2017 Nitto ATP Finals...ATP points award...London, Great Britain

[don_budge]

Oh yes...the Paradigm btw

The most interesting scenario that the tournament can likely muster is a semifinal with Golden Boy versus Bulgarian Playboy and Roger Federer versus Anybody. Somehow though this business of "Anybody" loses some of it's sheen when none of the major competitors are present and accounted for. The Rolex Paris was a disaster. Sock and Nobody in the finals. Ditto for the last event of the year in London. Roger alone cannot carry the tournament. He needs a supporting cast and it just isn't there. Well...it is winding down. The Federer Era is drawing to a close.

The one positive that I take from all of it is my teaching paradigm withstood the acid test right to the end. Thanks to a racquet change and some kind of metamorphic reinvention of the self...the drive backhand. Ala Don Budge...afterall remember the model is Richard Gonzales with the Don Budge backhand. Don't you love it when that happens. Not that I was right. I just put it out there. Food for thought. That's all it is.

We aren't going to have the ATP "Golden Boy" in the semifinals afterall. Jack Sock sort of rained on his parade last night in London. So it is corn fed Jack Sock who looks as if he came straight from plowing the fields versus his antithesis...the Bulgarian Playboy. Baby Fed. Grigor doesn't like that anymore but he might end up liking it more an more once The King has left the stadium. Alex Zverev...I call him Alex now. The star is falling. The problem is an old and familiar one. He started to believe his own press clippings. Sure...I love the backhand too. But the thing is that the current paradigm insists that the forehand is the attacking stroke and the backhand is the supreme defense. I don't necessarily agree with that but it's just the way it is. I predict that Zverev becomes a head case. A case of too much too soon. He wasn't ready for it...much the same the demon wasn't ready for his first taste of video interviews. His preparation did not prepare him for this. The jury is out on Alexander. I am not always right...am I?

Roger Federer continues to be the show. He's the ticket worth buying if you judge it on the basis of the bang for the buck. There is no other ticket in the professional game of tennis. The braintrust destroyed the game. The intrinsic value of tennis is a thing of the past and the engineered facsimile will never pass the test of time. Jimmy Connors couldn't bring himself to say it in the interview at my little buddies haven in Florida. He could only say I am not the one to ask...which is funny because he is the one to ask. He afterall has won the greatest number of tennis matches of all time which even Roger Federer has only a snowball's chance in hell of reaching. Come on Jimmy...bite the hand that feeds you. It's good for the soul.

There is one small chance of saving the totality of this tournament and that responsibility now is laying with Dominic "The Dominator" Thiem. Thiem is another victim of the advanced promo syndrome that is the standard operating procedure of the ATP as they grapple with the idea that Roger is not going to last forever. The thing that Thiem can do for the game is to defeat David Goffin to make it three one handed backhands in the semifinal of the year ending ATP event. Hello ATP braintrust...are you listening? Speed up the course and promote the one hand backhand all court game. It is your one and only chance to save the game. Am I right? Not sure...but I certainly don't need a second opinion. But of course they are always welcome.

[gzhpcu]

Dominic, like all heavy topspin hitters, stays way back. Just like Nadal he has to cover more ground in rallies. He seems to me to be the heir apparent to Nadal in Roland Garros if he keeps healthy.

[stroke]

Dominic, like all heavy topspin hitters, stays way back. Just like Nadal he has to cover more ground in rallies. He seems to me to be the heir apparent to Nadal in Roland Garros if he keeps healthy.

I feel the same way. He certainly looks to be in line for 2 or 3 trophies at Roland Garros. Kind of a modern day Muster. I still think A. Zverev will win several majors before his career is done. I can actually see him winning all 4, which is such a tough ask. He is just never going to be as good of tennis player as Roger, but neither is anyone else. I did see the Sock Zverev match, and the Sock forehand, certainly no surprise, was the difference, the biggest shot on the court. Grigor, or anyone else left in the draw, sans Roger, is going to have the same issue when he plays him. Roger looked splendid vs Cilic.

[don_budge]

The Never Generation...Zverev and Thiem

Dominic, like all heavy topspin hitters, stays way back. Just like Nadal he has to cover more ground in rallies. He seems to me to be the heir apparent to Nadal in Roland Garros if he keeps healthy.

I feel the same way. He certainly looks to be in line for 2 or 3 trophies at Roland Garros. Kind of a modern day Muster. I still think A. Zverev will win several majors before his career is done. I can actually see him winning all 4, which is such a tough ask. He is just never going to be as good of tennis player as Roger, but neither is anyone else. I did see the Sock Zverev match, and the Sock forehand, certainly no surprise, was the difference, the biggest shot on the court. Grigor, or anyone else left in the draw, sans Roger, is going to have the same issue when he plays him. Roger looked splendid vs Cilic.

I wouldn't bet on either one of them at this point. They've both been handed a gob of publicity and I just wonder if it is commensurate with their results. I realize that they have won a couple of tournaments and they have had some wins over top players but it is occasions like this that you would like to see them respond to if they have big time results in their DNA. I find it very disappointing that Dominic Thiem virtually disappeared before the very eyes of David Goffin. Goffin for his own right is a very solid second tier player. He has also taken down some of the bigger names in the last couple of years but he doesn't show the ability to close out the big matches consistently. Even sporadically. He fizzled against Grigor Dimitrov after a Rafael Nadal takedown and this shouldn't happen so routinely. A big win like that should bolster a player and leave him hungry for the next victim. But that doesn't happen.

With regards our Golden Boy, Alexander Zverev, he doesn't show the big finisher on the forehand side and after Federer gave his forehand a good going over the rest of the field should take a look and see that there is weakness where there should be big time power and strength. To me even the service motion is very suspect...there is way to much convoluted motion. Motion that really doesn't make sense in the way of delivering the ball to a spot over an over and in big time pressure situations. In all of his matches I see him struggle with the first serve. Roger's motion is just about perfect and it shows particularly down the stretch of matches when he is applying the coup de grace. That is not to say that Zverev will not have fantastic serving days but it remains to be seen that he can do it over the course of two weeks in best of five conditions.

Either of these guys is going to have to hoist a trophy before I concede a single Slam to them. They gotta do it first. If one of them happens to win one then you can start talking about the next but until the horse is in the barn, the check is in the bank...I remain a bit skeptical about either. Thiem in particular seems to have stalled and if I am not mistaken Zverev looks to be a bit bewildered at times. He gets this look on his face when he looks over to his box that he can't believe what is happening. It's happening alright...you've got to deal with it.

So what do we have tomorrow...Roger Federer and David Goffin in one semi and Grigor Dimitrov and Jack Sock in the other. Let's get the two one handed backhands into the finals and then see what happens between the real thing and the clone.

[stroke]

The Never Generation...Zverev and Thiem





I wouldn't bet on either one of them at this point. They've both been handed a gob of publicity and I just wonder if it is commensurate with their results. I realize that they have won a couple of tournaments and they have had some wins over top players but it is occasions like this that you would like to see them respond to if they have big time results in their DNA. I find it very disappointing that Dominic Thiem virtually disappeared before the very eyes of David Goffin. Goffin for his own right is a very solid second tier player. He has also taken down some of the bigger names in the last couple of years but he doesn't show the ability to close out the big matches consistently. Even sporadically. He fizzled against Grigor Dimitrov after a Rafael Nadal takedown and this shouldn't happen so routinely. A big win like that should bolster a player and leave him hungry for the next victim. But that doesn't happen.

With regards our Golden Boy, Alexander Zverev, he doesn't show the big finisher on the forehand side and after Federer gave his forehand a good going over the rest of the field should take a look and see that there is weakness where there should be big time power and strength. To me even the service motion is very suspect...there is way to much convoluted motion. Motion that really doesn't make sense in the way of delivering the ball to a spot over an over and in big time pressure situations. In all of his matches I see him struggle with the first serve. Roger's motion is just about perfect and it shows particularly down the stretch of matches when he is applying the coup de grace. That is not to say that Zverev will not have fantastic serving days but it remains to be seen that he can do it over the course of two weeks in best of five conditions.

Either of these guys is going to have to hoist a trophy before I concede a single Slam to them. They gotta do it first. If one of them happens to win one then you can start talking about the next but until the horse is in the barn, the check is in the bank...I remain a bit skeptical about either. Thiem in particular seems to have stalled and if I am not mistaken Zverev looks to be a bit bewildered at times. He gets this look on his face when he looks over to his box that he can't believe what is happening. It's happening alright...you've got to deal with it.

So what do we have tomorrow...Roger Federer and David Goffin in one semi and Grigor Dimitrov and Jack Sock in the other. Let's get the two one handed backhands into the finals and then see what happens between the real thing and the clone.

i would not bet on it either(or concede any Slam to them). I just enjoy talking tennis on a message board here that is not TW.

[arturohernandez]

Jack Sock makes the semifinals. He showed up under the radar. Took out Zerev, who was pretty pissed. He hardly looked at Sock when they shook hands after the match.

Did you see the nice one handed passing shot he hit against Zverev? He also was more aggressive at the net and sliced a lot more. Sock was also moving well.

For the first time, Sock seems to have stopped being a big banger. Maybe Thiem should get the memo.

Zverev is likely to continue being frustrated. Delpo is one of the few guys that height who can hang with those closer to 6 foot tall.

[arturohernandez]

The Never Generation...Zverev and Thiem





I wouldn't bet on either one of them at this point. They've both been handed a gob of publicity and I just wonder if it is commensurate with their results. I realize that they have won a couple of tournaments and they have had some wins over top players but it is occasions like this that you would like to see them respond to if they have big time results in their DNA. I find it very disappointing that Dominic Thiem virtually disappeared before the very eyes of David Goffin. Goffin for his own right is a very solid second tier player. He has also taken down some of the bigger names in the last couple of years but he doesn't show the ability to close out the big matches consistently. Even sporadically. He fizzled against Grigor Dimitrov after a Rafael Nadal takedown and this shouldn't happen so routinely. A big win like that should bolster a player and leave him hungry for the next victim. But that doesn't happen.

With regards our Golden Boy, Alexander Zverev, he doesn't show the big finisher on the forehand side and after Federer gave his forehand a good going over the rest of the field should take a look and see that there is weakness where there should be big time power and strength. To me even the service motion is very suspect...there is way to much convoluted motion. Motion that really doesn't make sense in the way of delivering the ball to a spot over an over and in big time pressure situations. In all of his matches I see him struggle with the first serve. Roger's motion is just about perfect and it shows particularly down the stretch of matches when he is applying the coup de grace. That is not to say that Zverev will not have fantastic serving days but it remains to be seen that he can do it over the course of two weeks in best of five conditions.

Either of these guys is going to have to hoist a trophy before I concede a single Slam to them. They gotta do it first. If one of them happens to win one then you can start talking about the next but until the horse is in the barn, the check is in the bank...I remain a bit skeptical about either. Thiem in particular seems to have stalled and if I am not mistaken Zverev looks to be a bit bewildered at times. He gets this look on his face when he looks over to his box that he can't believe what is happening. It's happening alright...you've got to deal with it.

So what do we have tomorrow...Roger Federer and David Goffin in one semi and Grigor Dimitrov and Jack Sock in the other. Let's get the two one handed backhands into the finals and then see what happens between the real thing and the clone.

Both Zverev and Thiem are much bigger than Goffin. But having seeing all of them in person I can say that Goffin is the smoothest of them all. Happy to see that economy of effort and clean strokes have paid off for him.

I keep thinking that all these little hitches are part of the need to perform at such an early age.

In the juniors they probably won A LOT by bashing the ball. It was enough to be steady.

In the big leagues you have to have a weapon and the ability to end the point by taking time or space away from your opponent.

Neither Thiem nor Zverev do that.

The other question I keep asking myself is why Thiem's first serve percentage is so low.

I feel like he could add more kick to his serve and be just as effective.

In the last two matches he seemed to have a really low first serve percentage.

don_budge, I think your vision of the big baseline banger era of tennis may finally be coming to an end.

We might actually get back to the way tennis should be played which is on the entire court.

[gzhpcu]

Yikes¨Goffin beats Federer! But Federer was way under par. Wonder what happened?

[stotty]

A great performance from Goffin and an inexplicably flat one from Roger. Like auturohernandez, I have watched Goffin play live up close. He is smooth and one of the best timers of a ball you will ever see. He thinks, too, unlike Thiem and the others.

Michael Stich always said if you want to beat Roger then hit aggressively to his forehand. I never quite saw the logic in that but it seemed to work today.

[stotty]

Sorry to keep banging on about Roger but he has been fascinating me of late.

If you spend some time looking some of Roger's older matches, in his pomp, you realise he is an even better player now than he was then. He has a bigger tool bag which he uses more readily and more confidently. He throws in stuff - impromptu - in the middle of rallies, which the modern player's database doesn't recognise and can't cope with.

Back then Roger's game was always impressive but based mostly around his serve and forehand. These days he still has those assets but the rest of his game has so much more invention to it. He probes and pulls players around and makes them feel bloody uncomfortable. Even Zverev cannot get a proper foothold in rallies once Roger ratchets things up. Roger's low backhand volleys have also improved. It's not how tennis_chiro might advocate playing them but it is a better shot than it once was.

Roger is, overall, is a far more skilled operator these days.

Zverev was a little disappointing this weak. His serve collapsed on two occasions in his two key matches. He really folded in the third against Roger.

Thiem hasn't improved at all as far as I can see.

I thought Roger would win the whole event playing at 80-90% but fizzled out inexplicably. At 5-1 up in the first set he seemed to donate a game to Goffin to make it 5-2. The next two sets were the worst I seen Roger play for quite some time. I would like to say Goffin was the cause of that, but he wasn't, although he certainly played well.

[stroke]

A stat in the 3rd set of the Sock/Dimitrov match just showed the average mph's and rpm's for both fh's so far:
Dimitrov, 79mph, 2800 plus
Sock, 89mph, 3800 plus

[gzhpcu]

I think it just shows Roger needs to pace himself. Just needs longer timeouts in between tournaments. Doing that he should be good for a couple more years...

[don_budge]

Yikes¨Goffin beats Federer! But Federer was way under par. Wonder what happened?

Yes, it really makes you wonder. You start with the most unlikely and crazy scenarios and work your way to the middle. Eliminating those that could not possibly have happened to arrive at the most likely possibility.

Well, as I start my mental gymnastics over this exercise of highly unlikely events let me just begin with my experience of the match. I watched the first set and found it incredibly boring. Federer was merely toying with David Goffin and not having to break into any kind of meaningful sweat. To say the least. By the end of the set I was thoroughly bored and I did something totally out of character for me. I left the match and decided to go out for a walk out on the dirt, dark and deserted roads in the Swedish countryside here. My dog and I made an nice effort to go further and further into the darkness. Man facing his fear of the dark with his best friend at his side. Puntzie...the heir apparent to Frankie. Chocolate Labrador Retriever. I highly recommend if you ever find yourself in need of a best friend.

We walked and we walked. I never once gave thought to the match. I left it in the rear view and never, ever would have expected a different outcome than what the first set was indicative of. It appeared to be a routine straight set romp over another hapless modern day tennis player with limited to no options other than to slug it out from the backcourt. Goffin thinking his way through? Through what? This guy has no options other than his one-trick pony act. Dismal chances for him after a first set shellacking by the best tennis player in the world...arguably.

When I got back from the incredibly redeeming walk in the darkness through the forest and the fields...I looked into the ATP website and was stunned to see that Roger Federer had lost. Absolutely stunned. There was no way in hell that this could happen after what I saw with my own two eyes in the first set. Seeing is believing so I sought out the replay on youtube and to my dismay they had all been taken down. Probably to destroy the evidence that Roger actually threw the match to Goffin. What I did tune in on by mistake and didn't realize it until it was obvious it didn't fit the script of what actually happened was the match in Basel where Roger won the first set by the identical score of 6-2 and then proceeded to pound Goffin into the next dimension. Literally. He just poured on the pressure and Goffin had no choice but to wilt.

Numerous times I have compared today's modern game of tennis to Big Time Wrestling and this match gives me another pause to thought. What is the reality of things? When I left that match there was no doubt in my mind, knowing what I know, what the outcome might be. Lo and behold...we witness what happened. Yet if you are so sure of what happened...don't be. It just doesn't make any sense. Federer has this guys number. He had beaten him six times in a row.

[gzhpcu]

Yes, but Roger now and then has been known to have lapses and to lose against persons he shouldn't. Guess it just proves he is only human. For example, his loss against Donsky in Dubai...

[don_budge]

If you spend some time looking some of Roger's older matches, in his pomp, you realise he is an even better player now than he was then. He has a bigger tool bag which he uses more readily and more confidently. He throws in stuff - impromptu - in the middle of rallies, which the modern player's database doesn't recognise and can't cope with.

Back then Roger's game was always impressive but based mostly around his serve and forehand. These days he still has those assets but the rest of his game has so much more invention to it. He probes and pulls players around and makes them feel bloody uncomfortable. Even Zverev cannot get a proper foothold in rallies once Roger ratchets things up. Roger's low backhand volleys have also improved. It's not how tennis_chiro might advocate playing them but it is a better shot than it once was.

Roger is, overall, is a far more skilled operator these days.

Interesting comments regarding Roger Federer. Here is one of my favorite matches of his...and Pete Sampras. Present...meet future; one could say. Take a look at his game at the 2001 Wimbledon. He has all of the shots here. It's almost as if he forgot how to play all-court tennis. He did. He forgot. He had to be retrained...back to his roots. Good thing he had those roots otherwise he would not have been able to transition back.

I don't think he is anywhere near the player now that he was back then. Sure, he may still have been wet behind the ears but the talent was oozing from his pores. This takedown of Sampras was the first bomb he exploded in his career. This is the grass tennis before the hybrid stuff replaced the old seed. It is a really interesting discussion about Federer and his career. He has ridden the wave so long and so far. But the truth of the matter is that there hasn't really been any competition. Just the Big Four. It's been a coast into the semifinals of virtually every Grand Slam. The racquets make it very difficult to get a handle on the big picture for those that are not intimately familiar with the old stuff. Even the addition of a measly 7 square inches has changed Federer into a different animal. Know what I mean?