US Open 2013

Gerry91

Yes Richie!

yerwanthere123

WaterLily. wrote: »

I have huge respect for him and I know that he is a phenomenal tennis player, I just can't seem to warm to him! I have grown to like him more recently but I'd still support Federer/ Nadal/ Murray/ Delpo/ Tsonga over him!

Gasquet serving for the match!!

Same. He just comes across as insincere to me, like he's trying too hard to get people to like him.

Gasquet wins! Didn't watch the match at all, but always happy to see Ferrer out. Nice guy and all that, but terrible to watch.

walshb

Love to see an in form Murray and Nadal final. If Murray beats Novak I guess we must assume that he's in form.

WaterLily.

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Same. He just comes across as insincere to me, like he's trying too hard to get people to like him.

Gasquet wins! Didn't watch the match at all, but always happy to see Ferrer out. Nice guy and all that, but terrible to watch.

Totally agree with you on your points about both Djokovic and Ferrer.

In terms of Ferrer, I just can't stand watching him play, to me it's like watching paint dry. In my opinion, he was why the French Open final was so dull.And his grunting drives me insane, it's just so irritating. After saying all that... he seems like a lovely person!

Very happy for Gasquet. He showed real mental strength winning that match, after having gone 2 sets to love up and then finding himself at 2 sets all against a player like Ferrer who chases every ball down and never gives up must have been unbelievably difficult. I really hadn't a clue who was going to win it in the end.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Gasquet hasn't been in a Slam SF since he was 21. He was supposed to be the second coming when he was a kid but never delivered. Would love to see him beat Nadal but he's played 8 hours for just 2 matches, can't see him getting anything off Nadal.

Rjd2

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Gasquet hasn't been in a Slam SF since he was 21. He was supposed to be the second coming when he was a kid but never delivered. Would love to see him beat Nadal but he's played 8 hours for just 2 matches, can't see him getting anything off Nadal.

At least we will get some nice winners, instead of a repetitive baseline war which Rafa always win, so small mercies and all that.

MisterAnarchy

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

What is not to like about Novak. Plays an attacking style and competes on all surfaces including clay.

There is hardly any difference in the speed of courts nowadays ,they have become homogenised.
Some people say Roland Garros plays as fast, if not faster, than hard courts on hot, dry days in Paris.

Serena Williams said this yesterday

Q. Rafa is undefeated on hard courts this year and you're undefeated on clay. Patrick said this year balance was really important with your clay game. I wondered about transitioning from clay to hard courts, what the challenges have been?

SERENA WILLIAMS: Well, actually, it's a lot easier, the transition, because the hard courts have gotten so slow since when I started playing. They were a lot faster. And now it's just so many more balls come back, and it's just almost basically playing on a fast clay court. I think the transition is a lot easier than it used to be.

They need to speed the courts up they are too slow .
The USO should be a very fast hard court. RG is what it is . Wimbledon should be fast grass and AO should be mid range speed .

Gerry91

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

Hope it's a nadal vs djokovic final. You want the two best players battling it out

Murray holds two slams yet isn't in the top two??

Gerry91

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

They need to speed the courts up they are too slow .
.

Agree! At least for one slam! Nadal would be goosed! Think they slowed down Wimby in 01? Always loved the fast grass

InTheTrees

SO many empty seats tonight at the Nadal match.

And its three quarters empty for the akarenka match earlier.

Whats the reason? Presumably they're charging too much for the seats? It seems far more pronounced than in previous years. Maybe its just me not noticing so much before?

Slashermcguirk

How can you say djokovic is not attack minded against top players, complete nonsense!! Have you seem djokovic wins in slams against federer, particularly the two matches in us open where he saved match points with ridiculous winners under pressure!!

Murray is the most negative defensive player in the top 10. Constantly waiting for errors. I have seen both players live and can assure you Novak hits a lot more winners in his matches.

Also Murray consistently moans all match long like a child.

If all courts are homogenised why can Murray never compete on clay!! He has never reached a single ATP final on clay in his career let alone French open.

Novak has won 6 slams, reached final of French, has won 2 world tour finals, almost single handed ly won Davis cup and has won countless more masters series and 500s than Murray.

He also has winning H2H against Murray overall and in slams.

In addition he is the only player to consistently beat nadal and federer at slams on different surfaces which proves his greatness compared to Murray.

StephenHendry

great win for richard last night, finally he is starting to get results, almost had the potential to get the sf of slams. the backhand shot is brilliant to watch, great fight back from david, he just never gives up :P

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Gerry91 wrote: »

Murray holds two slams yet isn't in the top two??

After the US Open Nadal will probably be #1 again. And based on the entire year Nadal is the #1 player. Murray has had a poor 2013 outside of Slams, as has Djokovic. I suppose you could argue Murry vs Djokovic for who is the 2nd best at the moment.

InTheTrees wrote: »

SO many empty seats tonight at the Nadal match.

And its three quarters empty for the akarenka match earlier.

Whats the reason? Presumably they're charging too much for the seats? It seems far more pronounced than in previous years. Maybe its just me not noticing so much before?

Azarenka isn't very popular with crowds. Her matches are only full when she's playing against someone popular. The night sessions have been a real disaster this year. I think they've all, or most of them, been won in straight sets. After a week and a half of that people probably thought what was the point in going.

I know someone who was posting here was going one of the nights this week, I think he ended up with tickets for Wednesday night. He'll be very disappointed with what he got if he went.

Gerry91

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

How can you say djokovic is not attack minded against top players, complete nonsense!! Have you seem djokovic wins in slams against federer, particularly the two matches in us open where he saved match points with ridiculous winners under pressure!!

Murray is the most negative defensive player in the top 10. Constantly waiting for errors. I have seen both players live and can assure you Novak hits a lot more winners in his matches.

Also Murray consistently moans all match long like a child.

If all courts are homogenised why can Murray never compete on clay!! He has never reached a single ATP final on clay in his career let alone French open.

Novak has won 6 slams, reached final of French, has won 2 world tour finals, almost single handed ly won Davis cup and has won countless more masters series and 500s than Murray.

He also has winning H2H against Murray overall and in slams.

In addition he is the only player to consistently beat nadal and federer at slams on different surfaces which proves his greatness compared to Murray.

To be fair Murray isn't near as much a pusher as he used to be. Ivan has him playing aggressive tennis

He's a counter puncher and specialises in hitting winners from defensive positions.

Ferrer is the definition of pusher.

Anyway Murray now has the two slams and will win more so whatever he does it's working

Nadal will win this mind, Murray is completely off colour. Could be injury or simply the hunger isn't there. Definitely a case of the latter at AO earlier in year

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Gerry91 wrote: »

Nadal will win this mind, Murray is completely off colour. Could be injury or simply the hunger isn't there. Definitely a case of the latter at AO earlier in year

Murray has been very poor. I know he usually starts off slowly at these things but he's dropped sets to people he should be destroying. Rusedski said at the start of the tournament that his first real challenge would be Berdych in the QF. He got the player wrong but in theory Murray's first real challenge should have been at QF stage and instead he's dragged the arse out of his first couple of matches.

Djokovic was on SkySports after he routed Granollers and he said he was pleased with how well he played because his plan was to expend as little energy as possible in getting to the QF's because he knew from there on he'd need to be fresh and ready to go longer in the matches. Murray seems to have regressed to where he was a few years ago where he was going 4 and 5 in matches he really shouldn't have been and then when he came up against real opposition he couldn't outlast them.

It's obvious that he has a few more gears to go through and his overall fitness is so much better than it used to be but when he comes up against the likes of Nadal or Djokovic who have barely broken a sweat so far it'll show.

MisterAnarchy

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

The night sessions have been a real disaster this year. I think they've all, or most of them, been won in straight sets. After a week and a half of that people probably thought what was the point in going.

Murray's match against Istomin on Tuesday night had to be one of the worst matches I have ever seen at a night session.
The crowd were completely dead ,I cant really blame them as watching Murray is like watching paint dry .

mickmackey1

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

In addition he is the only player to consistently beat nadal and federer at slams on different surfaces which proves his greatness compared to Murray.

Murray was under unreal pressure at Wimby, far more than Djoker was at any tournament, he deserves to be called great alright.

Slashermcguirk

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Murray was under unreal pressure at Wimby, far more than Djoker was at any tournament, he deserves to be called great alright.

He had the whole stadium behind him while djokovic had whole crowd against him!! I know what I would prefer.

Slashermcguirk

mickmackey1 wrote: »

Murray was under unreal pressure at Wimby, far more than Djoker was at any tournament, he deserves to be called great alright.

Novak also had an off day in Wimbledon final and had a much tougher draw than Murray. Djokovic beat berdych and del potro while Murray had janoviscz and verdasco. Djokovic played useless and still should have won 2nd and 3rd sets (up 4-1 and 4-2 in each).

Novaks accomplishments to date far outweigh murrays. Even nadal and federer have said as much that djokovic has always been a player they feared more than any other

Gerry91

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

Novak also had an off day in Wimbledon final and had a much tougher draw than Murray. Djokovic beat berdych and del potro while Murray had janoviscz and verdasco. Djokovic played useless and still should have won 2nd and 3rd sets (up 4-1 and 4-2 in each).

Novaks accomplishments to date far outweigh murrays. Even nadal and federer have said as much that djokovic has always been a player they feared more than any other

Obviously Novak has had a better career this far but Murray deserved to win Wimbledon hands down. He's a much better grass counter than Djok

Always amazes me how bitter some people are about Murray and the lengths people go to knock his achievements

Also amazes me how people keep saying Novak had an "off day". Grass is his worst surface he was hammered by Fed last year and Murray beat him in straights Olympics. He made load of silly errors v Delpo too

Fwiw verdasco on form was a far bigger challenge than Berdych who choked away a first set breaker and the second set

the_monkey

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

US Open starts next Monday with the draw to be made tomorrow, so thought I'd get the ball rolling and start the thread.

Here are some links to both the men's and women's draws:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_US_Open_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_Singles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_US_Open_%E2%80%93_Women%27s_Singles

So 5 days before it all begins, who are your picks to win?

I'm gonna go for Nadal on the men's side, and I'll take a gamble and say Azarenka for the women's side.

Discuss!!

You've already been banned for this behaviour.

Gerry91

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

He had the whole stadium behind him while djokovic had whole crowd against him!! I know what I would prefer.

Doesn't always work like that. Didn't bother Roger year before or Nadal in all those semis

For example, Murray was booed throughout his match v Gasquet last year at French simply because he was beating the crowds darling. The more they booed the better he played.

Nole overcame a partisan crowd himself at US 2011 v Fed though granted it wasn't AS partisan

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

In regards to Murray and his level of greatness I think Anabel Croft said it best. Marcus Buckland, and everyone else on Sky, were banging on and on about these silly anti Murray conspiracy theories with the scheduling and all that and she told him to pipe down. Murray has had a great 12 months. Nobody can deny that but at the end of the day he's nowhere near Nadal or Federer career wise and he's not even that close to Djokovic. He deserves respect and he deserves credit for what he's done but he is not at a level yet where he deserves anything from schedulers.

I'll admit I do think it's bad form that they don't treat their champion with a bit more respect at the US Open. He was the last one to play, on the 3rd day of R1 matches. Why they need 3 days for R1 I don't know. But apart from that I don't see why Sky had such a bee in their bonnet about it. So what if he was put on Armstrong one day instead of Ashe. As far as I'm concerned the only players that deserve to be on Ashe all the time are Serena, Federer and Nadal. I don't particularly like any of those 3 but overall career and achievement wise they are the only ones that "deserve" anything like that.

RosyLily

A little off-topic but it's been bugging me for a bit, how do they do the seedings for Mixed Doubles. I didn't get why Nestor/Mladenovic weren't seeded at the U.S. even though they won Wimbledon and reached the French Open final.

Or do the USTA not consider other GS mixed results?

Slashermcguirk

Lets be clear that I am not Murray bashing. I think Murray is an excellent player and has improved dramatically. Nobody deserved a slam more than that guy.

I don't even dislike him but at the same time would not be a fan. I guess the reason I prefer the other top 3 is I prefer their style of play. I have always found Murray tough to watch with his constant moaning on court and his habit of waiting for opponent mistakes. He has improved on the latter since Lendl started coaching him. Even still I was at a masters tournament last year and saw Murray play and he doesn't play tennis that would excite you.

He is an efficient player but lacks a presence on court and is still quite defensive. The other 3 bring more in terms of charisma and putting on a show. I look at the nadal vs federer classics along with federer vs djokovic classics and nadal vs djokovic matches. They provide great spectacles over the years but the Murray matches against the other 3 never really live up to the billing.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

^ Personally I find all of the "Top 4" (poor Fed ) boring to watch 90% of the time. They do barely enough to get by against most players, only turning it on when they come up against other top 5/6 players. Obviously that's not their fault really. Some matches you can't get any rhythm in when your opponent is terrible, but it still makes for pretty boring tennis. Usually during a slam I won't watch any of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray/Fed matches until I have no choice because they're the only ones left.

Rjd2

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

Novak also had an off day in Wimbledon final and had a much tougher draw than Murray. Djokovic beat berdych and del potro while Murray had janoviscz and verdasco. Djokovic played useless and still should have won 2nd and 3rd sets (up 4-1 and 4-2 in each).

Just because he is a break up does not mean the sets were in the bag against Murray one of the best returners on the tour, Novak would have known this quite well. Maybe Murray deserves some credit for coming back to win them?

Also yep Berdych on paper is better than Verdasco every way possible, but he was awesome against Murray while Berdych folded meekly against Novak like he does so often. Verdasco was on fire that day, Berdych not so much.


Jerzy wasn't exactly in poor from either to be fair, Murray was just much more clinical with him than Novak was with against Del Potro.

yerwanthere123

Slashermcguirk wrote: »

How can you say djokovic is not attack minded against top players, complete nonsense!! Have you seem djokovic wins in slams against federer, particularly the two matches in us open where he saved match points with ridiculous winners under pressure!!

Murray is the most negative defensive player in the top 10. Constantly waiting for errors. I have seen both players live and can assure you Novak hits a lot more winners in his matches.

Also Murray consistently moans all match long like a child.

If all courts are homogenised why can Murray never compete on clay!! He has never reached a single ATP final on clay in his career let alone French open.

Novak has won 6 slams, reached final of French, has won 2 world tour finals, almost single handed ly won Davis cup and has won countless more masters series and 500s than Murray.

He also has winning H2H against Murray overall and in slams.

In addition he is the only player to consistently beat nadal and federer at slams on different surfaces which proves his greatness compared to Murray.

He plays defense just as much as offense. I'm not saying he's incapable of hitting winners, but he's more than content to 'grind down' an opponent rather than try and hit them off the court. He relies on athleticism just as much, if not more so, than shot-making. Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but I find it utterly mundane to watch. And to his credit, he's an amazing athlete and the slowing down of courts over the years favours this type of tennis, so it works well for him.

This is why they need to speed up the courts though. Athleticism is winning over actual shot-making and hitting winners. Remember the quarter-final between Delpo and Novak last year? It almost seemed unfair than Delpo wasn't winning some of the points that Novak won in the end.

yerwanthere123

the_monkey wrote: »

You've already been banned for this behaviour.

I thought this post was referring to my OP and I was like :eek::eek:

yerwanthere123

WaterLily. wrote: »

I want to see Nadal and Murray in the final!
We've had so many Djokovic/Nadal matches, and even though they are nearly always brilliant battles, I'd rather a bit of a change! It possibly wouldn't be the most exciting match ever, but they haven't ever played a slam final against each other and also haven't played each other for nearly 2 years and Murray has come so far since then.

Really hoping for this final too. I think it would be much more interesting than another Nadal/Djokovic final. I also, like you want to see how the new and improved Murray fares against Nadal.

I do worry though if we do get that final, and Nadal wins, the effect it will have on Murray. After improving immensely and achieving so much in Nadal's absence, I imagine it might be hugely deflating for Murray if he's beaten well, and he might feel like he's back to square one.

Obviously though we might not get this final at all, in fact he might not even get past Wawrinka tonight... I'm kinda worried for him!