Why Are All The Flukes At The AO? - Page 4 - MensTennisForums.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #46 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 01:28 AM
Registered User
 
uxyzapenje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: At home.
Posts: 5,311
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

On a serious note, I don't know about the others, but Tsonga and Gonzalez played amazing and fully deserved it. The better question would be why couldn't the players continue their forms. I remember when I 1st saw Tsonga vs. Roddick (I think it was USO 2007), Jo was low ranked/unknown and I said 'WTF, this guy is great' and was so glad he got to the final in AO.

Djokovic | Tipsarevic | Querrey

Last edited by Action Jackson; 11-16-2012 at 09:10 AM.
uxyzapenje is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #47 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 08:30 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 18,216
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burrow View Post
Or these players were simply playing excellent tennis in their own right.

These runs by unexpected players are amongst my fonder memories in the sport. They acquired something which today's underdogs could only dream of. Balls, obviously.

People have bitter memories of Clement reaching the final, because seemingly almost everyone wanted and expected Grosjean to do so, but it doesn't take away from the fact that he strolled past a young Federer, beat former champion Kafelnikov and edged out Grosjean himself in an extremely close match, playing creative tennis and daring to approach the net, especially for a smaller man.

Schuettler was a rock, if not fortunate of the withdrawal of Safin and the fact Roddick was playing at 75% due to his marathon against El Aynaoui. He played fearless tennis up until the final where the wheels fell off.

Baghdatis played magical tennis. There was just a sense of inevitability that he would reach the final and if it weren't for his legs, I think Federer would have had to have played one of the most clutch matches of his career to win.

Gonzalez and Tsonga hit the form of their careers. Both served well and dominated from the baseline, with Tsonga's drop volley's never better.

People can say that it was because Nadal, Djokovic and Murray hadn't yet reached their prime, without judging the performances on their own merit, because either they can't remember them nor care to see them but every one of these players played a level of tennis worthy of a grand slam finalist.

The answer to your question is that nobody exactly knows why, each of these men probably have different reasons. What they all have in common is that they were physically and mentally prepared. Without the grind and troubles of the tour, I'd imagine that these players physical and mental bruises would have healed and that they come back onto the tour feeling refreshed and looking forward to the first big one of the year. There's no doubt that these players proved mentally stronger during that fortnight than any in their career so I'd be more inclined to go with the inkling that their mentally approach had been resynthesized.

Far too sensible and considered for MTF. Consider yourself downvoted (joke).
philosophicalarf is offline  
post #48 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 05:10 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 177
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak3yman84 View Post
Schuetmug, Mugzalez, Clemug, Tsongmug, Mugdull, Mugdhatis, etc.

I'm starting to think it's fixed. Discuss.
Get you facts right before you write anything, what's about the FO? All one slam wonder there such as Moya, Costa, Ferrero, Gomez, Chang just to name a few then Martin Verkek? Remember him?
Orangeball is offline  
post #49 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 10:21 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Freak3yman84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 12,445
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangeball View Post
Get you facts right before you write anything, what's about the FO? All one slam wonder there such as Moya, Costa, Ferrero, Gomez, Chang just to name a few then Martin Verkek? Remember him?
1. Moya wasn't too much of a fluke because he got to another GS final.
2. Costa won his title more than a decade ago (When I said flukes, I meant fairly recent)
3. Ferrero wasn't too much of a fluke because he got to another GS final.
4. Gomez won his title more than 2 decades ago (When I said flukes, I meant fairly recent)
5. Chang wasn't too much of a fluke because he got to another 3 GS finals. ; Chang won his title more than a decade ago (When I said flukes, I meant fairly recent)
6. Verkerk is 1.

Oh Sheesh Y'all, 'Twas A Dream

Number of Times I've Cried Over Sucking at FITD: All but seven

W Houston and Samarkand Singles W Charlottesville W Lermontov W ATP Bastad W Bol Fut W Orleans (w/MathMul) W Cordenons (w/dinkulpus) Tashkent S&D (w/ Mr Brightside)

Quote:
Originally Posted by @Sweet Cleopatra View Post
I like how you make me appreciate my life by comparing it to yours then I take a deep breath and say: Thank God..
Freak3yman84 is offline  
post #50 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 10:23 PM
.
 
rocketassist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 29,027
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

All those RG winners were not flukes- they were all excellent clay courters in an era of diverse surfaces. They couldn't win off it because it was too fast and they played with topspin.

unbiased analyst extraordinaire
rocketassist is offline  
post #51 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 11:04 PM
Registered User
 
BauerAlmeida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Argentina
Age: 24
Posts: 5,515
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketassist View Post
All those RG winners were not flukes- they were all excellent clay courters in an era of diverse surfaces. They couldn't win off it because it was too fast and they played with topspin.
But Verkerk or Gaudio diddn't have any great results even on clay besides that. I don't think there were flukes because there's no such thing, they diserved to win and reach the final. Cases like Costa maybe or Moya were different, because they don't have great results outside clay, but aside from their RG title they have some other achievements on clay.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
Fuck you. This ain't no God damn hobby, motherfucker.
BauerAlmeida is offline  
post #52 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-16-2012, 11:31 PM
.
 
rocketassist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 29,027
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BauerAlmeida View Post
But Verkerk or Gaudio diddn't have any great results even on clay besides that. I don't think there were flukes because there's no such thing, they diserved to win and reach the final. Cases like Costa maybe or Moya were different, because they don't have great results outside clay, but aside from their RG title they have some other achievements on clay.
Gaudio bagelled Nadal on clay And he did win his fair share of clay court titles but Nadal hit his stride on clay the year after. He was still at a decent level in 05 and took a set off Nadal in Monte Carlo in 2006 I think it was. Shock slam winner yes but a strong clay courter.

Verkerk didn't do much besides it but knocking over both Moya and Coria was an impressive achievement, albeit it ensured a non-competitive final (JCF-Coria would have been fascinating)

unbiased analyst extraordinaire
rocketassist is offline  
post #53 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 12:27 AM
Registered User
 
BauerAlmeida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Argentina
Age: 24
Posts: 5,515
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketassist View Post
Gaudio bagelled Nadal on clay And he did win his fair share of clay court titles but Nadal hit his stride on clay the year after. He was still at a decent level in 05 and took a set off Nadal in Monte Carlo in 2006 I think it was. Shock slam winner yes but a strong clay courter.

Verkerk didn't do much besides it but knocking over both Moya and Coria was an impressive achievement, albeit it ensured a non-competitive final (JCF-Coria would have been fascinating)
Yeah, I remember that match. I watched it live in fact, it was here in Buenos Aires. It was a weird match. 0-6, 6-0, 6-1 ( Nadal gave me an autograph that year ). Anyway, on topic, Gaudio had a strong season after he won RG, he won like 5 titles on clay in 2005 but after he was double bagelled by Fed in the TMC he declined at a super fast rate and never came back. And before the RG titles he was always inconsistent, he could play some amazing tennis but then be a complete disaster (the Davis Cup semi final in 2003, he was a ghost). It's a pity because he was very talented and could have won a lot before Nadal appeared, but he was a total headcase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
Fuck you. This ain't no God damn hobby, motherfucker.
BauerAlmeida is offline  
post #54 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 12:52 AM
Banned!
 
heya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,580
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Gaudio was a tough hardcourter against Federer. He was up a break in the final set of the Toronto match, but threw it away versus Federer.
Coria totally stopped functioning in the 2004 French Open. He realized he could win a Slam.
It doesn't matter now...because he prefers retirement more than choking many Slams away again & faking
that he contended for more Slams (unlike Hewitt & Roddick).
heya is offline  
post #55 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 11:44 AM
Registered User
 
Roy Emerson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,769
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
Mugdull??

Early in the season -> players lack match practice -> upsets more likely.
This.
Roy Emerson is offline  
post #56 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 02:05 PM
Registered User
 
PiggyGotRoasted's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 2,682
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Its not, Nadal won the US Open, Del Potro won the US Open, Murray won the US Open, Berdych made wimbledon final, Nalbandian won wimbledon final.

Other flukes do happen
PiggyGotRoasted is offline  
post #57 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 02:06 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Freak3yman84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 12,445
                     
Quote:
Originally Posted by PiggyGotRoasted View Post
Its not, Nadal won the US Open, Del Potro won the US Open, Murray won the US Open, Berdych made wimbledon final, Nalbandian won wimbledon final.

Other flukes do happen
I never said that other flukes don't happen...

Oh Sheesh Y'all, 'Twas A Dream

Number of Times I've Cried Over Sucking at FITD: All but seven

W Houston and Samarkand Singles W Charlottesville W Lermontov W ATP Bastad W Bol Fut W Orleans (w/MathMul) W Cordenons (w/dinkulpus) Tashkent S&D (w/ Mr Brightside)

Quote:
Originally Posted by @Sweet Cleopatra View Post
I like how you make me appreciate my life by comparing it to yours then I take a deep breath and say: Thank God..
Freak3yman84 is offline  
post #58 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 02:12 PM
Registered User
 
GOATsol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Age: 21
Posts: 2,848
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PiggyGotRoasted View Post
Its not, Nadal won the US Open, Del Potro won the US Open, Murray won the US Open, Berdych made wimbledon final, Nalbandian won wimbledon final.

Other flukes do happen
This was not a fluke. He didn't need the wind to help him like Mugray did.

Mugray would have 5 slam finals if the wind gods didn't feel bad for him and gift him his only slam.
GOATsol is offline  
post #59 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 02:25 PM
Registered User
 
Burrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,299
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketassist View Post
Gaudio bagelled Nadal on clay And he did win his fair share of clay court titles but Nadal hit his stride on clay the year after. He was still at a decent level in 05 and took a set off Nadal in Monte Carlo in 2006 I think it was. Shock slam winner yes but a strong clay courter.

Verkerk didn't do much besides it but knocking over both Moya and Coria was an impressive achievement, albeit it ensured a non-competitive final (JCF-Coria would have been fascinating)
It wasn't the fact Nadal hit his stride that Gaudio didn't challenge for Roland Garros or other bigger titles, it was because of himself. He wasn't just losing to Nadal, he was looking to the likes of Christophe Rochus, Olivier Patience, Ruben Ramirez-Hidalgo, well past it and out of shape Marat Safin amongst others. He was always an unpredictable player and that's one of the reasons which made him like-able to many, myself included.

As for Verkerk. It didn't seem like he ensured a one sided final at the time, it seemed like if he played the level of tennis he did against Coria, that he'd leave Ferrero with another plate. Nobody was talking about Ferrero, it was all Verkerk and how the match was on his racket. Unfortunately it ended up like Soderling's finals. Verkerk played like a better version of Soderling during that championship. He was far superior at the net and he moved better, especially moving forwards, which he did plenty of. Verkerk made that tournament very exciting.
Burrow is offline  
post #60 of 63 (permalink) Old 11-17-2012, 02:57 PM
Registered User
 
BauerAlmeida's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Argentina
Age: 24
Posts: 5,515
                     
Re: Why Are All The Flukes At The AO?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burrow View Post
It wasn't the fact Nadal hit his stride that Gaudio didn't challenge for Roland Garros or other bigger titles, it was because of himself. He wasn't just losing to Nadal, he was looking to the likes of Christophe Rochus, Olivier Patience, Ruben Ramirez-Hidalgo, well past it and out of shape Marat Safin amongst others. He was always an unpredictable player and that's one of the reasons which made him like-able to many, myself included.

As for Verkerk. It didn't seem like he ensured a one sided final at the time, it seemed like if he played the level of tennis he did against Coria, that he'd leave Ferrero with another plate. Nobody was talking about Ferrero, it was all Verkerk and how the match was on his racket. Unfortunately it ended up like Soderling's finals. Verkerk played like a better version of Soderling during that championship. He was far superior at the net and he moved better, especially moving forwards, which he did plenty of. Verkerk made that tournament very exciting.
Yes, Verker's run was outstanding. How he did it it's beyond me. He did NOTHING apart from that 2 weeks. He's gotta be the weakest grand slam finalist in the open era.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Groove View Post
Fuck you. This ain't no God damn hobby, motherfucker.
BauerAlmeida is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome