The Unofficial 2013 U.S. Open Thread

#2
#2
Looks like possible quarter-final match-ups could be (if top seeds get through):

Djokovic v. DelPo

Murray v. Berdych



Ferrer v. Gasquet

Federer v. Nadal


If I am reading the draw correctly, looks like Rhyne Williams could meet (and defeat) Rafael Nadal in the 3rd round. Rhyno plays Davydenko in first round.

I think the only roadblock in Nadal's way in the bottom half of draw is Isner. Top half of draw is where the action is at.

I would expect Djokovic, Murray, and Del Potro to all find the form they have been missing this summer once the U.S. Open starts.

If I had to bet my life on it, I would choose Nadal winning the title. However, I just cannot see him surviving the hard court grind for three straight tournaments. At some point I expect it to catch up with him. If it doesn't, his second U.S. Open title awaits.
 
#3
#3
DyronNix said:
Looks like possible quarter-final match-ups could be (if top seeds get through):

Djokovic v. DelPo

Murray v. Berdych



Ferrer v. Gasquet

Federer v. Nadal


If I am reading the draw correctly, looks like Rhyne Williams could meet (and defeat) Rafael Nadal in the 3rd round. Rhyno plays Davydenko in first round.

I think the only roadblock in Nadal's way in the bottom half of draw is Isner. Top half of draw is where the action is at.

I would expect Djokovic, Murray, and Del Potro to all find the form they have been missing this summer once the U.S. Open starts.

If I had to bet my life on it, I would choose Nadal winning the title. However, I just cannot see him surviving the hard court grind for three straight tournaments. At some point I expect it to catch up with him. If it doesn't, his second U.S. Open title awaits.
Click to expand...

I like Nadal to bring this one home, as well. I think he'd better be prepared for tiebreaks if he does play Isner, though.
 
#7
#7
Rhyne Williams is up two sets to one and up a break in the fourth on Davydenko. Hope I didn't just jinx him.
 
#8
#8
I jinxed him.

He was up 2 breaks in the fourth. Now Davydenko is up 5-4 in the fourth. Rhyne has to hold serve to stay in the set.
 
#11
#11
Let's go through the players:

Novak Djokovic: I still think you have to consider Novak the best harddcourt player in the game, despite what Rafa has done over the past two tournaments. I saw Rafa beat Novak in Montreal (on tv), and it was an incredible match and a great win for Rafa, but I'm still not convinced Rafa would have won the match if it were five sets. But the one interesting factor is whether Rafa has officially purchased real estate in Novak's headspace. He has won five out of their last six matches, and he won their last one in a Master's 1000 event on a hardcourt, which is supposed to be Novak's wheelhouse. The reason I think he is still the best hardcourt player in the world is because of what I've seen him do for certain periods of time. He can push anybody around on the hard courts and run them silly -- and this includes. Back in 2011 he was doing this consistently, his mental game was just so good. His mental game, has taken a hit and he doesn't seem to be able to sustain that top level that we know he has. But he does have that top level -- a sixth gear, if you will -- that even Rafa doesn't have, and why wouldn't he turn it on in the finals of the US Open? He would, but he has to get there first. More to come.

Rafael Nadal: He comes in on a serious hot streak and he is in the process of beating the absolute funk out of poor Ryan Harrison. He has an easier drawn than both Novak and Andy Murray. I'm not sure that he's quite at his 2010 US Open hardcourt form, but he's close to it. One thing I know for sure is that he's not getting knocked off by a no name. Isner could potentially give him trouble in the third round, but we'll first have to see if Isner gets that far. Rafa did himself some serious favors by winning both Montreal and Cincy and getting his ranking, and thus seeding, back up to #2.

Andy Murray: How will Murray react in the major after his biggest triumph as a professional in winning the prestigious SW 19 event and getting the proverbial monkey off his back? I think we can expect a let down. I believe Murray has a few more majors in him -- he's just that good of a player -- but I don't think this particular major will be one of those. First of all, he'll likely have to beat Novak (or Delpo) in the semis and then (likely) Rafa in the final, and I'm just not convinced he can do that. Rafa gives him fits, and if he beats one of those two guys to get to Rafa, methinks he'll be gasssed.

Juan Martin Del Potro: never count out the big Argentine, who went home with the US Open hardware in 2009. If he gets on a roll on the hardcourts, and that cannonball forehand starts landing near lines, he is a seriously tough out. You never know what you're gonna get from Delpo, though. The most consistent player on tour, he certainly is not. But I have a soft spot for the big fella, who I've just always seemed to like, and he has to be considered the fourth favorite, am I right? The Draw Gods did him no favors by placing him in the same quadrant with the flexible Serbian jokester, and then also placing vis a vis Andy Murray in a potential semifinal showdown, but if we assume for the sake of argument that he got past all of the above, he has shown he has the ability to push Rafa around on a hard court like no one else on the tour.

Roger Federer: Does anyone have a fork? Put it in him. If he makes it to the quarterfinals, he gets Rafa. And does anybody think Roger, at this point in his career, can beat Rafael Nadal in a five set match on outdoor courts? I don't think so, but please pretty please speak up if you do see this happening.

Thomas Berdych: Berdych is in Murray's drawn, and his road to the quarterfinals appears to be pretty favorable. Stan The Man Wawrinka could potentially threaten him, but I see Berdych making it to the quarters. If Murray avoids laying an egg and does the same, that will be a potentially interesting quarterfinal match.

Grigor Dimitrov: I've been a big critic of the WTA Heartbreaker who is also know as BabyFed, but he really has started to put his game together. He finds himself in Novak's draw, and he could find himself on the opposite side of the net from Mr. Djokovic as early as the third round. Bummer, dude. Bummer.

John Isner: Don't laugh. The big-serving American comes into this tournament playing some very good tennis. He played Rafa in the finals of Cincy and forced him into two tiebreakers. He tends to give Rafa trouble -- he took him to five sets in the French Open two years ago -- and they will potentially meet in the Round of 16. Rafa would certainly be favored in that match, but it wouldn't be a gimme.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
The David Ferrer Quadrant (aka Dumpster Fire)

The highest seeded guy is of course Ferrer, who has been playing like absolute racoontrash as of late. He got beat by Alex Bogomolov in Montreal, and then by Dmitry Tursunov in Cincinnati. Not exactly a murderer's row. He gets Australian up-and-comer Nick Kyrgios in the first round. I have difficulty thinking he'll drop this match to a guy who lacks experience on the big stage. He'll likely win his second round match as well, but could be presented with some difficulties if/when he faces the candid and colorful Ernie Gulbis.

Frenchman Richard Gasquet (aka Richard Gascoke) is at the other end of the quadrant. He isn't terrible at tennis, but the fact that he might win this quadrant and play in the semifinals is, well, interesting.

Uber talented Jerzy Janowicz is on the Ferrer side of the quadrant, and so we could find ourselves with a Janowicz/Ferrer matchup in the Round of 16. This would be an interesting matchup, and I'm not certain that Ferrer would be considered the favorite in this match. But I'm also not certain Janowicz won't trip and up allowing a lesser player to push through. Janowicz is inconsistent like that. But he does have MAD game.

In the top half of the draw, we have Milos Raonic, who blows at the game of tennis. Expect Gascoke to make it to the quarterfinals.

What a dumpster fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
kidbourbon said:
Let's go through the players:

Rafael Nadal: He comes in on a serious hot streak and he is in the process of beating the absolute funk out of poor Ryan Harrison. He has an easier drawn than both Novak and Andy Murray. I'm not sure that he's quite at his 2010 US Open hardcourt form, but he's close to it. One thing I know for sure is that he's not getting knocked off by a no name. Isner could potentially give him trouble in the third round, but we'll first have to see if Isner gets that far. Rafa did himself some serious favors by winning both Montreal and Cincy and getting his ranking, and thus seeding, back up to #2.

I don't think Novak can handle Rafa, based on his play today. Rafa has honed his game and is poised to win this one. But it wouldn't surprise me to see Djoke come through. Dude is seriously good.
Click to expand...
 
#14
#14
"...Roger Federer: Does anyone have a fork? Put it in him. If he makes it to the quarterfinals, he gets Rafa. And does anybody think Roger, at this point in his career, can beat Rafael Nadal in a five set match on outdoor courts? I don't think so, but please pretty please speak up if you do see this happening..."

Gotta post a reply, since my wife (the tennis encyclopedia) is in love w/ the fkr..

He can beat Rafa in three. Not four, not five. Won't happen.
 
Last edited:
#15
#15
I agree. He can beat Rafa in a three set match. But in a five set match, Rafa just wears him down, and even as early as the third set you'll see Rafa finding Roger's backhand -- which is weaker wing by an absurdly substantial margin* -- and you'll see said backhand breaking down. Shanked balls. Balls in the bottom of the net. Balls four feet wide. More shanked balls. Additional balls in the bottom of the net.

And though I am a Rafa fan, I'm not trying to give Federer a hard time here. The man is now 32 and having back issues. He had a great run, but nothing lasts forever in this game. Father time has never lost. And Federer doesn't have the type of game like Agassi had that allowed him to play into his mid-30s at a high level. Here's the difference.

Agassi's game was predicated on dominating rallies from the center of the court. Agassi would park his ass in the middle of the court about a foot in front of the baseline and completely control the point by taking every ball on the rise and moving his opponent from side -- just running them ragged. Agassi didn't have great speed, but he compensated for his lack of movement by getting on the offensive in a rally from the very get go. And because he was equally good on both his backhand and forehand sides, he could plant himself in the middle of the court, control the rallies by takign the ball early, and thus avoid having to move laterally in the way that we see, say, Rafa or Djoker moving laterally.

Federer's game was actually very simple. His game was to hit a winner every single time he hit a forehand. He was never the type of player who thought out points. He was never the type of player who tried to construct rallies with certain patterns in mind depending on who his opponent was. No no. His game was to hit his forehand, and every time he hit his forehand, his goal was to hit a winner.

His backhand was never a weapon and it was his quickness that allowed him make it so difficult for players to find his backhand. When they did find his backhand, he would simply use to try to set up his forehand. In other words, he would try to place his backhand in a place that would cause his opponent to hit a reply back to his forehand, which he would then try to hit for a winner.

So, losing a step was always going to be the death knell for Roger Federer. Once he was no longer fast enough to continually run around that backhand and still get away with it, he was no longer going to be an elite player. Because high-ranked tennis players aren't going to have any problem picking on his backhand. And his backhand just isn't very good.

The people saying Federer can win another major are delusional. He already won the major he wasn't supposed to win. And good for him. But the only way he is winning another major is if he regains the quickness that he had in him prime. And when in the world has a guy every gotten quicker as he's gotten older? It doesn't happen. Father time always wins.

And if you don't believe my assessment of Federer's game, watch his match against Agassi in the 2005 USO finals.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-TZeGkEQWc[/youtube]


_____________________________
*I would argue that Fed's forehand, in his absolute prime, was the most lethal forehand in tennis history. The man has made a career out of running around his backhand to hit his forehand instead.
 
#16
#16
BabyFed gone.
Jerzy Shore gone.
Kei gone.
Almagro gone.

Donald Young won 6-1, 6-0, 6-1.

The apocalypse is upon us. Take shelter.
 
#17
#17
Btw, the 17 year old american girl, Vicky Duval has some game. She can knock the crap out of her groundies. Stosur was too much for her, but she looks like a promising player.
 
#18
#18
I agree with almost everything you said. Main point, he's lost a step, which is devastating to his game. Using your backhand to set up your forehand is a strategy...just not much of one. The other thing is that if you watch the video you posted, Fed hit a slew of backhand winners. It isn't, and wasn't, his strong suit but he can have a lethal backhand response. As for him winning any more majors, I totally agree with you. Don't think its gonna happen, but I think the possibility exists (wishful thinking, I suppose).
 
#19
#19
kidbourbon said:
Btw, the 17 year old american girl, Vicky Duval has some game. She can knock the crap out of her groundies. Stosur was too much for her, but she looks like a promising player.
Click to expand...

i believe Duval won that match. I'm becoming a fan, but she definitely has some work to do.
 
#21
#21
Edit: quoted the wrong post..

Don't forget Gulbis losing to someone you haven't heard about that has a hyphenated name. No clue who he is.
 
Last edited:
#23
#23
Interesting question posed by the coverage team: Can Isner get past Nadal, if he gets that far? I think it's a fair question, given that Isner has had a great summer. He does have Monfils standing in his way to getting to that match, though.
 
Last edited:
#24
#24
MphsBlues said:
Interesting question posed by the coverage team: Can Isner get past Nadal, if he gets that far? I think it's a fair question, given that Isner has had a great summer. He does have Monfils standing in his way to getting to that match, though.
Click to expand...

Isner scares the crap out of Nadal. I guarantee it. The guy tends to give him fits. Whether it was him taking Rafa to five sets in the FO a few years ago, or just a weekend ago in Cincy when Rafa couldn't break his serve in two sets, Rafa does seem to have trouble with Isner.

Isner v. Monfils should be a good match. There is no guarantee Isner wins that, but I do think he will. Monfils this round and possibly Kohlschreiber next round could take Isner to five sets. That could be problematic because I just don't see Rafa dropping a set between now and then and I don't see Isner beating Rafa unless he's physically fresh.
 
#25
#25
MphsBlues said:
i believe Duval won that match. I'm becoming a fan, but she definitely has some work to do.
Click to expand...


I totally spoke too soon. Stosur was up 5-2 (i think) in the second set. Duval was playing fantastic, but I still thought it unlikely that she would win the match.

Cool that she did, though. She's a good player. She hits the damn crap out of the ball. Reminds me a bit of Monica Seles in that sense.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top