Tennis 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
How's this Rublev guy then? Any chance of a shock over Rafa?
 
How's this Rublev guy then? Any chance of a shock over Rafa?
Took out Dimitrov in 3 and looking feisty right now, but I don't think he has the net game to trouble Nadal. Decent serve, good forehand (not as good as Shapovalov's).
 
PCB is bang average. Shapovalov blew two sets out of 3 against him, especially the 3rd when he had 3 BPs to go 4-1, instead got broken back to 3-3.

Probably the most fortunate player in recent history to make a Slam semi.
 
PCB is bang average. Shapovalov blew two sets out of 3 against him, especially the 3rd when he had 3 BPs to go 4-1, instead got broken back to 3-3.

Probably the most fortunate player in recent history to make a Slam semi.

However he played before this tournament, you don't waltz into the U.S. Open quarters without losing a set by playing average. He has been very good this tournament. My point was that Shapovalov was playing well (by his own 18 year old upstart standards) but was repeatedly outfoxed by PCB's mental game.
 
However he played before this tournament, you don't waltz into the U.S. Open quarters without losing a set by playing average. He has been very good this tournament. My point was that Shapovalov was playing well (by his own 18 year old upstart standards) but was repeatedly outfoxed by PCB's mental game.
King, Norrie, Mahut, Shapovalov, Schwartzman.

If you don't put the USO before those names, it's perfectly reasonable to think that a 500 event run. It's not his fault, he can only beat what's in front of him, no one forced Cilic to blew his match to Schwartzman, but luck more than played its part.

The bottom half of the draw is a gargantuan joke, thanks to Murray.
 
King, Norrie, Mahut, Shapovalov, Schwartzman.

If you don't put the USO before those names, it's perfectly reasonable to think that a 500 event run. It's not his fault, he can only beat what's in front of him, no one forced Cilic to blew his match to Schwartzman, but luck more than played its part.

The bottom half of the draw is a gargantuan joke, thanks to Murray.

Players don't choose who they are drawn with. The fact that PCB has obliterated everyone in straight sets is better than Federer and Nadal can claim this tournament.
 
Players don't choose who they are drawn with. The fact that PCB has obliterated everyone in straight sets is better than Federer and Nadal can claim this tournament.
Obliterated is a strong word given that he won 3 tbs against Shapovalov, benefited from the latter blowing a lead in 2 of them.

Your need to big him up is baffling since I doubt you've followed him at all prior to the Shapovalov match. The guy hasn't even won a 500 event in 7 years on the tour. He had a nice run for himself meeting players around or lower than his level, that's it. Dolgopolov who Nadal actually 'obliterated' yesterday would make a similar run given the same opponents.
 
Obliterated is a strong word given that he won 3 tbs against Shapovalov, benefited from the latter blowing a lead in 2 of them.

Your need to big him up is baffling since I doubt you've followed him at all prior to the Shapovalov match. The guy hasn't even won a 500 event in 7 years on the tour. He had a nice run for himself meeting players around or lower than his level, that's it. Dolgopolov who Nadal actually 'obliterated' yesterday would make a similar run given the same opponents.

I'm not bigging him up, just giving up his rightful props for playing well. Perhaps you may want to consider doing the same.
 
I'm not bigging him up, just giving up his rightful props for playing well. Perhaps you may want to consider doing the same.
I'd rate players on their actual ability, thanks. One month ago you tipped Zverev to make it deep in USO, then Shapovalov to semi/final, now apparently Carreno. Perhaps you might consider refraining from giving out undue 'props'.
 
I'd rate players on their actual ability, thanks. One month ago you tipped Zverev to make it deep in USO, then Shapovalov to semi/final, now apparently Carreno. Perhaps you might consider refraining from giving out undue 'props'.

All the players I tipped to do well in the future will do well in the coming years. I tend to have a longer view than the usual cock-eyed short termers.
 
Took out Dimitrov in 3 and looking feisty right now, but I don't think he has the net game to trouble Nadal. Decent serve, good forehand (not as good as Shapovalov's).
Rublev has better net game and forehand than Shapovalov's tbh. His movement and backhand tho is not.
 
Two out of 3 aint bad. And frankly you wouldn't find many who would claim Fed is as interesting as McEnroe or Conors.
The point isn't the accuracy of your prediction, but that you make mistakes evaluating a player just like everyone else. Instead of deriding others as 'cock-eyed shortermers', maybe you should not be so cocksure?

As far as I'm aware, no one in this thread have slated the likes of Zverev/Shapovalov etc... as no hopers. We all acknowledge their talent, but the distance between talent and dominance is a big one. Making sweeping statements like 'they will battle each other at the top for years to come' or 'they will dominate in the very near future' just set yourself up for ridicules. Same as this inane discussion because you pounced on my comment about Carreno. I haven't followed the guy, never watched him before his match against Shapovalov, but 2 matches after and a quick Google gives me nothing to believe that he's anything other than average. Average players can play well, but they are still average.

Rublev has better net game and forehand than Shapovalov's tbh. His movement and backhand tho is not.

I think Shapovalov still has problems with his consistency but he generates way more power on his forehand than Rublev, even DelPo-lite. He also has zero net game so better than that is not enough tbh. Nadal's opponents have had some success serving into his forehand instead of ad side but given how deep he stays behind the line you need an aggressive net game also to capitalise.
 
The point isn't the accuracy of your prediction, but that you make mistakes evaluating a player just like everyone else. Instead of deriding others as 'cock-eyed shortermers', maybe you should not be so cocksure?

My views are based on long term predictions and let's face it, pointing out that I said Federer is boring, in no way undercuts what's been said during this open. It was you who was farcically attempting to cut down PCB's success in this tournament by suggesting he was bang average. No one in their right mind would consider the only player in this tournament who hasn't yet dropped as set to be bang average. So perhaps it best to sit back and take a chill pill and enjoy the Tennis without making claims that are obviously false.
 
My views are based on long term predictions and let's face it, pointing out that I said Federer is boring, in no way undercuts what's been said during this open. It was you who was farcically attempting to cut down PCB's success in this tournament by suggesting he was bang average. No one in their right mind would consider the only player in this tournament who hasn't yet dropped as set to be bang average. So perhaps it best to sit back and take a chill pill and enjoy the Tennis without making claims that are obviously false.

See, this is the kind of statement you can't help yourself with.

You would absolutely consider him average if you know he's been yo-yoing in the high teens to low 20s for year, already 26 y.o, never won even an ATP 500 title, and the highest-rannked player he beats en route to the semi is no.33. Plus, actually watching him play and see him missing easy forehands/volleys.
 
See, this is the kind of statement you can't help yourself with.

You would absolutely consider him average if you know he's been yo-yoing in the high teens to low 20s for year, already 26 y.o, never won even an ATP 500 title, and the highest-rannked player he beats en route to the semi is no.33. Plus, actually watching him play and see him missing easy forehands/volleys.

We're not evaluating how he played in some random minnowish tournament 16 months ago. We're strictly talking about his performance here.
 
Have to agree with @InfiniteBoredom PCB is indeed a bang average player who is having a decent tournament because, well, that bottom half is proper ATP 500 level post Murray, Cilic and Zverev. He's not even been too great from whenever I've watched him. He's just....solid enough to get through the draw he's had.
 
We're not evaluating how he played in some random minnowish tournament 16 months ago. We're strictly talking about his performance here.
Ok. In his last two matches here, which I presume (I may be wrong, but it's likely to be the case) are what you've seen. He was taken to 3 tie breaks by a player who is currently a no.67 on the ranking, and then beat a no.33 in his last match. Take the shine off it putting it that way isn't it?
 
Bang average is actually flattering for a guy who has went past the 3rd round in HC (or for that matter any surface) masters and slams only once and is 26.
 
Have to agree with @InfiniteBoredom PCB is indeed a bang average player who is having a decent tournament because, well, that bottom half is proper ATP 500 level post Murray, Cilic and Zverev. He's not even been too great from whenever I've watched him. He's just....solid enough to get through the draw he's had.

If you're argument was correct then Federer would've made it through his first two matches in straight sets against the 111 and 71st ranked players in the world. Fact is he didn't, so you can't then make the argument that PCB is only doing well because he had an easy draw.
 
Ok. In his last two matches here, which I presume (I may be wrong, but it's likely to be the case) are what you've seen. He was taken to 3 tie breaks by a player who is currently a no.67 on the ranking, and then beat a no.33 in his last match. Take the shine off it putting it that way isn't it?

It speaks to how good Shapovalov is, not how average PCB was. We know he isn't average since he has walked through the rest of his opponents without dropping a set.
 
It speaks to how good Shapovalov is, not how average PCB was. We know he isn't average since he has walked through the rest of his opponents without dropping a set.
Fine. I'll leave you to your opinion since this is going nowhere, it seems you are alone in that.
 
What a ballbag Muzza was, why he couldn't he have just ruled himself out of this earlier, everyone knew he wasn't doing it. The 3 players left all being in the same half is lame.
 
I think Shapovalov still has problems with his consistency but he generates way more power on his forehand than Rublev, even DelPo-lite. He also has zero net game so better than that is not enough tbh. Nadal's opponents have had some success serving into his forehand instead of ad side but given how deep he stays behind the line you need an aggressive net game also to capitalise.

yeah, I agree with that. Eventually Shapovalov will iron it out but at the moment Rublev's FH is the better shot - more consistent and with his serve is basically what beat Dimitrov and why he's where he is.

If you are looking at solid net game, then you have to look past the young guys. Shapovalov's basically non existent from what I saw in Canada, yet he managed to beat Nadal.

He should be more comfortable returning and staying back against Rublev, but against Federer or Delpo(assuming fit) he has to step up.
 
What a ballbag Muzza was, why he couldn't he have just ruled himself out of this earlier, everyone knew he wasn't doing it. The 3 players left all being in the same half is lame.
Bet he regrets withdrawing now. Even half fit, he'd have made it through this draw with ease.
 
It speaks to how good Shapovalov is, not how average PCB was. We know he isn't average since he has walked through the rest of his opponents without dropping a set.

Martin Verkerk? He dropped 5 sets on the way to 2003 RG final. Sure he had 2 - 5 setters yet you can argue that he looked pretty solid in the rest of the matches.

Average as you get - never been past the 2nd round in any GS tournament since or after that final.

Also Chris Lewis - a New Zealand guy, smoked by Mac at Wimbey was in the beginning of the 80's I think. Journeyman at best...

There are some examples of players getting a favorable draw but not really all that.
 
Martin Verkerk? He dropped 5 sets on the way to 2003 RG final. Sure he had 2 - 5 setters yet you can argue that he looked pretty solid in the rest of the matches.

Average as you get - never been past the 2nd round in any GS tournament since or after that final.

Also Chris Lewis - a New Zealand guy, smoked by Mac at Wimbey was in the beginning of the 80's I think. Journeyman at best...

There are some examples of players getting a favorable draw but not really all that.

Agreed, but in Shapovalov's case he is the real deal. He's just turned 18 four months ago already gone through Nadal and Del Potro in previous tournaments this year, so there's definitely something there, and given how most players improve significantly from the age of 18-25, there is more to come.
 
Anyone who thinks the second half of the draw isn't laughable is living in a dream land. It's been terrible thanks to Sir Andy. But also Cillic going out didn't help.

Let's face it Federer and Nadal especially will rather face PCB rather than the two servebots. I have nothing against Anderson and Querry as they both good players capable of causing upsets on their day. But it's not really exciting watching them play.

Agreed, but in Shapovalov's case he is the real deal. He's just turned 18 four months ago already gone through Nadal and Del Potro in previous tournaments this year, so there's definitely something there, and given how most players improve significantly from the age of 18-25, there is more to come.

You keep saying this. Kyrgios looked the real deal a few years ago. Tomic was the real deal before him. Dimitrov was baby Federer.

Let's wait and see how he does in a few tournaments before calling players real deals.

Well obviously there is more to come. But saying he is future world number one or him and Zverev are going to dominate at this stage is a bit premature.

Rublev beat Dimitrov and Goffin in a harder section. I don't see you tipping him to be world number one as he definitely would have made the semis if he was on the other side of the draw.

We don't know what's going to happen in the future. There might be a 16 year old in the ITFs who is better than them all. There might be a kid who comes into the game after the big four are winding down and start to dominate straight away. At the moment the big four are here to stay for the next few years. Someone offered you a bet the other day and you didn't take them up on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.