2020 French Open

wonski · 10-10-2020 3:54pm

I don't know if the limited crowd improves the chances of underdogs, but she became a favourite at some point and the limited crowd didn't cause her a trouble.

The 2:0 wins all the way, too.

Amazing tournament for her. Pleasure to watch her and listen to. Very modest player.

Another great day for Polish tennis, missed it for a while.

Rob2D · 10-10-2020 3:56pm

I wonder what the odds were on Iga before the tournament?

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 3:56pm

Renegadema wrote: »

Full package? I don’t watch much tennis anymore so I’m prepared to be educated but I thought she had great power off the baseline and thrashed a weak opponent but maybe the standard of ladies tennis is that way.

Judging on the whole tournament, not just the one match. She basically blew all her opponents away, including a former slam winner and a FO finalist from last year. Goes without saying, i'd hold fire after just one tournament where a lot of top players were absent but she was mighty impressive regardless i thought. Very raw still but think she might prove a level above the likes of barty and osaka.

yerwanthere123 · 10-10-2020 4:11pm

Augme wrote: »

Certainly wasn't a classic but Swiatek real does look like she could dominate the sport for a long time. She strikes the ball with an agressiveness and power that isn't often matched in the women's game. Serena obviously had it but it is rare to see.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Don't know about dominating but she's definitely most impressive we've seen for a while i think, in terms of power, composure, mental strength, the full package really. Could do with improving second serve and a few other aspects of her game but has lots of time to do it. Comes across really well off the court too.

Feels like we've read this before

RobertKK · 10-10-2020 4:15pm

When Swiatek beat Halep, it was a proper eye opener.
It was not the case that Halep had played badly, she didn't, it was just Swiatek was exceptional.
From that moment I had to watch Swiatek, most deserved champion.

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 4:18pm

Great win for Swiatek, looked impressive and like she will win more, but, we've seen that before with others only to disappoint. It's a bit early to predict her dominating.

The standard in women's tennis is also questionable with players showing wildly unpredictable displays from day to day let alone from year to year.

whiterebel · 10-10-2020 5:36pm

I think she said 3 years since her last victory, so I wouldn’t be so sure she’s going to dominate, despite how well she did for this 2 weeks.

10-10-2020 5:50pm

Ideally you want a few strong, or even to start with, consistent, players in the game at the top level to make it interesting.

This tends to drive the standard and consistency of those both at the top and near the top upwards.

When this is absent you get the reverse effect.

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 5:57pm

glasso wrote: »

Ideally you want a few strong, or even to start with, consistent, players in the game to make it interesting.

Agree with that, there needs to be standard bearers within any sport who are consistent and reliable and requires a certain level to beat them, this is what the women's game has lacked in the last decade, bar Serena who had no real challenger, the rest have been extremely inconsistent.

The men's game has almost always had 2, 3 or 4 players to keep the standard honest with very few slams won by outsiders who never really did anything again. Since the big 3 the standard has been exception with each pushing the other, it's also meant it has required exception performances from others to defeat them.

Once the big 3 finally finish, we will see a drop in standard on the men's side and players winning slams who in other era's wouldn't be contenders.

It may well be the case in 5 or 6 years where men's and women's tennis will be the reverse of where they are today. We may see 2 or 3 players like Osaka, Barty, Andreescu dominating and winning slams and on the men's side a series of players winning 1 or 2 slams with no one really dominanting.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 6:08pm

whiterebel wrote: »

I think she said 3 years since her last victory, so I wouldn’t be so sure she’s going to dominate, despite how well she did for this 2 weeks.

She was still playing juniors 2 years ago, was wimbledon junior champion 2018. I prefer that route personally to the gauff turning pro at 16 route but each to their own. There's always hype when a young player makes a breakthrough like that and sometimes it's more justified than others. Only time will tell how much substance there is to it.

10-10-2020 6:52pm

When your first title on the tour is a Grand Slam (and it's not the only time in recent years) it says a lot about the quality of the tour tbh and very much devalues the Grand Slams on that tour.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 7:06pm

Mats Wilanders first title was 84 French Open. Think wimbledon might have been Beckers first senior title. May be rare but hardly unheard of at same time.

10-10-2020 7:08pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Mats Wilanders first title was 84 French Open. Think wimbledon might have been Beckers first senior title. May be rare but hardly unheard of at same time.

It wasn't Becker's first.

Bet you can't find another since Wilanders.

Wilanders was no Ostapenko in any case

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 7:30pm

glasso wrote: »

It wasn't Becker's first.

Bet you can't find another since Wilanders.

Wilanders was no Ostapenko in any case

Gustavo Kuerten? I mean, ive no issue with people holding the opinion that the tour is weak, if that's what they feel, i just think swiatek winning her first title here isnt evidence of much only she played pretty exceptional tennis to do it. And the fact so many top players were absent, as well as serena withdrawing, has to be factored in too. She excites me a little anyway but until we see her in big tournaments being properly tested, as will happen soon enough, it's probably safer to hold fire.

10-10-2020 7:40pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Gustavo Kuerten? I mean, ive no issue with people holding the opinion that the tour is weak, if that's what they feel, i just think swiatek winning her first title here isnt evidence of much only she played pretty exceptional tennis to do it. And the fact so many top players were absent, as well as serena withdrawing, has to be factored in too. She excites me a little anyway but until we see her in big tournaments being properly tested, as will happen soon enough, it's probably safer to hold fire.

I would agree that she has some potential.

Would be good to have a few players as said who raise the standard, particularly in the consistency stakes as it's been sorely lacking.

The 1/4 final and on GS line-up could do with having a few more names that become vaguely familiar

Touché on Kuerten!

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 7:50pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Gustavo Kuerten? I mean, ive no issue with people holding the opinion that the tour is weak, if that's what they feel, i just think swiatek winning her first title here isnt evidence of much only she played pretty exceptional tennis to do it. And the fact so many top players were absent, as well as serena withdrawing, has to be factored in too. She excites me a little anyway but until we see her in big tournaments being properly tested, as will happen soon enough, it's probably safer to hold fire.

Kuerten did win 3 FOs and got to No. 1, so did have a decent career, a lot of the recent ladies grand slam winners have really struggled after winning a slam or never really challenged again.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 7:56pm

glasso wrote: »

I would agree that she has some potential.

Would be good to have a few players as said who raise the standard, particularly in the consistency stakes as it's been sorely lacking.

The 1/4 final and on GS line-up could do with having a few more names that become vaguely familiar

Touché on Kuerten!

Cant disagree with that at all. Said a while back that issue in wta has, for whatever reason, been with the generation in their mid to late 20s now who just haven't done enough. Pliskova been the biggest disappointment of the lot for me, has the game but just not mentally strong enough. Don't know what it is, too many beatings from serena or something? Hard to say. I think and hope there is more potential in the generation coming through now but only time will tell.

10-10-2020 7:58pm

Girly Gal wrote: »

Kuerten did win 3 FOs and got to No. 1, so did have a decent career, a lot of the recent ladies grand slam winners have really struggled after winning a slam or never really challenged again.

That's totally true but the poster was replying to my challenge :P

Kuerten was quality obviously and won a good number of ATP titles overall even if he didn't really do much in the slams outside of RG

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 8:06pm

Girly Gal wrote: »

Kuerten did win 3 FOs and got to No. 1, so did have a decent career, a lot of the recent ladies grand slam winners have really struggled after winning a slam or never really challenged again.

As indicated above, i wasn't saying anything whatsoever against Gustavo Kuerten or comparing him to anyone.

When you say "a lot" of recent slam winners struggled or never challenged again, who do you mean? Ostapenko obviously but who else?

10-10-2020 8:21pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As indicated above, i wasn't saying anything whatsoever against Gustavo Kuerten or comparing him to anyone.

When you say "a lot" of recent slam winners struggled or never challenged again, who do you mean? Ostapenko obviously but who else?

Well there has been a lot of "variety" in the WTA GS winners roster in the last number of years - it's easy enough to pick out who hasn't done much since or shown poor consistency

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 8:31pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As indicated above, i wasn't saying anything whatsoever against Gustavo Kuerten or comparing him to anyone.

When you say "a lot" of recent slam winners struggled or never challenged again, who do you mean? Ostapenko obviously but who else?

By recent I'm talking about the last decade and players like Pennetta, Bartoli, Schiavone and even Sloane Stephens (I know she made a FO final after winning US Open) and of course Ostapenko, which is quite a lot in a 10 year period. I'd agree with you regarding that players who are in their early twenties now like Osaka appear to be better than the generation immediately before them ie those in their late twenties to early thirties like Pliskova.

It's actually similar in the men's game where younger players appear to be stronger than players in late twenties and early thirties (outside the big 3 of course).

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 8:33pm

glasso wrote: »

Well there has been a lot of "variety" in the WTA GS winners roster in the last number of years - it's easy enough to pick out who hasn't done much since or shown poor consistency

Yeah i get the whole consistency thing, people see variety as a sign of poor quality etc. But on that list the only ones i'd seriously question would be ostapenko and stephens. It's too early to judge barty, osaka, andreescu.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 8:38pm

Girly Gal wrote: »

By recent I'm talking about the last decade and players like Pennetta, Bartoli, Schiavone and even Sloane Stephens (I know she made a FO final after winning US Open) and of course Ostapenko, which is quite a lot in a 10 year period. I'd agree with you regarding that players who are in their early twenties now like Osaka appear to be better than the generation immediately before them ie those in their late twenties to early thirties like Pliskova.

It's actually similar in the men's game where younger players appear to be stronger than players in late twenties and early thirties (outside the big 3 of course).

That's fair enough. Pennetta and Bartoli never had chances to follow up as they retired almost immediately iirc, but it's not likely they would anyway. Personally i think a lot of it comes down to mental strength and i wonder if it's lacking more with players today than it once did. Same goes for the men's side too. Could be wrong, just something I've suspected for some time.

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 8:55pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

That's fair enough. Pennetta and Bartoli never had chances to follow up as they retired almost immediately iirc, but it's not likely they would anyway. Personally i think a lot of it comes down to mental strength and i wonder if it's lacking more with players today than it once did. Same goes for the men's side too. Could be wrong, just something I've suspected for some time.

Pennetta and Bartoli weren't exactly strong challengers of slams and probably are proof of the poor standards when they won, basically it was only Serena at that time. I definitely do think there is a mental weakness in most sports now compared to previous generations, it's just the way society is going now.

All previous great players had to make the breakthrough at some stage, Federer beating Sampras, Nadal beating Federer on his way to his first FO, Djokovic beating Federer on way to first AO. Even during the big 3s reign, Wawrinka, Murray, Del Petro and Cilic won slams, that's why it's disappointing that none of the younger players have managed to take one or two slams in the last few years (recent US Open apart and the circumstances have to be taken into account there). Players in the past who aren't all time greats have managed to win slams with the big 3 present so it can be done. Also their level has definitely dipped slightly so they should be more vulnerable.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 9:29pm

Girly Gal wrote: »

Pennetta and Bartoli weren't exactly strong challengers of slams and probably are proof of the poor standards when they won, basically it was only Serena at that time.

Only serena? Think that's a bit of a stretch tbh. Kvitova, azarenka, venus, maria, kerber etc.....i think these are excellent players in any era.

Nor do i believe bartolis wimbledon title deserves to be devalued. She's not up there in the list of greats, nowhere near let's be fair, but in any sport it can take some that much longer to reach their potential than others and maybe that summer was just her time. Open to correction, but i think she belongs to a very exclusive club who have won wimbledon without dropping a set. Whatever her flaws as a player, i think that was a fair achievement.

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 10:15pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Only serena? Think that's a bit of a stretch tbh. Kvitova, azarenka, venus, maria, kerber etc.....i think these are excellent players in any era.

Nor do i believe bartolis wimbledon title deserves to be devalued. She's not up there in the list of greats, nowhere near let's be fair, but in any sport it can take some that much longer to reach their potential than others and maybe that summer was just her time. Open to correction, but i think she belongs to a very exclusive club who have won wimbledon without dropping a set. Whatever her flaws as a player, i think that was a fair achievement.

Winning a slam is a great achievement and I wasn't devaluing Bartoli's achievement, but, she wasn't a serious contender of slam titles before she won, then she retired, not sure if she had to retire because of injury, but, I wouldn't have expected her to win another slam.
Kvitova, Azarenka, Sharapova,and Kerber, were all good players but very inconsistent and I think probably didn't fulfil their potential and were generally a distant second to Serena. Venus is the only one you mentioned that I'd consider a great and she was well past her best in the early 2010s.

Joe_ Public · 10-10-2020 10:59pm

Girly Gal wrote: »

Winning a slam is a great achievement and I wasn't devaluing Bartoli's achievement, but, she wasn't a serious contender of slam titles before she won, then she retired, not sure if she had to retire because of injury, but, I wouldn't have expected her to win another slam.
Kvitova, Azarenka, Sharapova,and Kerber, were all good players but very inconsistent and I think probably didn't fulfil their potential and were generally a distant second to Serena. Venus is the only one you mentioned that I'd consider a great and she was well past her best in the early 2010s.

From memory i dont think there was serious injury with bartoli, just she'd achieved her main goal and felt it was time to move on. I dont think the whole stress of tour life was much to her liking, motivation was sometimes an issue with her. Something similar with Sloane i suspect. Bartoli had been deep in a few slams though, 2014 wasnt her first final.

All those players were a level below serena alright but the latter is a freak in terms of talent and power as we know, so i think that should be put in a bit of perspective.

And yes venus was past her peak by the turn of the decade but she remained a formidable competitor, a player you were now more likely to meet early rounds of a slam. And while i think it's valid to criticise wta for lack of consistency or whatever else, i think the other side is there is more strength in depth now than there was. Say what you like about Sloane Stephens but I'd still rather avoid her first round of a slam.

Girly Gal · 10-10-2020 11:42pm

Joe_ Public wrote: »

From memory i dont think there was serious injury with bartoli, just she'd achieved her main goal and felt it was time to move on. I dont think the whole stress of tour life was much to her liking, motivation was sometimes an issue with her. Something similar with Sloane i suspect. Bartoli had been deep in a few slams though, 2014 wasnt her first final.

All those players were a level below serena alright but the latter is a freak in terms of talent and power as we know, so i think that should be put in a bit of perspective.

And yes venus was past her peak by the turn of the decade but she remained a formidable competitor, a player you were now more likely to meet early rounds of a slam. And while i think it's valid to criticise wta for lack of consistency or whatever else, i think the other side is there is more strength in depth now than there was. Say what you like about Sloane Stephens but I'd still rather avoid her first round of a slam.

I think the general level is higher now than say 20 years ago, by that I mean that the top 100 is stronger now than it was 20 years ago, but, at the same time the top 5 is probably weaker than 20 years ago and has been for a lot of the last decade, a lot of that may have been down to Serena's dominance and not having any real rival. When the media was trying to build a rivalry between Serena and Maria you knew the game was not in good shape.

It's rivalries that make sport, I do think we might be at the early stages of getting a more consistent top 5/10 over the next few years with Serena bowing out and the likes of Osaka, Barty and Andreescu hopefully building up rivalries amongst themselves and the other top players. The opposite may well be the case with the men's game once Rafa and Novak bow out.

Joe_ Public · 11-10-2020 12:33am

Girly Gal wrote: »

I think the general level is higher now than say 20 years ago, by that I mean that the top 100 is stronger now than it was 20 years ago, but, at the same time the top 5 is probably weaker than 20 years ago and has been for a lot of the last decade, a lot of that may have been down to Serena's dominance and not having any real rival. When the media was trying to build a rivalry between Serena and Maria you knew the game was not in good shape.

It's rivalries that make sport, I do think we might be at the early stages of getting a more consistent top 5/10 over the next few years with Serena bowing out and the likes of Osaka, Barty and Andreescu hopefully building up rivalries amongst themselves and the other top players. The opposite may well be the case with the men's game once Rafa and Novak bow out.

Yeah, all fair comment. I particularly like barty but it was a bit quick how she got to No.1 and it's always a worry her relative lack of power will count against her. Though that makes me just root for her more.

The standard is definitely going up which theoretically should mean more chance of producing another great or two. Like, muguruza blew it against Collins this week but Collins is a seriously tough opponent who could be a contender if she wasn't such a mental basket case, which i don't mean disrespect by, but any player berating her coach mid game for sitting in the "wrong" seat has got big issues imho.

walshb · 11-10-2020 10:11am

Really looking forward to this final later!

seligehgit · 11-10-2020 10:43am

walshb wrote: »

Really looking forward to this final later!

Can't wait!

Girly Gal · 11-10-2020 12:54pm

Interesting final today, both probably expected this to be the final and probably hoped the other wouldn't make it. I think both would prefer to meet anyone else in the final.
It's probably Djokovic's best opportunity to beat a fully fit Nadal at RG. The conditions certainly take away a lot of Nadal's big advantage he normally has at RG, so, it's a more even match up than normal at RG. It's hard to go against Nadal at RG, but, with the conditions I'll give a hesitant vote to Djokovic, but, only just. So Rafa definitely win now!

dominatinMC · 11-10-2020 1:00pm

Looking at this objectively, I can't see Djokovic loosing. Although not playing great, he knows how to beat Nadal. He has the game plan in much the same way that Nadal had one for Federer for years. There are some lingering doubts about an injury to Djokovic, but as long as that doesn't flare up, I can't look past him.

11-10-2020 1:20pm

Roland_Garros wrote: »

Federer peaked in 2006, Nadal 2010 and Djokovic in 2011. All three are way past their best.

These sort of statements are pointless imo.

All three of these top players seek to adapt their game and improve in certain areas to try to win while they are playing.

They don't sit still and say to themselves "oh I wish I was i was like I was in 2XXX".

Federer completely remade his backhand and won back-to-back Australian opens and a Wimbledon with it after 5 years of not winning a slam.

Djokovic has improved his serve. He plays differently on clay than he used to. He had to come back out of a funk period of injury and some sort of mental issues and he did.

Nadal has sought to change his style to shorten points compared to his old style of play due to injuries and also changed his serve in the last couple of years to stay at the top.

These things make them the greats that they are.

MisterAnarchy · 11-10-2020 1:28pm

dominatinMC wrote: »

Looking at this objectively, I can't see Djokovic loosing. Although not playing great, he knows how to beat Nadal. He has the game plan in much the same way that Nadal had one for Federer for years. There are some lingering doubts about an injury to Djokovic, but as long as that doesn't flare up, I can't look past him.

Objectively ?
Nadal has lost 2 matches at Roland Garros in his entire career, he hasnt dropped a set all tournament and Djokovic isnt 100% fit.
It all points to a Nadal win.

I will watch the first set and hopefully its not a bish bash slog .
The last few matches between Nadal and Djokovic were hard watches.

11-10-2020 1:30pm

dominatinMC wrote: »

Looking at this objectively, I can't see Djokovic loosing. Although not playing great, he knows how to beat Nadal. He has the game plan in much the same way that Nadal had one for Federer for years. There are some lingering doubts about an injury to Djokovic, but as long as that doesn't flare up, I can't look past him.

I don't know. Nadal still has had the better of him on Clay over the last few years on the head-to-head.

You can't underestimate the dogged fecker on clay.

It will be interesting to see how the start goes and how Djokovic seeks to play - will he continue with a proportionally high % of drop shots, will he try to take the ball early, will the heavier balls and colder air really take a lot of the impact off Nadal's spin.

https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/novak-djokovic-vs-rafael-nadal/D643/N409

11-10-2020 1:55pm

Roof is apparently closed - that's an advantage for Djokovic.

11-10-2020 2:05pm

Even a bit of a crowd is better than none for the tennis.

Presume that they will be up for Nadal at the start and whomever is behind in the match after a while.

seligehgit · 11-10-2020 2:09pm

Prefer if Nick Mullins stuck to the rugby.

Much prefer Jim Courier in the commentary box.

11-10-2020 2:12pm

Roland__Garros wrote: »

Those sort of statements are not pointless. It is commentary on tennis and the peak levels of the three best ever players. How you could think that is pointless is bewildering.

All three we be consistently beaten by their peak selves in 2006, 2010 and 2011.

The reason they have adapted so much is partly game theory and partly compensating for deteriorating skills, stamina and fitness.

In 2013 I correctly said on this forum that Federer could still win slams when he adapted to his new Racquet. I was widely ridiculed. I see the truth that others can't see, they are blinded by group think. For years Federer handicapped himself by playing with a 90si racquet which meant he struggled in base line rallies with Nadal and Djokovic. When he switched to the 97si racquet and he was once more capable of holding his own in base line rallies as he was no longer handicapping himself.

2006 Federer would wipe the floor with today's Federer, even if you handicap the 2006 Federer with his 90si racquet.

2010 Nadal would wipe the floor with today's Nadal, he was far too athletic and and precise for today's Nadal to deal with.

Likewise, 2011 Djokov8c would be too much for today's Djokovic. He was an absolute machine in 2011.

Banned after 3 posts - impressive stuff.

Game theory lol

so it took Fed 4 years to win a slam with his bigger racquet and you're a tennis insight master?

the bigger factor was his revamped backhand which he came back with after his 2016 injury - won a slam in 2017

Mantis Toboggan · 11-10-2020 2:17pm

Nice start from Nadal

walshb · 11-10-2020 2:21pm

Is the roof covering g the court?

If so, why? This is the main court at RG, yes? Looks odd..

11-10-2020 2:22pm

Roland__Garros wrote: »

This is a discussion, don't be so sensitive that you have to resort to insults to people who disagree with you.

In 2015 his game was at a very high level. Good enough in most years to win a slam. Only Djokovic at hi very high 2015 level could stop him at Wimbledon and the US Open.

Federer's backhand in 2006 was just as good as 2017. Which is more impressive given it was a smaller Raquet.

grand we'll agree to disagree on that.

on the other side I find comparing the same player in different years pointless.

Mantis Toboggan · 11-10-2020 2:32pm

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Nice start from Nadal

Very nice start

11-10-2020 2:33pm

not going as planned for Djokovic - he's a bit rattled and not serving well.

First set gone surely

Can he regroup and figure Nadal out?

Nadal came out of the blocks determined even by his standards.

walshb · 11-10-2020 2:38pm

Nole bit unlucky to be two breaks down..

11-10-2020 2:42pm

Great game this 4th game

seligehgit · 11-10-2020 2:43pm

Good hold by Rafa.

MisterAnarchy · 11-10-2020 2:45pm

glasso wrote: »

Even a bit of a crowd is better than none for the tennis.

Definitely.
It makes a huge difference having a crowd.

Whats the capacity for today ,1k is it ?
You'd think they would space the crowd out a bit better for social distancing , the courtside seats seem fairly full.

The roof is closed because of rain ,so it will have to stay closed.

11-10-2020 2:53pm

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Definitely.
It makes a huge difference having a crowd.

Whats the capacity for today ,1k is it ?
You'd think they would space the crowd out a bit better for social distancing , the courtside seats seem fairly full.

The roof is closed because of rain ,so it will have to stay closed.

normally supposed to be 1k - looks like a bit more than that today imo!

Don't think that Nadal can maintain this level for 3 sets.

2020 French Open

Comments