Talk About Tennis 2.0

ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:47 pm

Suliso wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:47 pm

ti-amie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:45 pm Matteo woke up in time to force a third set TB but he's already down 1-3...

Did you miss that he was a break up most of this set?

No and yet here we are...

AND he had two set points with Ruud serving.

It WAS decently interesting to see how Ruud was able to bully Matteo today. The difference in foot-speed and movement was huge. Hope Matteo can get back to his best level of play soon.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:17 pm The unofficial #1. Sure. Lendl was #1 in 89, by rankings. Everybody gave it to Becker, with his W and USO wins.
Bets year is Rafa's. The rest is up for debate.

I think that was the reference to 1983 rather than 1989. Lendl's first Slam came at 84 RG, but he first took #1 spot in March of 83.

Jabeur-Tomljanovic is not bad, but somehow difficult to get excited about it.

mick1303 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 7:20 pm

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:17 pm The unofficial #1. Sure. Lendl was #1 in 89, by rankings. Everybody gave it to Becker, with his W and USO wins.
Bets year is Rafa's. The rest is up for debate.

I think that was the reference to 1983 rather than 1989. Lendl's first Slam came at 84 RG, but he first took #1 spot in March of 83.

No. This time I was talking along the lines of Rafa being #1 for the year, regardless of the rankings. In 1989, Lendl finished the year ranked #1 in the official rankings. Of course he had been #1 for a long time before that. But, in 89, Becker won the W/USO double, beating Lendl in the USO final. So, despite of the rankings, everybody agreed that Becker was the #1 for the year.
Remember that Becker was never a Year-End #1.
That was the comparison I was making. Of course, your figures about Lendl becoming #1 first in 1983 is totally correct.

Woody wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:32 pm

Woody wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 6:27 pm Does anybody know when was the last time the men's draw had no slam winners playing in the QFs?

Never mind, I have a short memory. Ok, but before the 2020 USO which was the crazy Covid year...?

I looked back into the 70's and I think the first time was indeed 2020.

There are very few active Slam winners on the tour. Only five. One wasn't playing, one is no longer at that level and one more was a bit lucky to get his. Thus just two real upsets is all it took.

Suliso wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 8:27 pm There are very few active Slam winners on the tour. Only five. One wasn't playing, one is no longer at that level and one more was a bit lucky to get his. Thus just two real upsets is all it took.

There are 8 active Slam winners on tour (active meaning they haven't retired, even if they haven't played in a while - Federer, mainly). Big 4, Stan, Cilic, Medvedev and Thiem. If you mean in this year's Open, there were 6.

Yes, but no reason to take Stan, Thiem or Murray chances seriously anymore. Realistically in this tournament only three strong Slam winners (being generous to Cilic here).

Ons 6-4, 7-6(4) over Ajla. Ajla has nothing to be ashamed of since a lot of people thought she'd crash and burn her next match after defeating Serena.

ti-amie wrote:Ons 6-4, 7-6(4) over Ajla. Ajla has nothing to be ashamed of since a lot of people thought she'd crash and burn her next match after defeating Serena.

Agree. She had a great tournament. But I thought this was a winnable match for her. Oh well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Suliso wrote:Yes, but no reason to take Stan, Thiem or Murray chances seriously anymore. Realistically in this tournament only three strong Slam winners (being generous to Cilic here).

For sure. Thought you meant raw numbers.

I think it is QUITE too soon to discount Thiem getting his career, and, yes, even his Slams career back in shape. (*Albeit, LOL, Suliso is probably right.)

nelslus wrote:I think it is QUITE too soon to discount Thiem getting his career, and, yes, even his Slams career back in shape. (*Albeit, LOL, Suliso is probably right.)

I think Thiem could come all the way back. I was talking about short term.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

meganfernandez wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 10:11 pm

nelslus wrote:I think it is QUITE too soon to discount Thiem getting his career, and, yes, even his Slams career back in shape. (*Albeit, LOL, Suliso is probably right.)

I think Thiem could come all the way back. I was talking about short term.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To be clear, 'Twas Suliso's Thiem Take I was disputing.

Really hope these two doubles players come in a lot. Caro's coming forward so far.