Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Only a minor lapse in the middle of the 2nd set for Rafa when Pospisil broke, though the Canadian was firing FH's all over. Very good performance from Rafa, his serve in particular was very good. Now Khachanov might be tricky in the 3rd round. Vamos!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
Good straight sets win for Rafa, especially winning the second set after being down by a break and taking that positive into the next match.

Khachanov next. Vamos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,539 Posts
People need to stop making the argument that there is more "depth" in tennis. These mugs have no shot against the top 3 players. I don't think there's ever been a bigger divide between the top 3 (even at their advanced ages), and the rest of the tour.

This match was a joke. Fed's match last night was a joke. Depth my ass. I can understand people arguing for Best of 3 in the early rounds of Slams. These matches are not competitive. Too much of a divide between talent and mugness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,944 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
People need to stop making the argument that there is more "depth" in tennis. These mugs have no shot against the top 3 players. I don't think there's ever been a bigger divide between the top 3 (even at their advanced ages), and the rest of the tour.

This match was a joke. Fed's match last night was a joke. Depth my ass. I can understand people arguing for Best of 3 in the early rounds of Slams. These matches are not competitive. Too much of a divide between talent and mugness.
Pospisil was 4:2 up and previously served excellently. Against 99,9 percent of other players, he'd probably win that set. When Rafa losses serve it's just 'OK, I keep going on like nothing happened.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,173 Posts
People need to stop making the argument that there is more "depth" in tennis. These mugs have no shot against the top 3 players. I don't think there's ever been a bigger divide between the top 3 (even at their advanced ages), and the rest of the tour.

This match was a joke. Fed's match last night was a joke. Depth my ass. I can understand people arguing for Best of 3 in the early rounds of Slams. These matches are not competitive. Too much of a divide between talent and mugness.
I think upsets will happen starting from QFs onwards. Exception is del Po's quarter.

History has shown us that Big 3 are too consistent to lose in the first few rounds of a grand slam, with Wimbledon, being the servebots' tournament, the exception.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,539 Posts
I think upsets will happen starting from QFs onwards. Exception is del Po's quarter.
I'm not complaining about there not being any upsets, but moreso that the matches just aren't competitive when it's Best of 5 and you have a top ATP player vs Challenger level competition.

I honestly think if it was Best of 3 in the first 2 rounds, that you'd have better tennis being played. Because these Challenger level guys wouldn't be so hopeless and give up midway thru the match, and even top 5 players would need to be on their games in best of 3 to not get upset.

Watching blowouts where a guy gets outscored 20 to 2 points in a match I don't think is good for tennis.

At the US Open for example:

Roger is 39-0 in 1st round sets since 2004. He hasn't even lost a set since 2003.
Novak is 29-3 in 1st round sets since 2007. He lost 2 sets to Troiki in 2010.
Rafa is 28-2 in 1st round sets since 2005.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,190 Posts
Pop simply didn't have the fitness levels for Grand slams. Going a break up but no more energy left.

Only Delpo and wawrinka can upset Nadal. Delpo is long overdue for a slam win against him.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,661 Posts
I'm not complaining about there not being any upsets, but moreso that the matches just aren't competitive when it's Best of 5 and you have a top ATP player vs Challenger level competition.

I honestly think if it was Best of 3 in the first 2 rounds, that you'd have better tennis being played. Because these Challenger level guys wouldn't be so hopeless and give up midway thru the match, and even top 5 players would need to be on their games in best of 3 to not get upset.

Watching blowouts where a guy gets outscored 20 to 2 points in a match I don't think is good for tennis.
Taro Daniel had Rafa on the ropes last year in the same situation - its not hopeless, though of course highly unlikely. That's true for any sport when the best are playing. Should the Brooklyn Nets only play one half against Golden State?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,069 Posts
LOL lots of idiocy on the Rafa threads as usual.

I have watched Posp a great deal in recent years, and he played some of his best tennis here, and Rafa utterly destroyed him.

I have toruble imagining who can give him trouble besides Delpo and Djok.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,939 Posts
LOL lots of idiocy on the Rafa threads as usual.

I have watched Posp a great deal in recent years, and he played some of his best tennis here, and Rafa utterly destroyed him.

I have toruble imagining who can give him trouble besides Delpo and Djok.


Rafa played very well all things considered and you are right; I have seen Pospisil plenty and he played above his normal level for long stretches which is why he was so gassed at the end.

The usual clueless comments about Nadal from people who either don't like him or who have internalized how you are 'supposed' to talk about him here and don't know any better.

In particular, Nadal is serving very well and especially to the forehand and body serves. Backhand also looked very good.

The comments about making making slam matches into best of 3 based on this are absolutely ridiculous. Go find another sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,939 Posts
I'm not complaining about there not being any upsets, but moreso that the matches just aren't competitive when it's Best of 5 and you have a top ATP player vs Challenger level competition.

I honestly think if it was Best of 3 in the first 2 rounds, that you'd have better tennis being played. Because these Challenger level guys wouldn't be so hopeless and give up midway thru the match, and even top 5 players would need to be on their games in best of 3 to not get upset.

Watching blowouts where a guy gets outscored 20 to 2 points in a match I don't think is good for tennis.

At the US Open for example:

Roger is 39-0 in 1st round sets since 2004. He hasn't even lost a set since 2003.
Novak is 29-3 in 1st round sets since 2007. He lost 2 sets to Troiki in 2010.
Rafa is 28-2 in 1st round sets since 2005.


What on earth are you talking about? You're bothered that 3 of the best players of all time are extremely hard to beat in first round matches at slams?

Yea, they have really hurt the sport's popularity by being there at the business end of tournaments and being the face of the sport.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,583 Posts
Nadal has a tough path ahead if he wants a 4th US Open title.

Khachanov will be a big threat on these slow courts.
Next are world beaters in Pella or Basilashvili.
Next is Wimbledon finalist Kevin Anderson, or hardcourt giant Thiem.
Next is the player with a Howitzer backhand DelPo, or another great grinder for these courts - Raonic.
The final will be tough against Novak/Fed/Zverev/Cilic, who have surprisingly easy draws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
It blows my mind a professional athlete can be so gassed and depleted after a set and a half. What a joke. I love it when athletes like Nadal embarrass them like this. I used to kind of like Pospisil too.
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top