US Open 2018

whiterebel

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Just watching a few snippets of her press conference. It’s actually just pure comedy gold at this stage, nobody can take this stuff seriously. The journalists clapping her at the end are a real credit to their profession.

According to the panel on Prime, it was her team doing the clapping, not journos.

MisterAnarchy

Too many unforced errors by Delpo in the tie break.

Niles Crane

2-0 Djokovic.

Some resilience from him to win that crucial game that lasted about 20 minutes.

mzungu

Forehand let del Potro down. Does he have a fightback in him at this point?

dominatinMC

mzungu wrote: »

Forehand let del Potro down. Does he have a fightback in him at this point?

Not a hope, one way traffic from here on, unfortunately for us neutrals.

Floppybits

All over now. Cant see Del Potro coming back from this. He missed his chance in that 20 minute service game for djokovic

Joe_ Public

Hard to be confident for him now given he actually played the best tennis that set and still ended up losing it.

mzungu

dominatinMC wrote: »

Not a hope, one way traffic from here on, unfortunately for us neutrals.

Aye, I can see a workman like 6-4 in the third to the Djokovic. Off both sides he is the more consistent and I don't see him faltering any time soon.

It would be nice to see del Potro take another slam at some point. But that won't be tonight.

Royale with Cheese

Right, time to turn that off.

Floppybits

Djokovic playing with Del Potro now.

MisterAnarchy

Delpo breaks back to level at three all in the third.
He won't lie down.

lostcat

Poor enough watch, lacked tension for most of match, Djokovic not playing that well but Delpo playing worse. Djokovic emulating his boyhood hero with 14 slams, he might catch Nadal yet.

Delpo won't be in too many more slam finals, pity he couldn't at least max out...

Chivito550

So all 4 slams to the big 3. Dare we dream that somebody in their 20s might win a slam next year or is that asking too much?

The Golden Miller

Chivito550 wrote: »

So all 4 slams to the big 3. Dare we dream that somebody in their 20s might win a slam next year or is that asking too much?

Don't be ridiculous

lostcat

Interesting point from the telegraph (assuming it's correct) :

Since the start of 2011, a male player has won back-to-back slams on six occasions.

On all six of those occasions, that player was Novak Djokovic.

lostcat

Chivito550 wrote: »

So all 4 slams to the big 3. Dare we dream that somebody in their 20s might win a slam next year or is that asking too much?

Actually, it may well happen, Federer is on a wind down by the looks of it, Nadal is prob only going to be a major threat at the French, so apart from Djokovic (, who on current form is basically unbeatable) it might be a very open field

Chivito550

lostcat wrote: »

Actually, it may well happen, Federer is on a wind down by the looks of it, Nadal is prob only going to be a major threat at the French, so apart from Djokovic (, who on current form is basically unbeatable) it might be a very open field

Ah yes, but in this form nobody is beating Djokovic.

Also hard to really pick any likely candidates.

Chivito550

Bit of a boo there when they announce the size of the winners cheque. Is there any need to tell people how much money they win? Seems unnecessary.

Federer surely to retire now? that Djokovic, barring injury, with his head sorted out (and marriage) is not going to be beaten (at the moment) by him anyways.

NoviGlitzko

glasso wrote: »

Federer surely to retire now? that Djokovic, barring injury, with his head sorted out (and marriage) is not going to be beaten (at the moment) by him anyways.

Yeah, everyone else should retire too then.

josip

Would all Federer's endorsement contracts continue if he retires?

Chivito550

glasso wrote: »

Federer surely to retire now? that Djokovic, barring injury, with his head sorted out (and marriage) is not going to be beaten (at the moment) by him anyways.

People seem obsessed about Federer retiring, almost like people hope he just goes away.

Why should he retire. He's still world number 2, not world number 42.

He won't beat Novak unless his level drops, but who's to say that wont happen again?

If he's still enjoying the sport why should he quit? He still needs to get to 100 titles, and possibly go after Jimmy Connors' 109.

JustJoe7240

Chivito550 wrote: »

Bit of a boo there when they announce the size of the winners cheque. Is there any need to tell people how much money they win? Seems unnecessary.

THought it a gasp more than a boo, But nothing surprises me with flushing meadows fans, especially after the women's presentation. They're utter scum, only closely matched by US Ryder Cup Fans

Chivito550 wrote: »

People seem obsessed about Federer retiring, almost like people hope he just goes away.

Why should he retire. He's still world number 2, not world number 42.

He won't beat Novak unless his level drops, but who's to say that wont happen again?

If he's still enjoying the sport why should he quit? He still needs to get to 100 titles, and possibly go after Jimmy Connors' 109.

Agreed, Assuming he will wish to maximise his earning potential while his body still allows him to play.
He can still go out and challenge on the tour, and earn a **** ton of cash.

yeah but don't see Federer wanting to be a guy who can't make the semis of a GS and plodding around the tour - hasn't had a good Summer - 1 revival was great - don't see a second one happening.

Chivito550

glasso wrote: »

yeah but don't see Federer wanting to be a guy who can't make the semis of a GS and plodding around the tour - hasn't had a good Summer - 1 revival was great - don't see a second one happening.

As I said, he'll want to get to 100 titles, and see if he can push the 109 (although Federer's 98 trumps Connors' 109 given the nature of some of the tournaments back then).

jr86

I was waiting to be convinced Djokovic's Wimbledon run wasn't a one-off of sorts in a long road to recovery but he looks well and truly back now

It opens up a lot of possibilities too. The conversation of him tracking down Nadal - and even Federer - would appear to be back on track. He can also break a new record of winning every single Masters and Slam x2 in 2019, also. Regardless it looks like he's now set to dominate again for the time being, and I'd imagine he'll be world number 1 again soon.

We could be in for another 2011/2015/first half 2016 year of dominance from him in 2019

walshb

Fed could realistically win 7-8 more ATP titles getting him above 100.....

Best 3 set matches he can beat Nole.

mickmackey1

If Djokovic finishes on 17/18 majors than his trip to the loony bin over the last two years will have cost him the all-time record.

Fed looks in significant decline alright, would be ironic if the serve was the first part of his game to irretrievably break down. He might consider playing a few smaller tournaments to get closer to that silly Connors 'record'.

When Delpo hits 30 in a few weeks then we have no Slam champion in their 20s, hard to think of a more bizarre stat in all of sports.

lostcat

mickmackey1 wrote: »

If Djokovic finishes on 17/18 majors than his trip to the loony bin over the last two years will have cost him the all-time record.

What will cost djokovic is the 'lost years' between 2012 and 2014 where he could/should have won a handful more slams, he didnt capitalise on those years of utter dominance. He acknowledged this by getting Becker on board in late 2013. He might well catch Nadal if Nadal ends up on 17/18, but talk of Djokovic winning 6 more is not realistic imo.

What killed him in the last two years is not so much that he had 18 months off, its that Federer and Nadal took full advantage to win 3 more slams each.

Chivito550

The obsession with slam numbers now is funny, as Connors was saying on Prime the other day that in his era nobody ever thought like that. He said the next match was always the biggest match. They seemed to take all events as seriously as each other to an extent. They wanted to beat their rivals, no matter where it was, and didn't tailor their season around 8 weeks of the year.

Most of the top names never went to the Australian Open from around 1972 to 1983 or so, and the Australian Open only became a really big deal in 1988 when it moved to Flinders Park (now Melbourne Park).

It's a bit harsh on the greats of the past that they are now judged based on modern standards.