French Open

[stroke]

That was as impressive as it gets, playing like that at age 37 in the most physically challenging test in ATP tennis. He appears to have not lost a step, or even half a step. He will obviously be the favorite at Wimbledon and US Open. Too good. He stuck a fork in it, and all the tennis records. 52 winners, 32 unforced errors for the match.

[jimlosaltos]

That was me on the Nadal comparison. My point also was Alcaraz is going to have a great Sampras Lendl Agassi type career. Just not big 3. But who knows, it is just an opinion obviously, worth nothing.

Worth a good deal here.

Hey, I'd "settle" for a merely Sampras career <g>

Just saying Alcaraz's ceiling isn't clear, to me anyway. At the end of the first set, I thought the semifinal, and the title, was his to lose. And he managed to do that, but in a surprising way. One that's curable.

I remember a 19 yo Edberg being so nervous he couldn't (literally) get a ball in the court vs McEnroe at the US Open. Kid turned out OK.

[stotty]

In terms of achievements, Novak now stands as the games' greatest player by pretty much any metric you care to mention. Rafa gets it on clay, of course, but any any other surface Novak has Rafa by the scruff of the neck. You can see Novak equalling Roger's 8 Wimbledon titles this year as well, since, grass, in my opinion, is actually his best surface.

I felt a little sorry for Ruud. For 90 percent of that first set he was the better player yet came away with nothing. I think that is something you seldom hear Novak credited for; his ability to play below par in a set yet still somehow win it.

I tend to agree with Jim about Carlos's ceiling. He has the hallmarks of a great but we cannot be sure just yet. I hope he will go on to do great things. I like him a lot.

[dimbleby69]

Nothing gives me pause like some poster that comes out of nowhere and is "disappointed" in what we have going on here. Too good.

Hi Stroke,

sorry if my comment caused offence. I don't get to spend as much time on the site as I would like, and so end up lurking more than contributing. Since the lockdown and the participation in the Tsitsipas Forehand thread that followed last year, my opportunities for playing and spending time on TPN have been limited. No slight was intended to either the forum or the rest of the site.

As a less frequent visitor, perhaps it wasn't such a bad vantage point to view the thread from. There seemed to be no comments about the latter stages of the womens' competition, and that seemed noteworthy. As you can tell from the posts I have made before this one, I'm a fan of Muchova, and was hoping others were as well!

regards
Rob

[dimbleby69]

Dimbleby,
We will try to film her at some point...

Thanks John, hope it happens.

regards
Rob

[don_budge]

The 2023 French Open Champion...Novak (Novax) Djokovic

I think in retrospect it looks as if Novak Djokovic did himself a favor with his disappearing act against Mussetti. I don't think he had back to back matches with Sinner and Rune as something he may be up to at this point. Or he is just saving it for another day. Performance is the end. All else are means to an end. His focus is on the French Open. His performance there will be void of any questions of motivation. Between Sinner and Rune are a lot of horsepower in the legs. Novak's big consideration these days are in his legs. He has reached that point. This is why he was able to dominate Roger Federer once Federer hit the age of 32 or so. You begin to go over the hill and it all feels to be uphill from here on out.

Novak could just run out of gas at some point and very possibly some point soon. With the young gang now maturing and him having to face round after round of fresh legs...it looks to be very daunting. Let's see how it plays out.

Now it Rune versus the man without a country. Without a flag. Soon they will take his name from him. It was really sporting to see Fritz and Rublev meet at the net after their match. The two countries are at war with each other...yet they could just easily put it aside and play a little tennis.

The last time Novak Djokovic won a tournament was in January at the Australian Open. I guess he hasn't forgotten how to win. No...this is one wily veteran. Since the Australian Open his record on the court was less than stellar Novak. It was rather mediocre and one might have questions about his performance or his ability to perform. He lost in the semifinals to Daniil Medvedev at Dubai in February. Then it was the aforementioned loss to Lorenzo Mussetti at Monte Carlo in the round of sixteen. The forum was abuzz at Mussetti's performance. I was less so. Novak lost to Dusan Lajovic at Banja Luka and the forum was questioning whether or not there was something wrong with Novak. Then there was the defeat to young Holger Rune at Rome. The truth is...none of it mattered to Djokovic. He had his sights on the prize. A 23rd Grand Slam title was all he cared about. Plus it gave his opponents (and the forum) something to speculate about.

Djokovic dodged a very serious bullet when Carlos Alcaraz went down to an injury that I have never seen the likes of before. Very strange. Very, very strange. Carlos Alcarez had been on a virtually unstoppable tear for a couple few months. His only loss a suspicious Djokovicesque loss to a lesser known and forgettable name which I challenge anyone to remember. He simply needed a breather and tossed in the towel to Fabian Marozsan which bought him some time off between the Rome event and Roland Garros. I watched briefly the Alcarez versus Djokovic match just before Alcarez became injured. What a strange injury. He had been cruising along for months at break neck speed. He came into the event rested after his early exit in Rome. He cruised through the draw all the way to the semis including a thorough demolition of Stefanos Tsitsipas which left the Greek wishing his mother never had him. He was thoroughly embarrassed it seemed. Then he was going toe to toe against an opponent who essentially is twice as old as him and has umpteen more miles on his body than Alcarez and it ends up Alcarez who comes down with the dreaded cramps. Strange cramps they were. I noticed immediately that they were effecting his arm and hand at the same time his leg was cramping. I've never seen anything like it.

Well...they don't call him Novax for nothing. He refused the vaccines, which are getting more and more dubious reviews, and he was the last man standing in the last two Grand Slam events. I hope Alcarez doesn't have some kind of vaccine related malady. That would be a terrible shame. He wouldn't be the first either. But you have to hand it to Novak. The Joker they call him. I have heard is said in certain circles "fuck 'em if they can't take a joke". Novak was heard after winning the French for his twenty-third Slam title..."joke 'em if they can't take a fuck". That's the kind of guy he is. He stuck to his guns during the entire pandemic fiasco and took all kinds of heat for a stand that many other took as well. Refusing to submit to a shot that does not have published clinical trial data to this date. I give him all the credit in the world for pacing himself and keeping himself prepared even though he was banned from playing events because of his commitment to his body and his mind. By doing so he made himself a target and he took a lot of heat. I guess I know what he means...joke 'em.

[stroke]

I personally was always in Novak's corner, vaccine wise, and tennis wise, not that it matters. I have always felt of the 3 great ones, the most empathy for Novak. Roger, and Rafa to a lesser extent, are so loved by the average crowd. Novak at one point truly seeked that same love, but at some point, he realized that was not in the cards, and he accepted it and became the greatest ever. Well done.

[jimlosaltos]

Hi Stroke,

sorry if my comment caused offence. I don't get to spend as much time on the site as I would like, and so end up lurking more than contributing. Since the lockdown and the participation in the Tsitsipas Forehand thread that followed last year, my opportunities for playing and spending time on TPN have been limited. No slight was intended to either the forum or the rest of the site.

As a less frequent visitor, perhaps it wasn't such a bad vantage point to view the thread from. There seemed to be no comments about the latter stages of the womens' competition, and that seemed noteworthy. As you can tell from the posts I have made before this one, I'm a fan of Muchova, and was hoping others were as well!

regards
Rob

Muchova's two matches -- vs Sabalenka and vs Iga -- were, in my option, THE matches of the event. Period.

[jimlosaltos]

I personally was always in Novak's corner, vaccine wise, and tennis wise, not that it matters. I have always felt of the 3 great ones, the most empathy for Novak. Roger, and Rafa to a lesser extent, are so loved by the average crowd. Novak at one point truly seeked that same love, but at some point, he realized that was not in the cards, and he accepted it and became the greatest ever. Well done.

I'm not a big fan, but you might appreciate this, in case you haven't already seen it:

NYT's Fetterman has a great description of Djokovic's tremendous tiebreak play Sunday and in general:

"In most tennis matches, when a set moves to a tiebreaker, the outcome comes down to a flip of a coin. That is not how it works with Djokovic.

Last week, he explained that when a tiebreaker begins, his mind moves to a state of hyper concentration to “stay in the present,” play each point on its merit and give nothing away.

He started this one with a lunging forehand winner down the line, and finished it seven points later with another blasted forehand that Ruud didn’t even bother making a run at, not that it would have mattered. When it was over, Djokovic had played 55 points in tiebreakers during this tournament and had yet to make an unforced error.

[stroke]

I'm not a big fan, but you might appreciate this, in case you haven't already seen it:

NYT's Fetterman has a great description of Djokovic's tremendous tiebreak play Sunday and in general:

"In most tennis matches, when a set moves to a tiebreaker, the outcome comes down to a flip of a coin. That is not how it works with Djokovic.

Last week, he explained that when a tiebreaker begins, his mind moves to a state of hyper concentration to “stay in the present,” play each point on its merit and give nothing away.

He started this one with a lunging forehand winner down the line, and finished it seven points later with another blasted forehand that Ruud didn’t even bother making a run at, not that it would have mattered. When it was over, Djokovic had played 55 points in tiebreakers during this tournament and had yet to make an unforced error.

That is unbelievable, 55 points in tiebreakers with no errors. It is no doubt a hyper alert thing for him, but more importantly and telling, it is just about being the best tennis player ever. Certainly his mental side is just as good as his physical side. So there is that.

[stotty]

I'm not a big fan, but you might appreciate this, in case you haven't already seen it:

NYT's Fetterman has a great description of Djokovic's tremendous tiebreak play Sunday and in general:

"In most tennis matches, when a set moves to a tiebreaker, the outcome comes down to a flip of a coin. That is not how it works with Djokovic.

Last week, he explained that when a tiebreaker begins, his mind moves to a state of hyper concentration to “stay in the present,” play each point on its merit and give nothing away.

He started this one with a lunging forehand winner down the line, and finished it seven points later with another blasted forehand that Ruud didn’t even bother making a run at, not that it would have mattered. When it was over, Djokovic had played 55 points in tiebreakers during this tournament and had yet to make an unforced error.

That's pretty much how it was in the tiebreaks against Roger in 2019 Wimbledon final. Novak was outplayed for great swathes of the match yet hung in despite an abysmal first serve percentage, especially in the first two sets. But when those tiebreaks came around he simply locked down and made zero errors...zero. This is what I meant when I said one of Novak's less recognised qualities is his ability win sets that for most of the time he didn't play that well in.

[jimlosaltos]

Craig O'Shannessy of Braingame.com just posted on the ATP site (link at end) his insights on the men's final that might be of interest. Exhausted by Ruud's offense, Djokovic shortened points by going for winners earlier, going to the net, and as the match progressed, going with increasingly with his forehand. (Craig politely omits all the delays and disrupting the match so he could recover.}

Excerpts:

Djokovic's Key Against Ruud To Earn Tennis Immortality

The first set was the match.

Novak Djokovic defeated Casper Ruud 7-6(1) 6-3, 7-5 in the Roland Garros final on Sunday by withstanding a brutal onslaught in the opening set that left the Super Serbian doubled over in exhaustion after only nine games.

Djokovic was tight, and the ball was consistently out of his strike zone. Ruud was playing perfectly, and Djokovic was struggling mightily. Playing when tight extracts an immeasurable amount of extra energy from the body. Djokovic somehow found a way to win one of the greatest sets in Grand Slam final history.

Against Alcaraz in the semi-finals, Djokovic could use the power of his opponent’s groundstrokes back against him. Against Ruud, the ball was slower and higher out of the strike zone, and Djokovic struggled to do anything to hurt his opponent. Combined with his tightness, Djokovic was expending maximum energy, and the ball was going anywhere.

Djokovic stole the opening set by completely dominating the 0-4 rally length.

Set 1: Rally Length

0-4 Shots: Djokovic 30/Ruud 12 (Djokovic +18)
5-8 Shots: Djokovic 7/Ruud 17 (Djokovic -10)
9+ Shots: Djokovic 10/Ruud 12 (Djokovic -2

The longer the rally went, the more it favoured Ruud. The shorter the rally length, the more Djokovic got to breathe and recover to fight another day.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/roland-garros-2023-final-brain-game

[stotty]

Against Alcaraz in the semi-finals, Djokovic could use the power of his opponent’s groundstrokes back against him. Against Ruud, the ball was slower and higher out of the strike zone, and Djokovic struggled to do anything to hurt his opponent. Combined with his tightness, Djokovic was expending maximum energy, and the ball was going anywhere.

A good assessment.

It made the game more attritional and a little dull actually. Ruud started the process my standing way back to return and looping many returns high. He had obviously studied how Nadal has employed this tactic over and over again against Novak on clay. It's an excellent way to neutralise Novak and hinder his precision tennis.

I agree with the assessment in the Alcaraz match also other than by the end of the second set it looked like Alcaraz could overwhelm Novak. Overwhelming Novak with power is not an easy thing to do but Wawrinka has done it in the past, and one imagines Alcaraz has enough power to do it also. Despite Ruud's sound tactics, it was simply never going to be enough to win.

[stroke]

That's pretty much how it was in the tiebreaks against Roger in 2019 Wimbledon final. Novak was outplayed for great swathes of the match yet hung in despite an abysmal first serve percentage, especially in the first two sets. But when those tiebreaks came around he simply locked down and made zero errors...zero. This is what I meant when I said one of Novak's less recognised qualities is his ability win sets that for most of the time he didn't play that well in.

Not less recognized to me.

[stroke]

Against Alcaraz in the semi-finals, Djokovic could use the power of his opponent’s groundstrokes back against him. Against Ruud, the ball was slower and higher out of the strike zone, and Djokovic struggled to do anything to hurt his opponent. Combined with his tightness, Djokovic was expending maximum energy, and the ball was going anywhere.

A good assessment.

It made the game more attritional and a little dull actually. Ruud started the process my standing way back to return and looping many returns high. He had obviously studied how Nadal has employed this tactic over and over again against Novak on clay. It's an excellent way to neutralise Novak and hinder his precision tennis.

I agree with the assessment in the Alcaraz match also other than by the end of the second set it looked like Alcaraz could overwhelm Novak. Overwhelming Novak with power is not an easy thing to do but Wawrinka has done it in the past, and one imagines Alcaraz has enough power to do it also. Despite Ruud's sound tactics, it was simply never going to be enough to win.

I would argue the Stan match, when he did take Novak, was an aberration. Stan no doubt a wonderful player, but their overall head to head history tells the story.