French Open 2021

12-06-2021 12:49PM

Hafael wrote: »

Recency bias makes people put more weight and exaggeration on recent performances.

If the 100m was not a timed event there would be people convinced that Usain Bolt was better than ever when he won the Olympics. The reality is he peaked in 2009 at 22, it was a gradual decline from there which you can see by looking at his times. Tennis players don't peak at 34, they usually peak by 24.

absolutely brilliant whataboutery there

tennis is not a purely physical event and performance is also about the context of the battle between the two players - e.g. coming back from 5-0 in the first set to be able to turn it around win a match against a Nadal who started off in unplayable fashion was an amazing achievement. nobody had ever beaten Nadal on clay ever over 5 after losing the first set. and then you have the third set which was absolutely epic.

on that basis I'm agreeing with Djokovic that it was his best match at RG

12-06-2021 01:02PM

https://twitter.com/enricomariariva/status/1403473214832091140?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1403473214832091140%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fscroll.in%2Ffield%2F997329%2Ftennis-doesnt-get-better-than-this-reactions-to-djokovic-s-historic-win-against-at-french-open

Girly Gal · 12-06-2021 01:26PM

glasso wrote: »

I didn't say that he's better than ever and I certainly don't change my mind like a goldfish after every match!

Neither do I, have always felt in recent years Djokovic was favourite for all slams outside RG and that Nadal was his main opposition in the other slams, (obviously Nadal favourite at RG) that hasn't really changed mainly because the next gen are so inconsistent, but, Nadal is in his mid thirties now and there are obvious signs of decline this year which is likely to continue, it's still not beyond him to win outside of RG, but , more unlikely, also the aura of invincibility at RG has been damaged somewhat by the manner of yesterday's result, Nadal visibly tired as the match went on, something I haven't really seen before at RG, age probably catching up with him, Djokovic still looked fairly fresh at the end

12-06-2021 01:38PM

to my mind personally all this "past their peak" and "Djokovic 2011 beats Djokovic 2021" is moot.

what counts is can they still win or not

how they win can evolve over the years - maybe the player is a bit slower (I don't know this for sure but it's likely) over 3 metres than years ago, but true greats can evolve their game to be still unbelievably effective. Experience, mental resilience and clutch play can make up for some physical degradation.

they are still capable of amazing tennis - when it counts. and winning the key moments, when it counts.

Federer has degraded too far at this point and being honest he never had the level of mental toughness that Djokovic and Nadal had either.

He was able to take advantage of Djokovic's "mental / marriage issues" a few years ago to get another couple of slams and fair play to him.

Djokovic is maybe not as consistent over a whole match as he used to be but he can still be better than anyone else out there at winning the majority of the sets.

and just because the "next gen" are younger and "not past their peak" does not give them any right or indeed an expectation from the public to beat him. they have to go out there and do it.

android1 · 12-06-2021 01:48PM

Do you ever feel embarrassed about your posts? Like even a little bit?

12-06-2021 01:55PM

android1 wrote: »

Do you ever feel embarrassed about your posts? Like even a little bit?

who?

if I posted something like the above purely to stir up sh1t I would feel so yes :pac:

walshb · 12-06-2021 02:02PM

android1 wrote: »

Do you ever feel embarrassed about your posts? Like even a little bit?

Do you ever think, what's the point?

Girly Gal · 12-06-2021 02:07PM

glasso wrote: »

to my mind personally all this "past their peak" and "Djokovic 2011 beats Djokovic 2021" is moot.

what counts is can they still win or not

how they win can evolve over the years - maybe the player is a bit slower (I don't know this for sure but it's likely) over 3 metres than years ago, but true greats can evolve their game to be still unbelievably effective. Experience, mental resilience and clutch play can make up for some physical degradation.

they are still capable of amazing tennis - when it counts. and winning the key moments, when it counts.

Federer has degraded too far at this point and being honest he never had the level of mental toughness that Djokovic and Nadal had either.

He was able to take advantage of Djokovic's "mental / marriage issues" a few years ago to get another couple of slams and fair play to him.

Djokovic is maybe not as consistent over a whole match as he used to be but he can still be better than anyone else out there at winning the majority of the sets.

and just because the "next gen" are younger and "not past their peak" does not give them any right or indeed an expectation from the public to beat him. they have to go out there and do it.

Saying Federer only won because of Djokovic's "mental/marriage issues " is disingenuous, the same could be said about any player, e.g. Djokovic only winning because Federer past his best, etc.I agree the next gen players have no right to win anything they have to earn it as all players do, they have shown themselves to not be up to the task so it's fair to say they are not good enough. That said of course they could win multiple slams when Djokovic and Nadal retire, but, they won't really be held in high regard if they fail to win slams while Djokovic and Nadal are still playing to a decent level

yerwanthere123 · 12-06-2021 02:25PM

Hope we're all well rested after last night's shenanigans, cause we all know the *real* match of the weekend is happening now.

I'm a bit behind so only sitting down to watch now, but hoping we can at least get a good match here after the shambles of the women's draw the last fortnight.

Tbf to Krejcikova she does have a bit of variety to her game so there could be a nice contrast of styles here, but wouldn't be surprised to see an inconsistent, nervy affair.

yerwanthere123 · 12-06-2021 02:42PM

Oh Anastasia

MisterAnarchy · 12-06-2021 02:46PM

Maybe if the womens final was best of 5 sets there might be less nerves.

Augme · 12-06-2021 02:47PM

This could be humiliating.

yerwanthere123 · 12-06-2021 02:50PM

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Maybe if the womens final was best of 5 sets there might be less nerves.

It'd be interesting to see how bo5 on the women's side would affect things, and which players in particular would benefit most. I think people often underplay how different the conditions are, when you're down a set in bo5 it's obviously not good but you've got breathing room. When you're down a set in bo3 you're fighting to save the match.

12-06-2021 02:54PM

Gives her the opportunity to make a match of it at least now if she can hold to go 3-0

Augme · 12-06-2021 02:55PM

I think a best of 5 for the slam finals would work well but I wouldn't want to see a whole tournament as a best of 5. I feel the quality of tennis would drop too much due to tiredness and fatigue.

yerwanthere123 · 12-06-2021 03:06PM

Augme wrote: »

I think a best of 5 for the slam finals would work well but I wouldn't want to see a whole tournament as a best of 5. I feel the quality of tennis would drop too much due to tiredness and fatigue.

I think QF's onwards would be good to see, I think just for finals would be changing conditions too much for the one match they matter the most. Playing it in QF's & SF's would give them a chance to adapt. Either way, it's never going to happen.

12-06-2021 03:10PM

I'm up for P over K here as K is too much of a pusher type player.

(but K then starts playing just when in danger of losing the set)

K not impressed with the treatment stoppage here.

whiterebel · 12-06-2021 03:29PM

I watched that match last night, and had no stake in who won. While I watched it, my son, who's a RN fan walked past and asked how it was going. I said, and this is TB in the 3rd, its brilliant - but its drama, not brilliant tennis. I wake up this morning and Roddick, Murray and Croft are in paroxysms over it. I'm scratching my head wondering did we watch different matches? Now, commentators have to believe everything is better now, particularly when. they show it on their channel - Football started in 1992 - Sky Sports syndrome. No teams before 92, no great players, no great goals. They have a vested interest, plus younger viewers don't remember the greats. How you can even have the discussion about GOAT in tennis without Laver is ludicrous. 11 slams, and forced to miss 20 when he dominated mens tennis. Talk of records for pre-Open era is conveniently forgotten. He won the slam of slams twice, 1962 and 1969.

Anyway, the match last night - one of the greatest? Nadal had 16 UEs before the TB in the 3rd set. 55 in total in 4 sets. 55 by the best player on clay we have ever seen. I'd say he has won tournaments with less UEs than that. Eurosport have the highlights up this morning, I watched it back, to make sure I wasn't dreaming. They started their highlights of a 4 set match, at the 3rd set. I had thought, while watching live, that the 3rd set would make it into a "greatest of all time" conversation, but there were terrible misses everywhere in that set, just less by ND.
Great drama, but definitely not great tennis. Nowhere near Nadal/Fed Wimbledon or Mac v Borg x 2.

The umpire deserves to take one massive boot in the ass for giving ND a violation, when Nadal, as usual slowed down the server. On break point, no less. In one tournament you've got Fed penalised for slowing down one of the slowest servers around, then Nadal is told he is fine versus Norrie, despite persistently slowing up the server. Then you've got the server being penalised last night because Nadal is giving himself a sponge bath in the corner followed by 27,000 tics that he has developed. This needs to stop, the 3rd set would have been done in less than an hour by 2 reasonably quicker servers last night. Nadal hit an ace last night, and you could clearly see he was nearly back to the towel by the time the clock started. No wonder they are not on obvious display for the TV cameras any more.

yerwanthere123 · 12-06-2021 03:40PM

Think Krejcikova flew back to Prague there for a second at the end of the first set. Did the same thing against Muguruza in Dubai.

Furze99 · 12-06-2021 03:58PM

Prefer to see the Russian Anastasia prevail here, nicer game to watch. Other one seems more limited tactics, though effective. Re Nadal, all that time delay is about game management and conserving his body. By end third set last night, he’d played a lot longer than his normal and just faded.

12-06-2021 04:05PM

K really blew those match point break points there in a weak fashion.

how will the nerves hold up serving for the match?

12-06-2021 04:08PM

coach is giving her signals which side to serve to

low-key finish!

SlickRic · 12-06-2021 04:21PM

walshb wrote: »

Come on

There’s plenty stats and criteria and intangibles to argue for any the big three

Personally I think Fed greatest tennis player ever. Nobody does it better…

On clay all at peak, Nadal wins!

Hard court all at best, probably Nole. Fed right behind. Should have put Nole away twice in U.S. semis.

On grass all at best, I think Fed best..

My position is this (and I don't like Djokovic at all).

Federer may be the most mesmerising to watch at his best, but I think Djokovic is the most difficult player to beat at his best.

I won't fall out with anyone over it. It's just how I've felt for a while now. If someone wants to argue for Fed, then great.

MisterAnarchy · 12-06-2021 04:32PM

whiterebel wrote: »

I watched that match last night, and had no stake in who won. While I watched it, my son, who's a RN fan walked past and asked how it was going. I said, and this is TB in the 3rd, its brilliant - but its drama, not brilliant tennis. I wake up this morning and Roddick, Murray and Croft are in paroxysms over it. I'm scratching my head wondering did we watch different matches? Now, commentators have to believe everything is better now, particularly when. they show it on their channel - Football started in 1992 - Sky Sports syndrome. No teams before 92, no great players, no great goals. They have a vested interest, plus younger viewers don't remember the greats. How you can even have the discussion about GOAT in tennis without Laver is ludicrous. 11 slams, and forced to miss 20 when he dominated mens tennis. Talk of records for pre-Open era is conveniently forgotten. He won the slam of slams twice, 1962 and 1969.

Anyway, the match last night - one of the greatest? Nadal had 16 UEs before the TB in the 3rd set. 55 in total in 4 sets. 55 by the best player on clay we have ever seen. I'd say he has won tournaments with less UEs than that. Eurosport have the highlights up this morning, I watched it back, to make sure I wasn't dreaming. They started their highlights of a 4 set match, at the 3rd set. I had thought, while watching live, that the 3rd set would make it into a "greatest of all time" conversation, but there were terrible misses everywhere in that set, just less by ND.
Great drama, but definitely not great tennis. Nowhere near Nadal/Fed Wimbledon or Mac v Borg x 2.

The umpire deserves to take one massive boot in the ass for giving ND a violation, when Nadal, as usual slowed down the server. On break point, no less. In one tournament you've got Fed penalised for slowing down one of the slowest servers around, then Nadal is told he is fine versus Norrie, despite persistently slowing up the server. Then you've got the server being penalised last night because Nadal is giving himself a sponge bath in the corner followed by 27,000 tics that he has developed. This needs to stop, the 3rd set would have been done in less than an hour by 2 reasonably quicker servers last night. Nadal hit an ace last night, and you could clearly see he was nearly back to the towel by the time the clock started. No wonder they are not on obvious display for the TV cameras any more.

Agree with all of that.
Well said.

12-06-2021 04:32PM

whiterebel wrote: »

I watched that match last night, and had no stake in who won. While I watched it, my son, who's a RN fan walked past and asked how it was going. I said, and this is TB in the 3rd, its brilliant - but its drama, not brilliant tennis. I wake up this morning and Roddick, Murray and Croft are in paroxysms over it. I'm scratching my head wondering did we watch different matches? Now, commentators have to believe everything is better now, particularly when. they show it on their channel - Football started in 1992 - Sky Sports syndrome. No teams before 92, no great players, no great goals. They have a vested interest, plus younger viewers don't remember the greats. How you can even have the discussion about GOAT in tennis without Laver is ludicrous. 11 slams, and forced to miss 20 when he dominated mens tennis. Talk of records for pre-Open era is conveniently forgotten. He won the slam of slams twice, 1962 and 1969.

Anyway, the match last night - one of the greatest? Nadal had 16 UEs before the TB in the 3rd set. 55 in total in 4 sets. 55 by the best player on clay we have ever seen. I'd say he has won tournaments with less UEs than that. Eurosport have the highlights up this morning, I watched it back, to make sure I wasn't dreaming. They started their highlights of a 4 set match, at the 3rd set. I had thought, while watching live, that the 3rd set would make it into a "greatest of all time" conversation, but there were terrible misses everywhere in that set, just less by ND.
Great drama, but definitely not great tennis. Nowhere near Nadal/Fed Wimbledon or Mac v Borg x 2.

.

Loser has higher number of UE's shocker (55 vs 37 overall).

Including the third set which took twice as long as a normal set - some long games with lots of break points saved and a tie-break.

Match was over half an hour longer in duration than the 5 setter that preceded it where UE count was 47 - 43.

Tennis is certainly not all about stats either.

It's about the battle, the ebb and flow, the intensity.

That's what makes it compelling.

Zverev V Tsitsipas was a five setter and had less UE's but wasn't a quarter of the match that came after it!!!

it's easily the best "big" / GS semi or final for years

I put it ahead of the Fed - Djokovic Wimbdledon final in 2019 as it had more "weight" (Nadal never lost at RG semi or final, his 98.5% win record over 5 on clay, never lost a match after taking first set here compared to a relatively faded Federer) and more intensity (imo, but some will prefer the other match)

after that you have to go back a long way to find a good one.

klr87 · 12-06-2021 05:47PM

glasso wrote: »

Loser has higher number of UE's shocker (55 vs 37 overall).

Including the third set which took twice as long as a normal set - some long games with lots of break points saved and a tie-break.

Match was over half an hour longer in duration than the 5 setter that preceded it where UE count was 47 - 43.

Tennis is certainly not all about stats either.

It's about the battle, the ebb and flow, the intensity.

That's what makes it compelling.

Zverev V Tsitsipas was a five setter and had less UE's but wasn't a quarter of the match that came after it!!!

it's easily the best "big" / GS semi or final for years

I put it ahead of the Fed - Djokovic Wimbdledon final in 2019 as it had more "weight" (Nadal never lost at RG semi or final, his 98.5% win record over 5 on clay, never lost a match after taking first set here compared to a relatively faded Federer) and more intensity (imo)

after that you have to go back a long way to find a good one.

The 2017 RG sem-final between Wawrinka and Murray was a belter: 6-7 3-6 5-7 7-6 6-1. Of course, as the match went into a fifth set, you just knew the winner wouldn't be able to recover properly for the final, which was exactly what happened to Wawrinka against Nadal.

Both of the Australia Open semi-finals that year were great matches as well: Federer-Wawrinka and (especially) Nadal-Dimitrov. While the final was also a five-setter, it wasn't quite as good as either semi, IMHO.

The rain- and wind-interrupted 2019 semi-final at the French was also a very dramatic match, Thiem beating Djokovic 6-2 3-6 7-5 5-7 7-5. If you recall, this match finished on the Saturday morning, after Djokovic seemingly refused to return to the court the previous evening.

12-06-2021 07:32PM

Not bad suggestions but the calibre of personnel involved not the same imo

And where matches go to a second day it loses the intensity

walshb · 12-06-2021 08:36PM

SlickRic wrote: »

My position is this (and I don't like Djokovic at all).

Federer may be the most mesmerising to watch at his best, but I think Djokovic is the most difficult player to beat at his best.

I won't fall out with anyone over it. It's just how I've felt for a while now. If someone wants to argue for Fed, then great.

I agree here..

Life on the line and you have to pick one player to win? Nole by a whisker.

I just don’t see it as being remotely clear for any of them..

They are neck and neck the three of them..

Furze99 · 12-06-2021 09:48PM

walshb wrote: »

I agree here..

Life on the line and you have to pick one player to win? Nole by a whisker.

I just don’t see it as being remotely clear for any of them..

They are neck and neck the three of them..

Doesn't that depend on conditions and length of the match? Neither Federer nor Nadal look really up to long 5 set battles anymore and certainly not more than one in a championship. They're surviving at the moment on blasting away their opponents in straight sets, with skill and reputation as main factors. Personally I don't see them lasting much longer, just hope they don't go through a phase of getting out in early rounds. Something to be said for reading the writing on the wall and quiting when ahead.

Djokovic despite I think his on court persona can be unlikable, has a few more miles left in him yet.

12-06-2021 10:04PM

If and when or if ever Djokovic gets to 20 then he'll certainly be out in front due to all the other stats and head-to-head records.

Some may not like him but he'll be obviously the G.O.A.T

French Open 2021

Comments