US Open Tennis 2017: Last Man Standing

[Janik]

Let’s start with the usual gubbins, i.e. the nominal R3 draws and work from there.

Men's Singles

Rafael Nadal Esp [1] vs Richard Gasquet Fra [26]
Fabio Fognini Ita [22] vs Tomas Berdych Cze [15]
David Goffin Bel [9] vs Gael Monfils Fra [18]
Pablo Cuevas Uru [27] vs Grigor Dimitrov Bul [7]

Roger Federer Sui [3] vs Felicano Lopez Esp [31]
Phillipp Kohlschreiber Ger [33] vs Nick Kyrgios Aus [14]
Roberto Bautista Agut Esp [11] vs Juan Martin del Potro Arg [24]
Adrian Mannarino Fra [30] vs Dominic Thiem Aut [6]


Sam Querrey USA [17] vs Karen Khachanov Rus [25]
Mikhail Zverev Ger [23] vs John Isner USA [10]
Jack Sock USA [13] vs Gilles Muller Lux [19]
Kevin Anderson RSa [28] vs Alexander Zverev Ger [4]

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga Fra [8] vs Robin Haase Ned [32]
Albert Ramos Vinolas Esp [20] vs Pablo Carreno Busta Esp [12]
Lucas Pouille Fra [16] vs David Ferrer Esp [21]
Diego Schwartzman Arg [29] vs Marin Cilic Cro [5]


Women's Singles

Karolina Pliskova Cze [1] vs Zhang Shuai Chn [27]
Barbora Strycova Cze [23] vs Kristina Mladenovic Fra [14]
Agnieszka Radwanska Pol [10] vs Coco Vandeweghe USA [20]
Anett Kontaveit Est [26] vs Svetlana Kuznetsova Rus [8]

Elena Svitolina Ukr [4] vs Daria Gavrilova Aus [25]
Elena Vesnina Rus [17] vs Madison Keys USA [15]
Jelena Ostapenko Lat [12] vs Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova Rus [19]
Lesia Tsurenko Ukr [28] vs Angelique Kerber Ger [6]


Caroline Wozniacki Den [5] vs Mirjana Lucic-Baroni Cro [29]
Kiki Bertens Ned [24] vs Venus Williams USA [9]
Petra Kvitova Cze [13] vs Caroline Garcia Fra [18]
Magdalena Rybarikova Svk [31] vs Garbine Muguruza Esp [3]

Johanna Konta GBr [7] vs Julia Goerges Ger [30]
Ana Konjuh Cro [21] vs Dominika Cibulkova Svk [11]
Anastasija Sevastova Lat [16] vs Peng Shuai Chn [22]
Lauren Davis USA [32] vs Simona Halep Rou [2]

[Satchmo Distel]

The most open tournament I can recall given that both singles trophies could realistically have two new finalists.

The early issue is clearly getting rid of Sharapova asap. Then it will be how many of the 64 players above make it to Round 3.

As Janik noted on the other thread, Zverev has to overcome a tendency to underperformed in the Slams. I am sceptical that Nadal will make it as far as the Federer SF. Roger is suggesting he is fit but surely he cannot be certain how his back will hold up.

Women's: Muguruza hopefully to keep getting better and better.

[Jimski]

Yes, it really could be almost anyone's tournament, on either side. Like Satchmo, I hope Muguruza wins the women's. She's the one player who really convinces as a potential number one post-Williams sisters. When she plays well, she's fantastically good, and just looks (in almost Graf-like manner) that she knows she will win. The women's game badly needs someone like her to really assert herself, so that we don't have an endless swapping of the number one spot between limited players who don't actually win the big tournaments.

[Janik]

Completely agree. Garbine looks like the big hope for taking the game back up a level currently.

[Antepli Ejderha]

At the moment the only important thing is to see the drugs cheat beaten then we can get on and enjoy the tennis.

[Satchmo Distel]

Halep v drugs cheat is the 7pm game so viewers in Europe will have a late night if they want to see drugs cheat go out live. Zverev v King is the other night game.

[Antepli Ejderha]

Peak time for her in the US, I just don't understand it. Will the crowd get on her back?

[Jimski]

Dopes anyone here have much faith in Halep beating Sharapova? Obviously she should do. It should be virtually a sure thing. But tbh Halep is probably the last of the upper echelon of players that I'd pick to play for my life, had I to do so. I'm worried.

[Janik]

Peak time for her in the US, I just don't understand it. Will the crowd get on her back?

It's the biggest match of the opening portion of the tournament, that is why it is peak time.
On the crowd, I'm not sure. She has a lot of fans out there who think she was very hard done by (bizarre, really, she admitted committing an offence!), so at best it will be split. If the neutrals stay neutral, she will probably have more support than Halep. The crowds in Stuttgart, Madrid and Rome were not noticeably against her, though there were isolated boos.

[ad hoc]

I think Halep will win comfortably

[Janik]

Some have described the Men’s draw as decimated by withdrawals. But that means 1 in 10 gone, doesn’t it? This is much worse than that – 6 of the top 11 are not present, all of them either multiple Slam champions or at worst former Slam finalists. 18 titles removed from the reckoning, including what should have been the defending champion. And that is before considering that two of the remaining top seeds (with a combined 20 (19 + 1) slam titles to their names, and who contested the last final just two months ago) also have fitness worries ranging from serious to very serious.
It’s a very open draw, therefore. But not for good reasons. It’s true that the US Open has been the place with the most variety of champions in the past decade or so, partly because of its position towards the end of the season, but this does not compare to anything previously. For the record, if we date the modern era from the 2005 French Open which was when Nadal emerged as a genuine peer to Federer, then 7 different players have been champions in New York compared to 4 at each of the other three Slams. The Aussie has been won by either Federer, Nadal and Djokovic in 11 out of the last 12 runnings; the same trio have won the French 12/13, Wimbledon 11/13 but only command 8/12 US titles.
Basically it’s the Men’s slam which, even with all the best players at hand, had the most opportunity of an unexpected champion. And this time it doesn’t have anything like the all the top guys there. The door is completely open for someone to walk through.

Let’s consider who is actually present to do that. The top seed and new World No.1 is Rafa Nadal. He is probably many people’s tip, with a major part of the grounds being that he is the only one of the big beasts in full fitness.
However US hard courts have always been Rafa’s least successful hunting ground. He has won the US Open twice before which isn’t to be sneezed at of course, but in both cases there was serious form behind him in the build up. In fact those two triumphs occurred in what will likely stand as Rafa’s best career years – 2010 when he complied his best overall Slam record of 25-1 including three straight titles in Paris, London and New York and reached the Semis in three of the four American Masters Series events and the QF of the other, and 2013 when he only lost before the final of 3 events all year and won every US hard court event he entered (Indian Wells, Canada, Cincy, New York).
This year, by contrast, he has won no hard court titles, got beyond the QFs just once in the four Masters Series tournaments (Miami, l to Federer in the final), hasn’t beaten a top ten player on hard since Acapulco at the beginning of March and comes in with a 3-2 win-loss record in the US Open series and just six matches won in total since Paris. He may be the no.1, but it’s via his clay court form to a large degree and Flushing Meadows plays nothing like a clay court.

What about Nadal’s only competitor (following the withdrawal of Murray) to exit the tournament with the no.1 crown, Roger Federer? Well, in his case, the form on hard is pretty exemplary. He has been involved with 5 Tour hard court tournaments, has won three of them (Aussie, Indian Wells, Miami), been a runner-up in another (Montreal) and had just one early defeat in the least of them in Dubai where his level of motivation was maybe questionable.
The problem with Roger is his back. This looked like it was hampering him in losing to Sascha Zverev in Canada two and a bit weeks ago. He insists it has healed, but a how well? The main hope for Federer fans is that there was a degree of exaggeration going on in Montreal, that he was undercutting the youngsters triumph with the implication of ‘ah, but if I’d been fully fit...’
One other wrinkle is that it’s a long while since Federer has won in New York. Nine years in fact. For a while the US Open appeared as natural a place for him as Wimbledon, as he won both five times in a row. However since del Potro shocked him in the 2009 final he has been back to the showpiece match just once, in 2015.

OK, so both the heroes of the past have large question marks against them. How about the next generation? Well, that is clearly headed by fourth seed Sascha Zverev. He has won two Masters Series titles this year, and done so in each case taking down big names in the final, Djokovic in Rome and Federer in Montreal. However the problem is consistency. Following the Italian win, Zverev was considered a genuine outsider for the French Open crown, and promptly lost in R1 to Fernando Verdasco. And following the Montreal win (which came on the back of a 500 title in Washington the previous week), he lost his opening match in Cincinnati to the world no.87 Frances Tiafoe. His best ever Slam result remains just R4, and that just once. Maybe the stamina needed for best-of-five matches is not quite there yet? With an all-power game such as Zverev plays, it has to be an issue.

The fifth seed is Marin Cilic. He has good vibes from this event of course having secured his place in Tennis history by winning it in 2014, but since then things have gone a bit backwards; SF, R3. And he has distinct ailments to worry about this time. His last match was the Wimbledon final, when he looked anything but fit, and most concerningly he hasn’t played since. Is the abductor injury healed? If it isn’t, that would be curtains because one can’t play Tennis with that, particularly not the muscular game that Cilic favours. The manner of the Wimbledon defeat will also be smarting, it’s one thing to loes in a Slam final but that was a thrashing. Is he over that? One piece of good news for Marin was the draw re-jig as he had a bad h2h record against his original opponent, Gilles Simon (1-5). Tennys Sandgren will be a lesser challenge. But if the body isn’t ready, even Tennys will prove too much.

And what of the other high seeds?
#6 Dominic Thiem has been far from stellar on hard in 2017, with nothing better than a QF from his Slam and Masters Series efforts. He remains a clay courter trying to make it work on the other surface. His chance comes mostly from the open nature of the draw, except he doesn’t truly benefit by being in the same half as Federer and Nadal.
#8 Jo-Wilfried Tsonga made the QFs in Melbourne at the start of the year but since then practically nothing; he has won just one match in Masters Series play all year.
Or one of #9 David Goffin, #10 John Isner, #11 Roberto Bautista Agut, #12 Pablo Carreno Busta, #13 Jack Sock, #15 Tomas Berdych, #16 Lucas Pouille. In all cases it feels like ‘Really??’ Can one make a proper case for any of them in isolation? No, but given how open it is none of this list can’t be entirely discounted as possibilities, which says an awful lot and not in a positive way. In turn:-
Goffin: Aussie QF, little else on hard to commend.
Isner: Cincy semi and can we play the US Open one year in Atlanta, please? One dimensional, poor record in slams.
Bautista Agut: solid player and Montreal QF but uninspiring as a potential slam champ. Did win the final warm-up event last week.
Carreno Busta: likewise solid-but-underwhelming as the future of Tennis, with an Indian Wells SF his sole stand out hard result in 2017.
Sock: decent on hard in spring (SF, QF Indian Wells and Miami), woeful in summer (one win combined in Montreal and Cincinatti). Completely out of form.
Berdych: Semis in, erm, Los Cabos. No other wins on hard since Miami. Did make Wimbledon Semis, but, y’know, it was all a bit open season in SW19 as well.
Pouille: 8-9 on hard for the season, 0-2 this summer with loses to the WR66 & 225. Last year’s QF looking more and more like an aberration.
That leaves just #7 Grigor Dimitrov, #14 Nick Kyrgios and #17 Sam Querrey. Dimitrov vs Kyrgios was the final in Cincinnati, and the key thing is both have talent in abundance. Dimitrov has been looking to break through for so long now, he must be sensing this is his opportunity. He has served his apprenticeship, it is time to deliver. And I’m intrigued by Kyrgios, as he is a player who thrives on chaos. New York really seems like his kind of town, and a drawn blown open could be exactly the thing he needs to make him feel like it’s not a grind. As an emotional type, he if gets on a roll he could well ride it to the title. The one stone in the shoe is he is yet another with questionable fitness. And then there is Querrey, who has three hard court titles in the year, albeit none at a Masters. His confidence will also be high after his Wimbledon SF, which will feel like a huge step forwards in his case. Like Isner he is pretty one-dimensional, but he has also put together results in Slams recently that put big John in the shade. He also has the advantage of being on the right side of the draw...

[Janik]

With no convincing cases for the 16 highest seeds, the door could well be open for someone else to make an unexpected run. French pair #18 Gael Monfils and #26 Richard Gasquet have both done well at this venue previously (each has a QF and SF run in recent years), but neither is in form and both are in the stacked top quarter.
The second quarter includes #24 Juan Martin del Potro, who is of course a former champion here. However Delpo really seems to be struggling these days, sadly. He just doesn’t trust himself to hit through his backhand anymore, and it’s too easy for top 100 players to play against someone with one wing clipped. This section might well see a new name making waves. Frances Tiafoe might have been it, if he hadn’t landed Federer in R1. Instead I look to a couple of young gun wild cards in Taylor Fritz and Alex De Minaur. De Minaur in particularly could pull off a big shock when facing Thiem in R1, and if he does the two would meet in R2 if Fritz gets past veteran Marcos Baghdatis. A potential QF against Federer or Kyrgios would then be the dangling carrot.
In quarter no.3 the four lower ranked seeds, #19 Gilles Muller, #23 Mikhail Zverev, #25 Karen Khachanov and #28 Kevin Anderson will all fancy their chances. There is a lot of aggression to be had in the play of these guys, with Khachanov and Anderson mostly straight up massive serve, massive forehand merchants. That could be enough in this open tournament. However the higher ranked pair, Muller and Zverev, are more interesting watches as they play with a bit more subtlety, though Muller is of course in possession of a big and very clever serve. But what price a Zverev vs Zverev quarter-final? Standing in Mischa’s way of achieving that are Kwiatkowski, Lack/Paire, Isner, Querrey/Khachanov. He really could finesse his way through all that...
Four non-seeded youngsters (or relative youngsters) stand out in q4; Denis Shapovalov, Daniil Medvedev, Kyle Edmund and Thanasi Kokkinakis. Shapovalov had the big breakthrough in Montreal, beating del Potro and Nadal as he became the youngest player ever to make a Masters Series semi-final. He has come through the qualies as well, so his eye should be in. He actually meets Medvedev in R1. The Russian had a great grass court season up until he lost his head (and lots of money in fines) during R2 of Wimbledon. Since then he made the QFs in Washington including a win over Dimitrov but has since lost four straight. Edmund’s form has similarly been up-and-down, with Semis in Atlanta and Winston-Salem bracketing disappointing R1 losses in the Masters. He does however have form in NY, having made R4 last year. And Kokkinakis? Well, he is a real talent but the question with the Aussie is always whether he can rely on his body. That said the biggest threat from this sector probably comes from a complete veteran – #21 David Ferrer. He pushed Federer to three in R3 of Montreal then went down in two breakers to Kyrgios in the semis in Cincy. He is playing good ball at the moment. It would be rather ironic if this apparent chance for the next generation were to end up with one of the unfulfilled holdovers from the previous finally coming good.

So who to pick? If his fitness wasn’t a doubt, then Federer would stand head and shoulder above the pack just as he did prior to Wimbledon. But it is, so I have to lean away from a 20th title. The heart says Kyrgios but then the head says also possibly injured. Therefore I go with Grigor Dimitrov to be the man.

[Jimski]

I think Halep will win comfortably

Please be right!

[Jimski]

Just noticed I typed "dopes" rather than "does" above. An apt typo, given the discussion.

[Antepli Ejderha]

It's the biggest match of the opening portion of the tournament, that is why it is peak time.
On the crowd, I'm not sure. She has a lot of fans out there who think she was very hard done by (bizarre, really, she admitted committing an offence!), so at best it will be split. If the neutrals stay neutral, she will probably have more support than Halep. The crowds in Stuttgart, Madrid and Rome were not noticeably against her, though there were isolated boos.

Thanks Janik. Agreed it's the biggest match and perhaps with many players missing that influenced the wildcard decision as the media focus on the doper and not those who've withdrawn.

Sadly I'm not surprised to hear she's got supporters there as the impression that I get is that doping in US sport isn't as harshly dealt with compared to other countries.

[Janik]

The top end of the Women’s game is pretty even these days, as evidenced by eight players potentially ending the tournament as world no.1. They have basically been through where the men are, and are now adjusted to the new landscape. The time seems ripe for a new dominant player or two to emerge, ready to set the challenge for when Serena (the ghost at this particular party) returns.
The eight possible world leaders are Simona Halep, Garbine Muguruza, Elena Svitolina, Karolina Pliskova, Caroline Wozniacki, Johanna Konta, Svetlana Kuznetsova and Venus Williams. In that order, as that reflects their ranking points standings with last year’s US Open removed. Let’s deal with them one-by-one.

#2 Simona Halep has been knocking at the door for so long now. She really needs to burst through it. She is so talented and so athletic, if only she didn’t undermine herself mentally she would already been well in front of the pack. The good news for Halep is that she looks like she is moving superbly well, which is one of her greatest strengths. The bad is obviously her R1 draw. However that could be a silver lining, as she can go in without feeling herself as expected to win based on the past record. Indeed the rotten draw could be a dark cloud with a silver lining; the confidence boost received if she wins today could propel her to that elusive Slam crown. As for the no.1 ranking, as the leader coming in she is unlikely to have any particular match where it will be ‘win this and get the mark’, it’s more likely it will land at her door be default as others go out. That in itself might be what she needs to get over the hump.

As alluded to up thread, the player who seems most ready to take the mantle of alpha female is #3 Garbine Muguruza. Garbine infamously struggled to deal with the aftermath of winning the French Open last year, splitting with her coach over her attitude to training and going on a long run of early exits from tournaments. But in the last few months it’s all come right again, and spectacularly so. She completely deserved her Wimbledon crown, and this time backed it up with a QF in Toronto and the title in Cincinnati, her first US hard court win. She has still collected relatively few tournament titles in her career, just 5, but they have mostly been big ones. And her game is so suited to hard courts, with its baseline power and big serve. Weaknesses are few and far between now the head seems right.

#4 Elena Svitolina will need to make at least the semis to take the top spot. She has been consistent this season, winning the most tournaments of any on the WTA (5) and has played well on hard courts winning the Premier 5s in Dubai and Toronto. The issue with Elena is that she hasn’t particularly delivered in the Slams. Her best remains a QF showing, which she achieved in Paris this year for the second time in her career. But R3 in Melbourne and R4 at Wimbledon were underwhelming and such has never been past R3 in New York. A lot of match wins will help, but her draw is not nice at all with a difficult R1 opponent in Katerina Siniakova and possibly a sparky R3 encounter with Daria Gavrilova.

It seems odd to reach the top seed and current no.1 fourth on the list, but as Karolina Pliskova’s runner-up points from last year are stripped away she will need to do lots of work to retain her status at the top of the tree (making the final is the minimum requirement). A few months ago Pliskova looked to be the one; she had a good run to the Semis in Paris on her worst surface making it three Slams in a row of QFs or better, she had consistency of results with a bunch of QF and SF showings in key tournaments, and she straight up beat Serena in the semis here last year. But then came Wimbledon, which looked like hers for the taking, and not to put too fine a point on it, she choked. That raises questions of whether she can deliver when expected to do so. Pliskova also has an obvious weakness in movement, which is not something that sounds like a leading player can reliable hope to cover. Her serve, her groundstroke power and her equanimity on the court are the big strengths. She will probably go deep this time, but when push comes to shove is that weakness to big a handicap?

Now we are down to the long shots for the top ranking, who would need to win the tournament and get other results drop to claim it. But that isn’t really what these players are chasing – they just want the glory of a Slam title. That is certainly the case for #5 Caroline Wozniacki, who has been there, done that as World No.1 but has not yet got the mantelpiece adornment she really desires. Based on her past record, if it is going to happen anywhere it will do so in her second home city. Both her previous slam finals have been in New York (in ’09 and ’14) and she has made three other semis including last year. Wozniacki has also been playing well this year, making the most finals of anyone on the WTA with six, the most recent being Toronto. And then losing them all... That is the problem for Caro – her style of play gets lots of wins over lower players, but then a power player is on form against her and she just can’t do enough with her shots to worry them.

#6 Johanna Konta can become World No.1 this week, though she probably won’t. Lots of things confirm her remarkable rise, and this is but another. She has expectation on her shoulders now, particularly as she is the only Brit with a realistic shot of the title now that Murray has withdrawn from the Men’s. And let’s be clear; Jo is a complete genuine contender to win this. Hard courts are clearly her best surface, one where she is probably better than the ~7 ranking where she has hovered for the last few months. That said her form coming in is a bit of a concern, if not to her then to others (Chris Evert apparently remarked on it). Prior to the ’15 US she won something like 15 consecutive matches. Prior to last year she was the Stanford champion. This time around she is 2-2 on US hard courts, which is far below her abilities on the surface. That said the draw looks negotiable and she should go at least as far as the R4 of the previous two years. Being a little under the radar will probably help. And those other deep runs in Slams mean the experience bank balance is starting to build up. Watch this space...

Finally two veteran former champions #8 Svetlana Kuznetsova and #9 Venus Williams, have the potential to take the crown, and with it possibly the top spot. It is time, finally, to put Sveta into the vets club as she is now up to 32. The odd thing being that people have assumed she was that for years, as her US Open title is now a distant memory, coming back in 2004. What happens when you win it as a 19 year-old. At that time Kuznetsova looked like she might be the future of Women’s Tennis, but that hasn’t exactly worked out though she would dismiss anyone who says her career is a little unfulfilled I suspect. Two slams, four finals is a return to be proud of. But will she add to that here? Unlikely. She last made it past R4 a decade ago, which was her last time to the final. She has won just one match in the last three years at Flushing Meadows. Her game has changed, and she is now a clay court specialist. That could as has a banana skin in R1 against talented young Czech Marketa Vondrousova.

Venus needs no introduction and will be the emotional favourite with the New York crowd. She remains, in my view, the most likely American to win it, her WTA leading 15 slam match wins this year backing that up. She hasn’t done much since Wimbledon, but these type of events are next to irrelevant to someone with Venus’ CV. They are just tune-ups for the big show. The Aussie and Wimbledon finals are the only two she has made all year. The worry is whether her body can last two weeks of Tennis in a slam, or indeed the eight months that have pre-dated the US Open. She has just one QF appearance in New York in the last seven years, which is not great on a surface and in an environment well suited to her strengths. I don’t think I can tip her for the title, and doubt she will make the QFs.

[Janik]

Who’ve we left out of the top 10 seeds? Well, only the defending champion, #6 Angelique Kerber. But Angie 2017 is not a patch on the awesome Angie of 2016. She sits 16th in the race standings and with last year’s 2000 points expiring will need to win a few rounds just to retain her place in the top 10. The US Open last year remains her last title, and she hasn’t made a tournament final since April. One win combined in Toronto and Cincinnati speaks volumes. If she does anything here it will be a much more major shock than even her 2016 Aussie Open crown. And her R1 opponent, hot young talent Naomi Osaka, could hardly be worse. Like Murray, she looks like she needs a break. Things look just as bleak for #10 Agnieszka Radwanska. Her race standing is #28(!), and she got to her first quarter-final since Sydney in January last week in Newport, but then lost in the Semis. New York has never been a happy hunting ground either, with a best ever result of R4. That said 2017 has been a great ready for Aga. She got married.

The rest of the top 16 seeds are #11 Dominika Cibulkova, #12 Jelena Ostapenko, #13 Petra Kvitova, #14 Kristina Mladenovic, #15 Madison Keys and #16 Anastasija Sevastova. Of these Keys looks the best bet, as she won in Stanford, skipped Toronto and then pushed Muguruza to a final set tie-break in Cincinnati (lets overlook that Keys should have won this one, letting chances slip by).
Cibulkova has struggled this year very similarly to Radwanska, with New Haven being her first QF for ages. There was even rumours she might be about to retire from the sport at one point.
Ostapenko is so attacking she is always going to blow hot-and-cold. She did have a good run at Wimbledon, but lost first round in both Toronto and Cincinnati. With her game she is just massively unpredictable.
The initial burst of optimism when she won in Birmingham has been replaced by more grim reality for Kvitova with a string of early losses. It’s going to take a while to get back to where she was after the assault. And where she was before the assault wasn’t her best, either.
Mladenovic is playing poorly and losing regularly at the moment.
Sevastova is a nice enough player, and has good memories of New York have made the Quarters last year, but she lacks the power to truly threaten in a slam.

And then by quarter. The main player to watch for in the quarter is #20 Coco Vandeweghe. She has already made an SF and QF in slams this year, and looked good in Stanford as she rolled to a final with Keys. However since then things haven’t worked with first round exits in the Prem 5s. However she is the sort of player to get on a roll, and if she can battle past Riske in R1 the draw opens up for her. The other player to watch in this sector is likely the winner of the R1 match between #26 Kontaveit and Safarova. Both good movers with solid power.
The standout for me in quarter two is #25 Daria Gavrilova. She comes in having won her first ever tour title in New Haven, and as an extremely emotional player that is a major thing. Others worthy of a look include young Czech Katerina Siniakova, who has won two tour titles this year, Elise Mertens who has won one and made another final and Naomi Osaka, who hasn’t made a final this year but still looks quite like the real deal. All of Siniakova, Mertens and Osaka face a seed in R1, playing Svitolina, Keys and Kerber respectively. It would surprise me if none of them won, and if one does then the draw opens up in front of her.
Names to catch the eye in the third quarter are Ekaterina Makarova, who has been playing very well in the warm up events and Oceane Dodin, who hasn’t been playing well but is mercurial thanks to her thrown-the-fridge-at-it-because-it-got-hooked-on-the-kitchen-sink approach. #29 Mirjana Lucic-Baroni takes a similar all-or-nothing approach as does Camilla Giorgi who faces #31 Magdalena Rybarikova in R1 in what could be a fascinating contrast of styles or a complete mess or a match.
The stacked quarter of the Women’s draw is the bottom one. In addition to two quality seeds (Konta and Halep), there is #30 Julia Goerges who has been having a very good year with three finals and maybe the QF in Cincinnati, #21 Ana Konjuh, still only 19 and a Quarter-Finalist last year, Konjuh’s R1 opponent Ashleigh Barty with two finals to her name in 2017 in singles and a slew of them in doubles, and Sloane Stephens, who had the most match wins in Toronto and Cincinnati of anyone with 8 (R1 to semis in both events). And then there is Donna Vekic, who must be still smarting over that Wimbledon loss to Konta and finally Voldemort who we all know about. Though I fear those who see her lack of matches as indicative that her level will be lower than before as clutching at straws. She was right back into gear at Stuttgart when she came back, and I suspect today will be similar.

So a tip? Konta. Genuinely. She is an extremely hot potato for anyone on a swift hard court. Two R4 showings when she wasn’t ready show the potential. She is now, and can really do this thing.

[Janik]

Five mens and five women’s matches to look for today. Starting with the Women’s, as that is where the standout is.

Kvitova [13] vs Jankovic
Rybarikova [31] vs Giorgi
Konjuh [21] vs Barty
Stephens [PR] vs Vinci
Sharapova [WC] vs Halep [2]

Petra Kvitova vs Jelena Jankovic is most definitely not the match-up it once was, but it does retain a name recognition so will draw interest and gets a big stage as they open affairs on the Louis Armstrong court. Jankovic is now ranked down at 68, and hasn’t got past R2 for a couple of years. However Kvitova does struggle with heat and humidity and her form is poor. Could be a last hurrah in slams for Jelena who has made allusions to retirement already this season.
As noted in the preview Rybarikova vs Giorgi is a vast contrast in styles between the Slovak’s ceberal serve-volley game and the Italian’s near brainless smack-everything-as-hard-as-I-can approach. If both are on, it could make for a truly epic contest, but if either is off such as Rybarikova not serving well enough or Giorgi spraying the ball everywhere looking to pass it could make for a complete shambles. It’s also a second meeting in a month after they clashed in Cincy qualifying, Camilla coming through then.
No such issues for Konjuh vs Barty, which will almost certainly be a quality contest. As those who read this thread might have divined, I like Ash Barty. She takes a very calm approach to Tennis. Ana Konjuh is quite aggressive in her play, looking to end rallies but can be inventive about how rather than just wellying the ball. Expect a lot of sliced backhands, net approaches and short but interesting points.
Sloane Stephens comes into the Open in hot form and with time to make up after being out with injury for so long. She used to only bring in it Slams but now seems to be doing so regularly, which ought to provide a better base for the main event. Roberta Vinci is not the same player who made the final two years ago (she was top 10 then and is no longer seeded), but is definitely wily and should retain the sympathies of the NY crowd after her brilliant on court interview after ending Serena’s Grand Slam effort[/url] and of course the cities Italian influence.
And of course, this one. As is widely reported Sharapova leads the h2h 6-0. However if Halep moves like she did in the warm-up events she ought to take Maria’s game away from her by keeping on getting the ball back. That ought to mess with her mind. And Halep most definitely serves better than Sharapova. Maria’s advantage is in mental edge. She won’t fade out if it starts going wrong, whereas Simona might. It gets to follow the opening ceremony (WTF is there an opening ceremony?!?) on the night session on Ashe. Arthur probably wouldn’t be impressed.


Querrey [17] vs Simon
Tomic vs Muller [19]
Vesely vs Coric
Shapovalov [Q] vs Medvedev
Edmund vs Haase [32]

Gilles Simon would possibly have preferred to take on Marin Cilic as he was originally meant to do as he seems to have a hold over the Croatian. Except the record is nearly as good against Querrey, at 4-1. That tells you everything about Gilou’s game. He is a defender, he gets under the skin of power players. One more ball, ah go on, another. Only one of their previous five meetings hasn’t gone the distance, this could be another.
Bernie Tomic has spent most of 2017 moaning about Tennis rather than playing it. He is amazed by how much he has earned despite not trying. And ponders how good he could be if he was arsed. This is pretty well the opposite of Gilles Muller, who seems to be giving it full gas all the time. Muller is a veteran who sees his chances as limited and is making the most of that, and will surely have enough to beat Surly. As he has generally done previously.
Taking the next two matches in one go, as they feature four players considered as the next generation. However one can wonder if that really applies to Jiri Vesely at 24 anymore. The time has come for him to step up from being a former junior no.1 and burgeoning talent to being someone operating at the top level. He won a tour title and hit a career high ranking of 35 back in 2015 and hasn’t improved on that since. Coric also peaked around the same time, but still only aged 20 this can be seen as an early flourish rather than something not to be repeated. Slams are becoming more and more important to both players kick-starting their rise back to the top again. A breakthrough is needed, and only one can possibly do it here as someone is going home.
Time is definitely still on Daniil Medvedev and Dennis Shapovalov’s side at 21 and 18 respectively. Medvedev needs to forge a new reputation for himself having behaved like a total brat in his R2 defeat at Wimbledon. He should take a leaf out of Shapovalov’s book in taking responsibility for one’s actions after the Canadians much less deliberate but potentially rather more dangerous behaviour earlier in the year. The good news for Shapovalov is he seems to have grown from that, and he is a very watchable. It could be a good match, but hopefully only explosive in terms of the shot-making.
Youth against experience as Kyle Edmund begins his attempt to defend his R4 points from last year. He has decent form ready to take on veteran Robin Haase, who is as known for doubles as singles. Haase earned himself his seeding with an SF run in Montreal a few weeks back which included a fine win over Dimitrov along the way. Both are big servers, which could make opportunities few and far between, with the player who holds their nerve best coming out on top.

[Jimski]

Muguruza conceded just 8 points (and no games) to Lepchenko in the first set of their match. Not seen any of it, but sounds impressive - Lepchenko ain't a bad player.

[Janik]

Forgot to do Brits in action today. Four of five are, in fact. Kyle Edmund vs Robin Haase is the opening match on court 10, Edmund is currently serving for the first set having just broken to lead 5-3. Heather Watson vs Alize Cornet is also underway on court 4, with Cornet currently a break up at 4-3. Cameron Norrie is also playing now, on serve at 3-4 against Dmitry Tursunov on court 14.
Jo Konta vs Aleksandra Krunic is second on Grandstand.

[Janik]

Edmund gets set 1 done after a couple of deuces on his third set point.

[Satchmo Distel]

Edmund takes the set 6-3

[Janik]

Muguruza conceded just 8 points (and no games) to Lepchenko in the first set of their match. Not seen any of it, but sounds impressive - Lepchenko ain't a bad player.

Lepchenko has not been quite the same this year since Meldonium got banned.

[Jimski]

Ooh, interesting. I didn't know about that! (Still she was good enough to beat Rybarikova and Ostapenko - presumably in "blowing cold" mode - in Toronto recently.)

[Satchmo Distel]

I have Watson v Cornet on live stream (ESPN3). Watson's serve is all over the place, but she has just played a good point to save the set.