There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Nishikori wins! Whatever next...
Nishikori wins! Whatever next...
-
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Murray's train stuttering in the first set, 2-4 down, although he did well in the 6th game to recover from 0-30 with his best serving so far.
Novak not quite at top gear on his own serve yet.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Is Murray someone who will never feel fine on a tennis court unless he invents a niggle to worry about? He comes out and starts flexing his arm like there is an issue and he is blinking hard and covering his eyes more. Is it a nervous thing because it is amazing how he suddenly perks up when he starts playing well?Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Maybe it's gamesmanship - rope a dope?
To be fair, however, he's playing exceptionally well in the latter half of the first set; best since his Wimbledon win.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Yes, since the 4-1 mark Murray has raised his level considerably and both are actually striking the ball magnificently. I love the intensity of a big 4 contest. Even if they are a bit off it still feels better than a contest between non big 4 guys.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
You'd wonder if the winner of this will be spent for the SF and final.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
The winner will play Nishikori who has gone through two five set epics so i think the winner will feel confident. I believe the final is on a Monday now so that is two games in 5 days. Should be ok for these guys.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
That tie break highlights the biggest problem in Murray's game. He served four times in the tie break and made one first serve. 25% when it mattered most. He serves at around 50% so when he dips it goes down to the 20 or 30% range within games.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
I'd forgotten the Monday switch. It should increase the quality of the final, which ought to be Novak v Fed though that's by no means guaranteed. Tonight's game could still swing to Murray although again he desperately needed that first set really to put Novak under pressure.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
When was the last time the same two players contested the Wimbledon and US Open finals in the same year?Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Nadal and Djokovic 2011Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Yep, and they made it 3 in a row:
https://www.facebook.com/Rafael.Nadal.VS.Roger.Federer/posts/358776177467790Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Did they not make it 4 at the French?Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
One set all after two tie breaks. Murray is hitting the ball so sweetly off his forehand side. It is drawing gasps from the crowd like a Del Potro effort.
I am not sure if Murray can keep this intensity up but that has been two hours of his best tennis in a year.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Djokovic took the third 6-2. Murray dropped off at the back end of it and now looks spent but you never know with him.
One poor stat from Murray is his inability to fight off break points. Djokovic has won 71% of his break points.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Murray looks completely knackered, and desperately conserving energy where he can - trying to shorten points, particularly in games where he's already 30-0 down.
But up until the back end of the third set it was a pretty fantastic match.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
That is it for Murray for another year. I think Murray will surely take great heart from this. For just under 3 hours it was toe to toe but then he gave way physically. He managed to drag it out past 3 and a half hours but he was delaying the inevitable.
Djokovic v Federer looks likely now.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
I thought he was awesome in the second set but there was just no way he could sustain that level for five hours, which is how long the match would have gone in a five setter.
He had to win that first set tiebreaker. It was win or bust. It all came down to those 8 points.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Cilic does for Berdych and so is into his first SF since the 2010 Aussie. Pennetta and Hingis are into the Women's Doubles final, where they will meet... more on that below.
Women’s Semi-Finals
First a general preamble about what a bizarre line-up this is. Serena is no shock at all, and Woznaicki was on decent form in the run-up. But Makarova? Peng? Yes, in the Doubles, where both are notable practitioners (2nd and 4th seeds respectively; Makarova, in fact, is also into the Women’s Doubles Final in tandem with Elena Vesnina), but not in the Singles.
That does slightly underestimate the Singles skills of both. Neither are mugs. Makarova is a top 20 singles player who has been relatively deep into Slams on a few occasions recently, particularly those on slick surfaces (i.e. Wimbledon). Peng was ranked around 40 going into the event, which meant she wasn’t far off being a seed herself. She has been inside the top 20 in the past. However, her recent focus has been, or at least seemed, more on the Doubles, where she got to the World No.1 ranking earlier in the year. That was a landmark, as it was the first time a Chinese player had headed a Tennis world ranking list.
Serena Williams USA [1] vs Ekaterina Makarova Rus [17]
So, how does Makarova win this, then? Christ, what a question you ask...
First up, she needs to respond to it with a deal more positivity than the above. So let’s try and pick out reasons to be cheerful. There are some bits to hand ones hat on. First of all there is the Doubles. She is established as one of the World’s leading exponents of that, mostly in her long-standing partnership with Vesnina. They have a Slam title to their names, the French last year, and a runner-up finish at this year’s Aussie (opponents on both occasions being Errani/Vinci), with their third Final pending. She also has a slam mixed crown garnered at this event (I assume on this court) back in 2012 and another Mixed final reached at the 2010 Aussie. The Final notable entry on her Doubles CV is a runner-up finish, with Vesnina, at last year’s tour Finals. Where they lost to Su-Wei Hsieh and Shuai Peng...
Makarova also has those previous Slam QF appearances, and now her first Semi. So she is not wholly unfamiliar with this stage. But the intensity and the loneliness if it isn’t working will be a new deal. She will also be playing the crowd as well as Serena. However, she has some experience of that already. Her Doubles QF was against Serena and Venus, the crowd were exactly as one-sided as would be expected, and she and Vesnina played superbly well to win. That also means she has beaten Serena very recently. That can’t hurt.
Other things to pick out are who Serena has lost to in Slams this year. Ana Ivanovic (seeded 14) at Melbourne, Garbine Muguruza (unseeded, ranked 35) in Paris and Alize Cornet (seeded 25) at Wimbledon. These are Makarova’s peers. Serena can look utterly imperious when on top, but the margin of her dominance is a little narrower than that makes it appear. She is an unstoppable front-runner, but is not a great scrambler. It wasn’t just 2014 when this happened either. Back in 2012 she was shocked in the Aussie Open 4th Round, beaten two and three by one E Makarova. That match is very important in the mental preparation.
OK, that is the case for Makarova. What is the case for Serena? Um, realism. She is a better player than Makarova. A much better player. The styles match up well for her; Makarova is a power player, who likes to dominate. Serena is the same, but better. Makarova has a good, punchy serve aided by her lefty delivery. Serena has the greatest serve of any Woman, ever. Serena is ultra-aggressive and will take the game to Makarova.
Their h2h shows 3-1 in Serena’s favour, with that Aussie Open match being Makarova’s one win. The two meetings since then have had tight first sets, followed by bagel second sets as Serena hit the front and powered away (see the unstoppable front-runner thing). Makarova must take the opening set to worry Serena. But she surely won’t.
Serena in two.
Peng Shuai Chn vs Caroline Woznaicki Den [10]
One might ask the same question of this match as the one in the top half of the draw. How does the underdog win? Well, this time the question doesn’t feel as forlorn. If both players play to their best, it is victory for Denmark/Poland/Monaco/New York/Woman of the World. But Caro performing when asked is not as certain as some of the other top women. Her career has been marked by underachievement on the biggest stages rather than glorious triumph. The size of the opportunity here therefore adds a certain amount of pressure.
As with Makarova, Peng’s doubles career gives her a certain amount of experience of the environment. She and Hsieh are the current French Open and Tour Champs (see above about Vensina), and also won Wimbledon in 2013. She hasn’t lost a major Final, which gives particular hope. Maybe she is a big stage player? Indeed, there are notably few Final defeats on her CV. In Doubles. The situation reverses in Singles, where she has made 6 WTA finals and lost the lot, including the 2011 Brussels Open where she was beaten by a certain Caroline Wozniacki, albeit in three.
In terms of style, Peng is a pretty attacking player, liking to rush her opponent by hitting flat down either wing. With her doubles skills she is quick to come forward if she has made a dent, seeking to kill the rally off at the net. This might not work so very well against a superb athlete like Wozniacki. Peng could find herself caught in no-man’s land, coming forward thinking she has made a serious dent only to find the ball coming back at her with rather more alacrity than she was prepared for. There are also questions to be asked about how she will do if Wozniacki is bossing points and asking Peng to do the defending.
Their past meetings show one win for Peng, but that was a long while ago when Wozniacki was still a rising teenager and Peng was already an established player. Since then it is 5-0 for Caro, with the last completed match reading 6-1 6-1 in her favour. Peng is in thoroughly uncharted Singles territory by reaching a Slam semi; the match against Bencic was her first ever quarter. Wozniacki has made three previous Semis in NY alone (another part of the reason why she likes the city enough to maintain an apartment there, I guess), winning one and losing two. She has also made a Semi in Melbourne, once. However, the most recent of these was this event three years ago, so there is some re-adjustment and recalling of the pressures to be done, even here.
Much as I would like to say the underdog will triumph, I can’t really see it. Experience of the level is such a big thing, unless you possess something dramatic in your game to fall back on. Peng doesn’t, and will get overwhelmed by it all.
Wozniacki in two.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Serena in three.
Wozniacki in two.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Amazing.Janik wrote:
Gael Monfils Fra [20] vs Roger Federer Sui [2]...At some point, Monfils is going to wake up to what is happening and retreat into his shell of defence and occasional flashy winners. Particularly if the winning line against Fed approaches. As I think it will at one point.
Federer in five sets including some outrageous Tennis, mostly from Monfils.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Evidently the divining rod no longer hates me in the way it did when completely lying about Wozniacki-Errani.
Somewhat gutted by the result. Monfils coming from nowhere to finally win a senior slam would have been such lovely story. [murmurs mournfully whilst little tricolour flaps a little desolate]Allez La Monf!Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Well, they have a total of 17 slam singles titles between the four of them. ;-)First a general preamble about what a bizarre line-up this is.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Men’s Semi-Finals
Let’s take a peek at themes again before considering the specific matches.
In my opinion, a good metric for the strength of an era is the number of different players who reach Slam semi-finals each year. The maximum, obviously, is 16 and the closer you to this, the weaker the era is as it is lacking outstanding players. The norm is somewhere between 10 and 11 [rule of thumb, I haven’t exactly calculated]. 2011 and 2012 were exceptional, as those years there were just 6 and 7 different players respectively filling the SF berths. Those years will come to be regard as the apogee of Men’s tennis, the zenith of the big four. Even the extras muscling on the superstars in were notable types. David Ferrer, consistently the fifth best in the world over the period, made three semis over that time, Jo-Willy Tsonga got to two and Tomas Berdych reached one (which he earned by beating Federer). So even these guys, the bit part players, were highly talented and had hit and maintained an exceptional level of play for a significant length of time.
Last year my metric was back up to 10. This year it reaches 11. There are still few, if any, runs from absolutely nowhere; even Gulbis and Cilic were seeded 18 and 14 respectively as they made their unexpected showings. But the field is now more open, and it is strongly arguable that this is so because levels near the very top have dropped rather than the next tier down improving to meet the challenge. But that is near the top, and not at. Murray has been relegated from one of the big four, but Djokovic, Federer and (when fit) Nadal are all far ahead of the rest of the game. The three ‘big four’ vs ‘non-big four’ Semi match-ups so far this year have all gone the way of the established stars, Djokovic beating Gulbis in Paris and Dimitrov at Wimbledon, Federer beating Raonic at Wimbledon. We have two more such encounters coming, and somehow it doesn’t feel like much will change. The bookies had Djokovic and Federer as extremely short odds to reach the Final pre-tournament. I doubt they have changed their minds since.
Novak Djokovic Srb [1] vs Kei Nishikori Jpn [10]
The cloud hovering over this match is Nishikori’s physical condition. Not the toe injury that he had pre-tourmanent, he is clearly over that, but a generalised doubt about his body not being up to the strains of playing this much Tennis in such a short space of time. That 2014 is going to remain a stand-out year for Nishikori, despite missing swathes of it through various ailments gives an indication of just how capable the man is. Fine early season form, with titles and deep runs at important events, was interrupted by an injury withdrawal in Miami when he had been due to play his first Masters Series Semi in a long while and second of all time. He soon recovered and played out of his skin on clay, culminating in reaching the Final in Madrid. Where he had the greatest clay court player of all time, Nadal, on the ropes before his body again gave up on him. He was broken badly enough that the French Open, three weeks later, was too soon. Fit again for grass, he broke down once more early in the American hard court season.
The gaps should mean his general level of fatigue is low, which is normally a factor for the US Open, but when you’ve got a player whose body repeatedly hasn’t stood up to the challenge of six three-set matches in quick succession, one has to worry that six five-set matches are going to seriously over-tax it. Particularly when the most recent two both went past the four hour mark. Also being unfit prior to the event may have hampered his general work out. How he has recovered since the Wawrinka match will be a big factor in this.
Djokovic had something of a work-out himself, for the first time in the event, against Murray. But I don’t think that will particularly bother him. If anything, it should be a boon, sharpening him up for the rest of the event. Nothing to see here.
Past record against each other doesn’t tell us much, as there isn’t enough in it and nothing at all recently. It stands at 1-1, both over 36 months ago. About the only thing to note is that Djokovic’s win came in a Slam, and came easily. As for game style, both play the generalised power-baseline game that predominates on the modern tour, but Nishikori does it with considerably more flair. However, if Nishikori has a marginal advantage on the attack, Djokovic has a significant one on defence. Nishikori is decent enough at that, but Djokovic is jaw-droppingly good.
Djokovic obviously has an overwhelming advantage in experience. He has been at least this far in 17 of the last 18 Slams... By comparison, prior to this event Nishikori had made just one Slam quarter. Which he lost, making this his first Semi. No scratch that, making this the first Slam semi for any Japanese man, ever. It’s a huge, huge deal for him, which can only add to the tension, pressure, etc. As if there wasn’t enough of that in playing Djokovic anyway.
The fitness doubts, the sheer newness of the situation, it all adds up to only one result.
Djokovic in three.
Marin Cilic Cro [14] vs Roger Federer Sui [2]
Marin Cilic is a big server with a big groundstroke game. Roger Federer knows big servers. He has met many big servers. He has beaten them, time and again. Andy Roddick was maybe the ultimate player of this type. He couldn’t beat Federer when it mattered, and barely ever when it didn’t. Milos Raonic is the new Roddick. Federer owns him, and was just imperious is dismissing the Canadian in the Wimbledon semi-final.
Generally it takes something more than just hitting the ball hard to beat Federer, it takes Nadal’s heavy spin to expose the backhand, Murray’s variety, Djokovic’s grit. But it can work, sometimes. Federer had winning records against the three best serving and groundstroke machines of recent years, Tsonga, Berdych and Del Potro. Winning, but not perfect, as while rach of these players has more losses than wins against the Fed, each has enough successes, 5 or 6, to be consider more than a smattering. More than that, each of the three has significan wins over Federer, in the latter stages of Slams.
Federer expects to win against big serves as a matter of course (c.f. when the masked slipped after Berdych beat him that time in the Wimbledon Quarter-Final and Federer let the truth through that he believes ‘I ought to be winning matches against players like this’), but he ought to be wary. If Cilic can play like those guys did in victory, if he can stay positive enough and believe he can win, then it is possible. Federer makes enough unforced errors to drop a service game a set on an off-day, and if he does that and Cilic stays strong on his own delivery then he should be able to see sets out.
Belief might be a serious issue, though. Like many others, Cilic is very used to losing to Federer. In fact, he has done nothing but so far in his career, holding a 0-5 record. However, their recent meeting in Toronto was very tight (7-6 6-7 6-4 to Fed), which is much closer than Cilic had ever previously come. Cilic has also had problems in very recent times with believing he can beat the top guys, see his recent comments about the Djokovic match at Wimbledon where he admitted he could have done better mentally. That particular on-court interview answer was phrased in a positive way, as in ‘I know what I did wrong against Djokovic at Wimbledon’, but whether this is true or not remains to be seen, if and when he ever gets into the same position.
This is probably a match of fairly short rallies, with a lot resting on how both players serve, and how Federer returns. If he can read Cilic’s serve, get lots back in to play, and make Cilic earn his service games by rallying then that seriously undermines the Croat. If he can’t get enough back, then the pressure switches to Federer’s own delivery as he’ll know a couple of shanks could equate to a lost set.
Everything in the past says Federer reads Cilic’s serve and forces him to play way often enough to get the errors Federer needs. Cilic might get one, but that is as much as I can see him doing.
Federer in four.Comment
-
There were the Irish. Back over to Swiss, Serbs...
Great previews - thanks, Janik. One minor thing is that a Japanese male has previously made a major semi. Long, long ago in 1918: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichiya_KumagaeComment
Comment