USTA & poor scheduling, favoring Americans... AGAIN. [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

USTA & poor scheduling, favoring Americans... AGAIN.

prima donna
09-10-2005, 05:19 PM
Fedex and Hewitt should be up first. It's an absolute travesty what the USTA has gotten away with here. I'll be the #49409490th person to say that I do not think their seeding system is random. The USTA is doing all that it possibly can to ensure that Agassi have the advantage tomorrow or that he can compete at his highest possible level and that's NOT THEIR JOB TO DO.

Why shouldn't Agassi and Ginepri follow Federer ? Why should Federer & Hewitt be the dessert of the afternoon ? Because, the USTA is hoping that Hewitt will somehow drain Fedex ... take him to 5 sets ... while Andre sits in his hotel room popping cortisone shots and feeding his face for tomorrow's final ... honestly ... this is looking very odd & suspicious.

I heard Dick Enberg state that Andre had "requested" to be the 1st match up, oh, so great. Now, Czar Agassi is running the USO. What's next ? Will he be calling his own matches? This is such a joke.

Also, I'm curious why Hewitt deserves to be on Roger's side and Andre doesn't ? Shouldn't the roles be switched ? This is very amusing, Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian and Federer all on one side of the draw.

Agassi, Roddick and Nadal (his forte is the clay, not the hard stuff), which draw would you pick ? I mean, give me A BREAK. Agassi owns Roddick. The only reason Nadal ended up being on a separate side of the draw is simply this: He was the #2 seed, you cannot have a #1 and #2 seed on the same end of the draw.

Funny, also, that the USTA decided to schedule Federer's first match during the day and Agassi's match at night. What disrespect, yep, you're the champion but enjoy your 2nd day, 11am matchup. Lesser champions would be outraged.

propi
09-10-2005, 05:28 PM
Wow, US Open sucks at doing schedules... :eek::eek:
The fact best of 5 semis are played on saturday is simply :cuckoo::retard:

Scotso
09-10-2005, 05:29 PM
I don't think the draw is rigged, but I do think that the semi scheduling was obviously done to favor the Americans.

It happens.

Sjengster
09-10-2005, 05:30 PM
Yes, I'm sure the great atmosphere that was generated for Agassi's 3, 3 and 1 demolition of Sabau would have been even better for Federer's triple breadstick whitewash of Minar earlier in the day.

The top half has played second from the beginning of the tournament, so it makes sense for Federer and Hewitt to be the second SF. I don't think it'll have an effect tomorrow anyway, both men are fit and while Hewitt has had two five-setters, I don't think the winner of this encounter will be fatigued tomorrow unless it becomes an utter four-hour marathon, which I don't expect either way.

HappyAndie
09-10-2005, 05:30 PM
The semi scheduling was done that way also because Andre gets people in the seats earlier than if they were to start with the Fed-Hewitt beatdown.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 05:34 PM
The semi scheduling was done that way also because Andre gets people in the seats earlier than if they were to start with the Fed-Hewitt beatdown.
If that were true then they would never have random WTA matches played first in the evening schedules, before the men's match.

There is no doubt about the source of the sudden schedule change-- it is completely consistent with their wanting to favor the US players.

In any case, the benefit to agassi from playing first is STILL bigger than the loss to Fed/leyton from playing second. In the end, I don't think it will make a whole heap of difference to whoever emerges from the second match for the final.

Fee
09-10-2005, 05:34 PM
Myskinalover, the draw was donw according to the rules of the ATP and ITF. The first and second seeds are place at the top and bottom, the rest are placed according to a random draw. Same for every slam, and the USO used the current rankings without tweaking them according to surface results.

As for the scheduling, players can and do make requests of tournament directors regarding their match times at every tournament (yes, even Roger does this). The TV networks make requests as well. Its the tournament director's decision whether to take that into consideration or not. CBS wanted Agassi on second, rumor is that Agassi wanted to be on first. What law says that Roger had to be the first semi?

oneandonlyhsn
09-10-2005, 05:41 PM
My only complain with this tournie is plz stop with the scheduling of 1st round matches over 3 days, and play the semi 2 days before the final. Oh well I cant change the rules

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 05:49 PM
Myskinalover, the draw was donw according to the rules of the ATP and ITF. The first and second seeds are place at the top and bottom, the rest are placed according to a random draw. Same for every slam, and the USO used the current rankings without tweaking them according to surface results.

As for the scheduling, players can and do make requests of tournament directors regarding their match times at every tournament (yes, even Roger does this). The TV networks make requests as well. Its the tournament director's decision whether to take that into consideration or not. CBS wanted Agassi on second, rumor is that Agassi wanted to be on first. What law says that Roger had to be the first semi?

The pissed off feelings coming out from many are because it was announced earlier on air and to Federer that he would play first, agassi being the marquee draw. This was the case until very late the night before last. Then there was a sudden change and that's the problem --that due to pressure from the honchos at CBS on in camp agassi, the other players who don't really have a voice because they are not US, get the short shrift. There is no law, otherwise there would be a lawsuit. This is like the 12 minute injury timeout --perfectly legal and in bad taste.

tangerine_dream
09-10-2005, 05:50 PM
MTFers and their never-ending paranoia about the USO :lol:

Andre could have a week off and Roger would still beat him in the final. Don't get your panties in a twist folks, JesusFed will save you from the evil American tomorrow. :cool:

nobama
09-10-2005, 05:51 PM
The pissed off feelings coming out from many are because it was announced earlier on air and to Federer that he would play first, agassi being the marquee draw. This was the case until very late the night before last. Then there was a sudden change and that's the problem --that due to pressure from the honchos at CBS on in camp agassi, the other players who don't really have a voice because they are not US, get the short shrift. There is no law, otherwise there would be a lawsuit. This is like the 12 minute injury timeout --perfectly legal and in bad taste.The CBS crew admitted today that Agassi requested to play first and they granted his request. Initially I wanted Agassi to win, but with all the ass kissing by the commentators on tv I'm pulling for a Ginepri upset now.

mishar
09-10-2005, 05:53 PM
Why are people making such a big deal about this? Clearly done to favor Agassi, but it's not such a big difference. It's not like they scheduled Federer for midnight. The difference between the matches is only a couple of hours and somebody has to play first. It might help Agassi, but I don't think it matters to Fed/Hewitt one bit.

Anyway, Fed earlier this week said he hates playing 11 Am matches, as he stays up to 2 or 3 in the morning usually, so the schedule is probably to his advantage.

fenomeno2111
09-10-2005, 05:54 PM
What difference does it make to play 2 or 3 ho.... oh oh oh yeah....is myskinaLova guys... that explains pretty much everything

mickymouse
09-10-2005, 05:57 PM
Would a few extra hours of rest make that much difference?

prima donna
09-10-2005, 05:59 PM
Myskinalover, the draw was donw according to the rules of the ATP and ITF. The first and second seeds are place at the top and bottom, the rest are placed according to a random draw. Same for every slam, and the USO used the current rankings without tweaking them according to surface results.

As for the scheduling, players can and do make requests of tournament directors regarding their match times at every tournament (yes, even Roger does this). The TV networks make requests as well. Its the tournament director's decision whether to take that into consideration or not. CBS wanted Agassi on second, rumor is that Agassi wanted to be on first. What law says that Roger had to be the first semi?

Oh, no law says that Roger has to be first ... he's just the #1 player in the world and he's received no respect from the USTA throughout this tournament. Oh well. I'm sure he doesn't care, much like ESPN chooses to televise horrible Roddick matches over Federer's, we will all see on Sunday who the real champion is. You know what, Americans are very clueless about tennis because they lack exposure to true talent. How can one not grow tired of the media trying to turn Agassi into this super human entity and blow Roddick up ? Roddick is exposed, year in and year out ... at Wimbledon ... by Federer ... nobody even knew who Fedex was until he wiped Roddick out ... the average American turned on the television and saw Roger dismantling Andy ... thought ... wow ... who is this guy ? It's true and it's sad, the USTA should try doing a better job to promote tennis and not it's own players.

mishar
09-10-2005, 06:01 PM
Anyway it does make sense that Fed/Hewitt would be second because the top half of the draw has played a day after the bottom half throughout the tournament. A commentator may have theorized that Andre would be the marquee second match, but no official decision was made, and then reversed.

Look, a tournament has a right to make the scheduling. These guys are getting paid an outrageous amount of money to hit a yellow ball around.

The saturday semis might be a bit ridiculous, but it can't be said to be favoring the Americans -- in this case, it definitely is a disservice to the Americans, especially Agassi.

mishar
09-10-2005, 06:02 PM
Roger did play three marquee matches at night -- more than any other player. To the Open those are the big matches, as that's when the real money is spent on boxes, corporates seats, etc...

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 06:02 PM
Anyway it does make sense that Fed/Hewitt would be second because the top half of the draw has played a day after the bottom half throughout the tournament. A commentator may have theorized that Andre would be the marquee second match, but no official decision was made, and then reversed.

Look, a tournament has a right to make the scheduling. These guys are getting paid an outrageous amount of money to hit a yellow ball around.

The saturday semis might be a bit ridiculous, but it can't be said to be favoring the Americans -- in this case, it definitely is a disservice to the Americans, especially Agassi.

Actually, the scheduling is a disservice to everyone-tournament staff included.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:03 PM
MTFers and their never-ending paranoia about the USO :lol:

Andre could have a week off and Roger would still beat him in the final. Don't get your panties in a twist folks, JesusFed will save you from the evil American tomorrow. :cool:
To tangerine_dream: who will you vote for tomorrow? You appear to be a fan of Roge's and also andre's, no? Or you not care who wins?

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:04 PM
Would a few extra hours of rest make that much difference?
Yes, andre himself said it made a difference to him when he lost to Pete in 2002. So take it from the players, not random MTFers: it very much can play a role.

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 06:05 PM
MTFers and their never-ending paranoia about the USO :lol:

Andre could have a week off and Roger would still beat him in the final. Don't get your panties in a twist folks, JesusFed will save you from the evil American tomorrow. :cool:

I wouldn't call it paranoia, per se. I think it's some posters' displeasure at how corporate the US Open is. Nothing wrong with it-anything to get money, of course-but compared to the other Slams, the US Open is definitely unique in this regard.

Paul Banks
09-10-2005, 06:08 PM
We can all agree that it's stupid to have 1/2F and F 2 consecutive days.

However this complain that Agassi plays first is ridiculous. There's 2 matches, they have to put one of the 2 first.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:10 PM
I am beginning to think that playing first will be worse, because the noon sun is far sharper than the late afternoon sun.

I think andre/ CBS/ USTA plan backfires here because if this match runs 4 or 5 sets then andre/robbi will have played in far worse conditions than Roge/leyton

fenomeno2111
09-10-2005, 06:11 PM
Oh, no law says that Roger has to be first ... he's just the #1 player in the world and he's received no respect from the USTA throughout this tournament. Oh well. I'm sure he doesn't care, much like ESPN chooses to televise horrible Roddick matches over Federer's, we will all see on Sunday who the real champion is. You know what, Americans are very clueless about tennis because they lack exposure to true talent. How can one not grow tired of the media trying to turn Agassi into this super human entity and blow Roddick up ? Roddick is exposed, year in and year out ... at Wimbledon ... by Federer ... nobody even knew who Fedex was until he wiped Roddick out ... the average American turned on the television and saw Roger dismantling Andy ... thought ... wow ... who is this guy ? It's true and it's sad, the USTA should try doing a better job to promote tennis and not it's own players.
Does it makes any difference if the average american knows a sh*t about Federer???? NO
If in your country (Italy) Bracciali is playing and at the same time Federer is playing...Do they show Federer??? Don't be such an imbecile it's obvious that they show Roddick because more people will watch him play...Have you ever heard about something known as common sense?????
Oh and yeah now 300 million americans MUST know who Federer is because the other 6 billion in the world know who he is...Have you ever seen in any part of the world that a country is promoting players from other countries if they have their own???? Now in DC the italian network will root for Nadal b/c he's better than all your players...HAHAHA FUNNY!!!

Ps. Im not american, I just live here....

Paul Banks
09-10-2005, 06:14 PM
I am beginning to think that playing first will be worse, because the noon sun is far sharper than the late afternoon sun.

I think andre/ CBS/ USTA plan backfires here because if this match runs 4 or 5 sets then andre/robbi will have played in far worse conditions than Roge/leyton

I guess I'll have to agree that there is a paranoia over today schedule. There's no "plan", there is 2 semi finals, they have to put one at 12PM, one at 3PM. 3 hours isn't that much of a difference.

1sun
09-10-2005, 06:18 PM
To tangerine_dream: who will you vote for tomorrow? You appear to be a fan of Roge's and also andre's, no? Or you not care who wins?
lol, no no no no, tangerine a federer fan? no no no no. andre? yes
he/she is a big roddick fan and is just bitter about roddicks lose, and the whoppings he recieves from rog.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:18 PM
I guess I'll have to agree that there is a paranoia over today schedule. There's no "plan", there is 2 semi finals, they have to put one at 12PM, one at 3PM. 3 hours isn't that much of a difference.

Well it does sound like that, but andre himself said that his playing the second (and harder) match against leyton in 2002 was a factor in his defeat to Pete (who played the easier and earlier match with Sjeng) in 2002 final at USO

tangerine_dream
09-10-2005, 06:20 PM
To tangerine_dream: who will you vote for tomorrow? You appear to be a fan of Roge's and also andre's, no? Or you not care who wins?
Roger will win, no doubt. But I root for The Man (Andre) above all my favorites, that includes Roddick and Federer. Sentimental favorite. He was my first tennis crush.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:20 PM
Q. You can't make excuses, but is the playing field level for the person who has the second match the day before? Especially if it goes long?

ANDRE AGASSI: Well, more hours you get to recover, the better off you are. There's no really two ways around that. But you could play first and play five sets and play second and play three. So... You know, again, it's one of the things that makes it so difficult to win here, but it's also one of the things that makes it so special to win here

Paul Banks
09-10-2005, 06:21 PM
Well it does sound like that, but andre himself said that his playing the second (and harder) match against leyton in 2002 was a factor in his defeat to Pete (who played the easier and earlier match with Sjeng) in 2002 final at USO

Well the problem is how difficult it is to beat your opponent, not if you play at 12 or 3. Like I said, 1/2F should be Friday.

mickymouse
09-10-2005, 06:22 PM
Yes, andre himself said it made a difference to him when he lost to Pete in 2002. So take it from the players, not random MTFers: it very much can play a role.

Point taken.

nobama
09-10-2005, 06:23 PM
I guess I'll have to agree that there is a paranoia over today schedule. There's no "plan", there is 2 semi finals, they have to put one at 12PM, one at 3PM. 3 hours isn't that much of a difference.Well there must be a difference because on CBS today they said Agassi requested to play first. So this wasn't just a random decision by the folks running the USO.

tangerine_dream
09-10-2005, 06:27 PM
I wouldn't call it paranoia, per se. I think it's some posters' displeasure at how corporate the US Open is. Nothing wrong with it-anything to get money, of course-but compared to the other Slams, the US Open is definitely unique in this regard.
I disagree with this part because Wimbledon and the Australian Open this year has also shown some favoritism towards home players. Whatever questionable scheduling is done at USO is hardly unique.

Anyhoo, I don't think any of this favoritism has been outlandish enough to cause players to win/lose matches they wouldn't have already won or lost. It didn't help Hewitt at AO. It didn't help Henman at Wimbledon. It didn't help the French players at RG. And it won't help Agassi tomorrow.

Paul Banks
09-10-2005, 06:30 PM
Well there must be a difference because on CBS today they said Agassi requested to play first. So this wasn't just a random decision by the folks running the USO.

Well the earlier you play, the better it is, obviously. But I doubt beginning at 12 or 3 would much that much of a difference.

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 06:30 PM
I disagree with this part because Wimbledon and the Australian Open this year has also shown some favoritism towards home players. Whatever questionable scheduling is done at USO is hardly unique.

Anyhoo, I don't think any of this favoritism has been outlandish enough to cause players to win/lose matches they wouldn't have already won or lost. It didn't help Hewitt at AO. It didn't help Henman at Wimbledon. It didn't help the French players at RG. And it won't help Agassi tomorrow.

I agree. It won't help Agassi, no matter what time he plays, to beat Federer. Like I said before, Federer's game and mentality defies statistics, match start times, and weather conditions. He adapts very well to these things.
I could care less, honestly, how any tournament schedules their matches. It just seems that many people on here do because they dislike the "made for TV" contraption that is Super Saturday.

Clara Bow
09-10-2005, 06:31 PM
I just thought that it would make sense that the players who had their quarters on Wednesday would play first and then the players who played on Thursday would play second. Which is what is happening.

I do think that the USO has done some unfair things in the past. They did catch a good amount of flack in 2003- but since then I think they have been more fair.

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 06:31 PM
Well the earlier you play, the better it is, obviously. But I doubt beginning at 12 or 3 would much that much of a difference.

No. Someone like Roger will find a way to adapt. The man has so much confidence in his game plan, that little things like "start times" will not rattle his cage much.

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 06:32 PM
I just thought that it would make sense that the players who had their quarters on Wednesday would play first and then the players who played on Thursday would play second.

I do think that the USO has done some unfair things in the past. They did catch a good amount of flack in 2003- but since then I think they have been more fair.

I noticed that.
Well before then, Super Saturday had the women's final match wedged between two men's semifinal matches. That was chaotic enough.

pinky
09-10-2005, 06:37 PM
I just thought that it would make sense that the players who had their quarters on Wednesday would play first and then the players who played on Thursday would play second. Which is what is happening.

I do think that the USO has done some unfair things in the past. They did catch a good amount of flack in 2003- but since then I think they have been more fair.

Aye, 2003 was really awful. Now, a good part of it was linked to rain and the way things were rescheduled... It didn't rain this year, thank god :)

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 06:40 PM
Yes, this scheduling change is really very minor compared to the 2003 debacle. there, everyone must agree that it really did help roddick. He did not have to play back to back and others had to.

Also, Australia Tennis : leyton was very angry that this year they changed court surface against the advantage of australian players. So I do not think that Australian Open is similar to US Open. At wimbledon, there are too few British players that make the semifinal in last 2 years, so hard to see how they are favorinig own players.

Paul Banks
09-10-2005, 06:41 PM
No. Someone like Roger will find a way to adapt. The man has so much confidence in his game plan, that little things like "start times" will not rattle his cage much.

Why do you say "no" when I precisely mentionned that starting times will not have an impact?

mishar
09-10-2005, 06:43 PM
Well it does sound like that, but andre himself said that his playing the second (and harder) match against leyton in 2002 was a factor in his defeat to Pete (who played the easier and earlier match with Sjeng) in 2002 final at USO


Well, Andre did imply that, and he may have believed it, but there were a lot of other facts. Beating Lleyton vs. Schalken is a big one, also Agassi's demanding style of play versus Sampras, plus the fact that Sampras has almost always beaten Agassi in the big matches at the USO. So I don't think the scheduling played much of a role in that defeat.

Also Roger is 9 years younger than Andre was then -- I don't think the three hours will hurt him, in fact, for reasons others have pointed out, it might be scheduling he preferred.

If Andre had played second, and lost to Roger tomorrow, would the scheduling have been an "excuse" for his defeat. Not to me, because I think there are a million other reasons why Roger would beat Andre, apart from the scheduling.

Fee
09-10-2005, 06:47 PM
Good point about Roger being a night owl. How do we know that he didn't request the late match and the schedule was changed to honor his request? We don't. As I said before, the tournament directors get all kinds of requests from various entities, and then do what they want for whatever reasons.

As for Agassi, he's 35 years old and I'm sure that every minute of rest he gets is valuable at this point. He was at a distinct disadvantage to Pete in 2002 because Pete had an easy semi (straight sets, short points) and Andre did not (five sets, long rallies with Lleyton). The few hours difference in start of the matches probably wasn't the problem compared to the difference in energy expended.

The USO is the 'most corporate' of all the slams, I'm sure. I left there with a bad taste in my mouth after three days. I can't imagine the other slams are anything like that.

warmy
09-10-2005, 06:50 PM
While I do think there is a little favoritism going on Iím not sure if itís because Andre is American. More likely itís because heís been playing the USO for 20 years now and has personal relationships with the tournament administration and staff. Iíd guess that over the years Andre has done a lot to help the tournament, its promotion, and every year draws a huge crowd, so the USO naturally would want to keep him as happy as possible. I really donít see the problem. Accommodating scheduling requests is probably one of the few incentives that tournaments can use to inspire help from players. Good on them.

R.Federer
09-10-2005, 07:01 PM
Look, unless the Roge match is going to 5 sets, I think andre/ Bobbi-G will have played a lot more and in hotter conditions

So, the extra few hours of rest will not be a big deal to winner of first match if the second match is not gruelling since second match is played in fading sun/cooler conditions

The final will be fair. Allez!

sigmagirl91
09-10-2005, 07:04 PM
Whatever it is, I'm sure the early scheduling came down to what the tournament directors determine was best. Whether Agassi requested the early scheduling, or Federer requested the later scheduling, the real result of it will be how the players play the final tomorrow.
Oh, and what if Ginepri ends up pulling this out? What in the world will some of you who began this thread say then?

tennisace
09-10-2005, 07:19 PM
I just thought that it would make sense that the players who had their quarters on Wednesday would play first and then the players who played on Thursday would play second. Which is what is happening.

I do think that the USO has done some unfair things in the past. They did catch a good amount of flack in 2003- but since then I think they have been more fair.

That's my take on it, also. It also use to be a much bigger deal when the women's final was sandwiched in between the two men's matches. The 2nd match sometimes didn't start until well into the evening.

thrust
09-10-2005, 07:48 PM
GET REAL FOOL!!

AnneMarie
09-10-2005, 09:04 PM
:confused: Jeez, I can't believe all this bitching about Andre playing
the first match on. It will at most give him an extra 3 to 4 hour's rest
over a man who's a good 11+ years younger than him, and Andre just
played a tiring 5-setter to boot. Andre has historically played the
second match on 'Stupid Saturday' because he's been the biggest draw
in men's tennis lo these many years. Mabye the situation would warrant
the bitching if they still played the old schedule--one men's semi, the
women's final, THEN the last men's semi, which in some cases could
go well into the evening. Just be glad they changed the format to
that extent. Besides, Fed's just 24 years old. This turnaround will be
no big problem for him. Remember, in '99 when Andre last won here,
he played second on after Todd Martin. Chill out, people!! :wavey:

marcelwks
09-10-2005, 10:20 PM
Agassi played many more then Federer/Hewitt this week , he is 12 years old - which kind of advantage he has ? He also payed today when the sun was shining on court .

Why there isn't day of rest ?

R.Federer
09-11-2005, 12:42 AM
Q. Were you given the option to play first? I would assume you would have taken it if you had.
ROGER FEDERER: That was the plan in the first place.

Q. So what happened?
ROGER FEDERER: Phone call, I don't know (smiling).

Q. I mean, I don't know, what do you feel by that? Are you bothered by that?
ROGER FEDERER: I'm through to the final, you know. We both have to win, but something like that happens. But what have we got, three more hours of rest? So, I mean, could be crucial, I don't know. I don't think so, but...

Well, I mean, it's not also the TV that should decide on things like that. So you can ask the players or just the tournament should not even ask anybody and just put up who they think is the prime time match. It's always hard, you know, two Americans, you get the No. 1 and No. 3 in the one section. It's their call. I'm not really angry.

AnneMarie
09-11-2005, 12:47 AM
Q. Were you given the option to play first? I would assume you would have taken it if you had.
ROGER FEDERER: That was the plan in the first place.

Q. So what happened?
ROGER FEDERER: Phone call, I don't know (smiling).

Q. I mean, I don't know, what do you feel by that? Are you bothered by that?
ROGER FEDERER: I'm through to the final, you know. We both have to win, but something like that happens. But what have we got, three more hours of rest? So, I mean, could be crucial, I don't know. I don't think so, but...

Well, I mean, it's not also the TV that should decide on things like that. So you can ask the players or just the tournament should not even ask anybody and just put up who they think is the prime time match. It's always hard, you know, two Americans, you get the No. 1 and No. 3 in the one section. It's their call. I'm not really angry.


:eek: How magnanimous of him--he's not angry, even tho it could be
'crucial'? Like he's even the teensiest bit concerned that Agassi could
beat him? Give me an effing break, Roger!! :p

Grinder
09-11-2005, 02:48 AM
I'd take Federer's draw over Agassi's any day. I'll leave it at that.


And yes I do think James Blake is better than Nalbandian and Hewitt at this point.