2017 Australian Open...ATP 2000...Melbourne, Australia

[tennis_chiro]

(NOTE: My username is now switched to Stotty. All my posts have also come with me.)


Observations over two weeks of the Aussie Open


Misha Zverez doesn't volley that well. His backhand volley is certainly a good one, but his forehand volley is average. Against Murray, critically, his serve set everything up. He served extremely well.

,,,

An unorthodox player cannot beat Roger Federer. And Roger knows how to play a serve volleyer. Rule number one: return the ball in to feet. Roger played and beat Sampras, don't forget.

Players need deep-rooted confidence to volley in matches. Few have that confidence. There is huge opportunity beckoning for the player who resurrects the trade


Nadal is a good deal slower than he was. His forehand lands short so often. He's 80% of his former self. Oddly enough I think his backhand may have got better.

Nadal has perhaps the best backhand volley on tour. He sneaks in to put away easy volleys better than anyone else. A skill Borg had. Nadal should come in more.

,,,
Grigor showed fortitude and character. He buckled those last two games against Nadal but only under enormous pressure. Grigor should have won. I lost count of how many forehands of Nadal's plopped on or just outside the service line. Don't play the legend, play the man.


Roger defeats the pesky Spaniard in the final. I haven't seen it yet as I had to work. If he couldn't beat Nadal today he was never going to. The outcome was never in doubt for me. I had Roger to win in four.

,,,

Roll on Roland Garros....

Stotty

Misha may not volley that well, but he volleys better than anyone else on the current ATP Tour. If he had a serve averaging about 10 mph faster and groundstrokes just average for any top 50 player, he would be an amazing force for current players to deal with.

Federer handled Misha by just routinely returning down at his feet. Misha never varied his tactic and Federer just kept putting the ball at his feet. Any decent S&V player from the 70's or 80''s would have known to occasionally hang back just a little and approach on those short returns to force Federer to have to vary the depth of his returns. Even though Misha's groundies may not be as good as most of his contemporaries in the top 100, he still hits them well enough that he could have hit approach shots off those balls that would have put him in a much stronger situation than he was constantly in volleying from his shoelaces.

I didn't see any sign of Nadal slowing down. I thought he looked really strong although he may have been short with some of those forehands. I think he has always been like that,but I'm not at all sure. I'll take Stotty's word that he used to be deeper more often. i thought he had it locked up at the beginning of the 5th set. I thought Federer really went away and looked stranly loopy at the end of the third set and he was a little lucky to get out of there. But he played fabulous those last 5 games. No sign of any frailties from Nadal that have plagued him the last two years, beginning with the Aussie final against Wawrinka. I think he's going to be tough in IW and Miami and dominating in the clay court season. I'd be curious how the betting line on him for Roland Garos changed over the last 10 days. If he's this healthy, he's good for at least 3 more years.

I think two players came of age: Grigor Dimitrov and Alexander Zverev.

don

[don_budge]

Great question! I never thought you'd ask.

The last time at least 3 mens semifinalists used a single handed backhand in a grand slam was at The Australian Open in 2007. Roger Federer, Tommy Haas, Fernando Gonzalez. (Roddick only one of four to use two hander). And yes, Roger won that tournament.

And before that it was the 2004 US Open Open, the final four featured Federer, Henman, Joachim Johansson and the two hander was Agassi. And yes, Federer won that title as well.

And before that, it was the 1999 Wimbledon, You had Sampras (Champion), Rafter, Henman and *Agassi.

The frequency starts to pick up the further back you go...

* denotes two hander

1998 US Open: Rafter (Champion), Philippoussis, Sampras, *Moya

1998 Wimbledon: Sampras (Champion), Henman, Krajicek, *Ivanisevic

1998 French Open: *Moya (Champion), Corretja, Mantilla, Pioline,

1997 Wimbledon: Sampras (Champion), Pioline, Stich, Woodbridge - This marks the last time all four semifinalists had one handed backhands.)

Hope that helps.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Well...there you go. Culmination points. Thanks klacr...I delayed posting on your post to give tennis_chiro's post some air. But it has been ten years and it occurred at the same venue. Interesting enough.

It's awesome to see three out of four one hand backhands at a Grand Slam event. It isn't any coincidence that the venue is the fastest that the mens tour will see all year. The tournament had some drama...some spice as you might say. That was some spicy meatball.

Tennis should be a creative game. An art form. Poetry in motion. One handed tennis promotes this sort of play. Not the monotonous two handed drone play that the game has been dumbed down to. It's all engineering...you know. Thanks again Big Guy. You are the man and if you want 35 to be the new 25...good luck. Me...I like to think of it as the number of time around the sun and you know...it ain't the miles. It's the terrain.

[don_budge]

(NOTE: My username is now switched to Stotty. All my posts have also come with me.)


Observations over two weeks of the Aussie Open

Roger can still be immaculate.

Tomic is too slow and has not improved

Berdych is still too slow and has not improved. He might be in decline. I am not sure the much lower ball toss suits his motion

Berdych still has the prettiest girlfriend in the house

Monfils still has nothing between his ears

Djokovic looks like he's lost weight

Federer knows precisely what needs to be done. Pancho Gonzales did. A useful trait they share in equal measure.

Where did Dan Evans come from? He's suddenly playing a decent game of tennis out of nowhere. And he's a Brit!

In English rhyming slang, Kyrgios would be termed a 'paper hat'.

Misha Zverez doesn't volley that well. His backhand volley is certainly a good one, but his forehand volley is average. Against Murray, critically, his serve set everything up. He served extremely well.

Murray isn't as smart as I thought.

It's comforting to see a weird forehand (Misha Zverev) can still exist out there

An unorthodox player cannot beat Roger Federer. And Roger knows how to play a serve volleyer. Rule number one: return the ball in to feet. Roger played and beat Sampras, don't forget.

Players need deep-rooted confidence to volley in matches. Few have that confidence. There is huge opportunity beckoning for the player who resurrects the trade

Djokovic is still great. I have a feeling he will be back.

Murray has always been vulnerable to dumping out early, and always will be.

Alexander Zverev will become world number one. His temperament is outstanding.

The scheduling in the second week of the Aussie seems unfair.

It's funny what can happen when the courts are sped up, just enough.

Nadal is a good deal slower than he was. His forehand lands short so often. He's 80% of his former self. Oddly enough I think his backhand may have got better.

Nadal has perhaps the best backhand volley on tour. He sneaks in to put away easy volleys better than anyone else. A skill Borg had. Nadal should come in more.

Nadal's girlfriend doesn't wear makeup.

Nadal has missed 10 majors due to injury. Murray has missed 5. Federer just 2. Djokovic has missed 0

Grigor showed fortitude and character. He buckled those last two games against Nadal but only under enormous pressure. Grigor should have won. I lost count of how many forehands of Nadal's plopped on or just outside the service line. Don't play the legend, play the man.


Roger defeats the pesky Spaniard in the final. I haven't seen it yet as I had to work. If he couldn't beat Nadal today he was never going to. The outcome was never in doubt for me. I had Roger to win in four.

Full marks to Roger for sticking around and waiting, lurking, for a slam draw to pan out his way. Like I said earlier, he knows exactly what's required.

Incredible stats posted by Klacr on Federer's achievements. Despite all this, Federer, statistically, ranks just third amongst the big four in their head-to-head meetings at majors.


On a negative note, it's depressing no one has come through to seriously challenge the big four in all these years. Roger could win another one at this rate; so could Rafa, Murray and Djokovic.

Overall, a good major. The best in many years. This is what I signed up for and why I started playing tennis in the first place, now over 40 years ago.


Roll on Roland Garros....

Stotty

Stotty...loved the post. It certainly speaks volumes.

[stroke]

[QUOTE=stotty;n62490](NOTE: My username is now switched to Stotty. All my posts have also come with me.)


Observations over two weeks of the Aussie Open

Roger can still be immaculate.

Tomic is too slow and has not improved

Berdych is still too slow and has not improved. He might be in decline. I am not sure the much lower ball toss suits his motion

Berdych still has the prettiest girlfriend in the house

Monfils still has nothing between his ears

Djokovic looks like he's lost weight

Federer knows precisely what needs to be done. Pancho Gonzales did. A useful trait they share in equal measure.

Where did Dan Evans come from? He's suddenly playing a decent game of tennis out of nowhere. And he's a Brit!

In English rhyming slang, Kyrgios would be termed a 'paper hat'.

Misha Zverez doesn't volley that well. His backhand volley is certainly a good one, but his forehand volley is average. Against Murray, critically, his serve set everything up. He served extremely well.

Murray isn't as smart as I thought.

It's comforting to see a weird forehand (Misha Zverev) can still exist out there

An unorthodox player cannot beat Roger Federer. And Roger knows how to play a serve volleyer. Rule number one: return the ball in to feet. Roger played and beat Sampras, don't forget.

Players need deep-rooted confidence to volley in matches. Few have that confidence. There is huge opportunity beckoning for the player who resurrects the trade

Djokovic is still great. I have a feeling he will be back.

Murray has always been vulnerable to dumping out early, and always will be.

Alexander Zverev will become world number one. His temperament is outstanding.

The scheduling in the second week of the Aussie seems unfair.

It's funny what can happen when the courts are sped up, just enough.

Nadal is a good deal slower than he was. His forehand lands short so often. He's 80% of his former self. Oddly enough I think his backhand may have got better.

Nadal has perhaps the best backhand volley on tour. He sneaks in to put away easy volleys better than anyone else. A skill Borg had. Nadal should come in more.

Nadal's girlfriend doesn't wear makeup.

Nadal has missed 10 majors due to injury. Murray has missed 5. Federer just 2. Djokovic has missed 0

Grigor showed fortitude and character. He buckled those last two games against Nadal but only under enormous pressure. Grigor should have won. I lost count of how many forehands of Nadal's plopped on or just outside the service line. Don't play the legend, play the man.


Roger defeats the pesky Spaniard in the final. I haven't seen it yet as I had to work. If he couldn't beat Nadal today he was never going to. The outcome was never in doubt for me. I had Roger to win in four.

Full marks to Roger for sticking around and waiting, lurking, for a slam draw to pan out his way. Like I said earlier, he knows exactly what's required.

Incredible stats posted by Klacr on Federer's achievements. Despite all this, Federer, statistically, ranks just third amongst the big four in their head-to-head meetings at majors.


On a negative note, it's depressing no one has come through to seriously challenge the big four in all these years. Roger could win another one at this rate; so could Rafa, Murray and Djokovic.

Overall, a good major. The best in many years. This is what I signed up for and why I started playing tennis in the first place, now over 40 years ago.


Roll on Roland Garros....

Stotty

This was great stuff on all. I have seen a couple of Tomic matches in person up close and both times, I have felt like if he had just average ATP top 50 court coverage/movement, he would certainly be a top 10 or 5 player. His tennis skills are something, but as you said, he is just too slow. If he truly wanted to get better, he should spend practically all his training time just trying to become a better athelete. He does appear to have a top 10 gf.

[stotty]

Note on Berdych, Esther, the pretty girl in his box is not his girlfriend, she is his wife. All other comments on Berdych I cannot disagree with.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

We didn't see the best of Berdych at the Aussie Open. He underperformed by quite a way I felt. One thing I did notice, and it could well be a contributor to his poor display, was he, on quite a number of occasions, hit the ball at varying heights off his ball toss. On numerous occasions he hit the ball a bit below full extension and ballooned serves way over the service line. He clearly hasn't got used to the timing of it yet under the pressure of a match. I don't think the much lower toss suits him in the way it benefitted Cilic. It's early days yet, but it will be interesting to see what develops with regards to his serve and ball toss.

Nice girl Esther. Smart man to move in quick and marry the girl. Did you get an invite to the wedding?

Stotty

[stotty]

This was great stuff on all. I have seen a couple of Tomic matches in person up close and both times, I have felt like if he had just average ATP top 50 court coverage/movement, he would certainly be a top 10 or 5 player. His tennis skills are something, but as you said, he is just too slow. If he truly wanted to get better, he should spend practically all his training time just trying to become a better athelete. He does appear to have a top 10 gf.

Roger was right some time back when he said Tomic was a long way off the top ten. Tomic really doesn't understand what he has to do to get there, and if you don't understand what to do to get there...how can you get there?? Tomic hits the ball really well and has some great qualities, but if he truly wants to get better then he needs to develop a lot more physicality. A couple of hours a day in the gym plus and lot of footwear training and speed drills. But it's getting later in the day. He's 24 and needs to knuckle down and get on with it.

Roger is extremely generous with his compliments towards up and coming players. He's a very nurturing figure, something few pundits pick up on. He was giving Tomic a sharp nudge when he said that, a reality check if you will. Sometimes you have to be a little cruel to be kind and that was exactly what he was being when he made that comment. A player who doesn't take note of what Roger says is an utter fool.

Stotty

[johnyandell]

Here is an interesting Rafa/Roger analysis for Machar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8ZyT9Vo8wM&app=desktop

[tennis_chiro]

Here is an interesting Rafa/Roger analysis for Machar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8ZyT9Vo8wM&app=desktop

Fascinating, but not surprising!

don

[klacr]

We didn't see the best of Berdych at the Aussie Open. He underperformed by quite a way I felt. One thing I did notice, and it could well be a contributor to his poor display, was he, on quite a number of occasions, hit the ball at varying heights off his ball toss. On numerous occasions he hit the ball a bit below full extension and ballooned serves way over the service line. He clearly hasn't got used to the timing of it yet under the pressure of a match. I don't think the much lower toss suits him in the way it benefitted Cilic. It's early days yet, but it will be interesting to see what develops with regards to his serve and ball toss.

Nice girl Esther. Smart man to move in quick and marry the girl. Did you get an invite to the wedding?

Stotty

Did not get an invite to the wedding. But I was there in spirit.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[klacr]

Federer's tournament points won via Craig O'Shannessy

Baseline 48.5%
Net 72.3%
Serve & Volley 69.5%

I rest my case.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Novak Djokovic is the only one that has consistently demonstrated that he has Nadal's number. He is the only one that can take it aggressively at the Nadal forehand from his backhand side so that he can expose the backhand. If you allow Nadal to camp out on the backhand side he can move around his backhand and he has two lethal options from the reverse cross court forehand (inside out as most call it). Dimitrov couldn't do it and Federer has the same problem.

Amen.

[don_budge]

The Skunk...Rafael Nadal

I actually feel nothing for the much ballyhood final hype of Roger Federer versus Rafael Nadal. Nadal sickens me. I almost cannot bear to watch except to hope to see him lose. There has never been a more self absorbed tennis player that has gotten so much adulation. It just goes to show you how stupid people really are.

He has no consideration for anyone when he is playing except his own interests. The towels, the pre-serve routine, the water bottles, more towels, changing ends of the court, the coin toss. From the beginning to the end...it's all about Nadal. I can never understand how the receiver stands there waiting for him to go through the endless bouncing and pulling, tugging, picking, wiping. Why don't they continuously stand up with their hand up just before he serves? Are they afraid to piss him off?

Watch for all of the psyching and freaking nonsense from this overinflated ego. But it figures that there are many out there salivating over this match up. The only thing that holds it together is Roger Federer...otherwise it is forgettable. It's a nonevent. Unless Roger wins.

One of the best parts of the final was seeing this skunk slink off the court. But he wasn't done. Roger Federer hits a forehand crosscourt that is flat on the line. Rafael Nadal is standing very close to the line and had a perfect view of the shot. These guys know better than anyone if the ball is in or out. So what does the skunk do...he challenged the call an robs Roger Federer of a moment that he richly deserved.

Perhaps one of the biggest moments of his career was put on pause because of this epic ego maniac. Nadal thinks everyone will wait for him. It starts at the coin toss with his juggling of his water bottles and it just goes on and on and on and on...and on. Nauseating stuff.

It wasn't enough that he robbed Roger Federer of an epic moment but when he got the microphone in the award ceremony I thought that somebody was going to have to put the proverbial hook on him and pull him off of the stage. He went on and on about himself and his team and his own dramatic story of his comeback. His injuries...the handwork. He'd throw in an obligatory remark about the sponsors and then launch again into something revealing about his great fighting spirit. Somebody should have told him that he lost and the loser is only there to congratulate the winner. This guy is an epic jerk. His tennis game is ugly.

My wife and I were watching a replay of the match on Eurosport last night and she was going on and on about the very nonsense that I point out here. She said in her adorable Swedish accent..."Can't somebody make him stop?"

[arturohernandez]

I understand people's irritation with Nadal. I think he is kind of OCD. It could be viewed as gamesmanship. But really he is just doing whatever he can to stay focused. It is within the rules and he seems to bend them. But in the end there is not much he can do to stop people from going after his forehand and getting him out of his preferred pattern.

Nadal might win one more French if at all. But I think the blueprint for beating him is there and you will see more and more people exploit it.

It will be very hard for him to win anything outside of clay.

The other thing is recovery which was always something he counted on.

I saw him not run after balls.

Rafa understood the magnitude of the moment. It's almost as if he thought he had won...

[bottle]

Different interpretations of the same moment. I see that final shot as a sprayed forehand that somehow stayed in. And the little face Nadal made said, "I don't know. Probably good but what do I have to lose?" So he challenged. And then we got to see all of Federer's vulnerability. An announcer even compared him to a 5-year-old. He wasn't robbed of any moment. The moment in fact was greater the way things happened since everybody loves a human being even more than a god. Don't want to be ornery here. I'm just speaking the way people speak who have had intense theatrical experience. I could be in Katharine and Dick Hepburn's kitchen once again.

[stotty]

I understand people's irritation with Nadal. I think he is kind of OCD. It could be viewed as gamesmanship. But really he is just doing whatever he can to stay focused. It is within the rules and he seems to bend them. But in the end there is not much he can do to stop people from going after his forehand and getting him out of his preferred pattern.

Nadal might win one more French if at all. But I think the blueprint for beating him is there and you will see more and more people exploit it.

It will be very hard for him to win anything outside of clay.

The other thing is recovery which was always something he counted on.

I saw him not run after balls.

Rafa understood the magnitude of the moment. It's almost as if he thought he had won...

Nice post...

I have just watched the first five games of the final....more on this in a few days.

It's a blueprint for beating Nadal if you are Federer. Federer's position was quite unique in that HE was a player who couldn't beat Nadal when others, lesser than Federer, could, at least sometimes.

Nadal is not the player he was, not by a long chalk. I would expect him to win the French this year but wouldn't want to count on it. Nadal is slower and his forehand has disappeared in terms of the venom it once had. Have you seen Rafa play live? I have.

Through all his matches at the Aussie Open 2017, Nadal was quite defensive I thought. Nadal at his best works inside the baseline, working opponents from side to side until they run out of legs. Sure he defends and retrieves lot but he can also take control of whole rallies with that forehand of his. Once he gets hold of rallies by the scruff of the neck it's hard for opponents to wrestle out of that grip. In recent times his forehand has become less potent and his chances to work inside the baseline have become less as a result. Couple this with the fact he has lost half a step.

The blueprint for beating Nadal (and Djokovic for that matter) was to belt him off the court if you could. Dissecting Nadal (or Djokovic) through repertoire was a fanciful idea. The only achievers were those who opted for route one and had a purple day. Roger has been the only player in recent times who has more tactical options.

Roger always brings out the best in Rafa so I am intrigued to watch the rest of the final to see how Rafa's forehand and footwork perform.

Roger's backhand has certainly improved. In previous matches he would barely have hit one winner on that wing against Nadal, he hit quite a few last Sunday.

I doubt Nadal could believe he had lost. The stranglehold was so strong, so deep, he must have thought deep down he would win whatever Roger came up with.