/31/09 10:24 PM

i remember it well fan4tennis. but i was talking about a player not seeded no.1 or no. 2, but i think youzhny was seeded 465 at that time, and i was shocked because he bagelled rafa (a big difference between between seeded 1 or 2 than 465 and 2 - it was just "one of those days" for rafa - that's all and not a big deal. just happens sometimes-right?). but i just think, forget about the seed in the competition and play the opponent and win - that's what its about- right?