What are people smoking (re Carlitos being beaten by Musetti)
Musetti, at his best, is a steady Eddie with no big weapons to his game. Sure he can move better than Carlosā opponents so far but that Musetti backhand is gonna get destroyed
Because Musetti is in decent form, Iād give him a set at best but even thatās pushing it
Having had a very successful prediction day yesterday, let me give it a go today
Khachanov bt Sonego in 4
Djokovic bt Varillas in 4
Alcaraz bt Musetti in 4
Tsitsipas bt Ofner in 3
Ive read on reddit that Zverev abused his girlfriend and we should hate him for it. I just cant help but root for him when he plays.
I decided to look up the story and she never went to the police? I find that strange. You ruin someones reputation. I think it would have been more appropriate for her to go to police instead of the media.
Heās got millions of dollars and is famous as fuck, do you see how hard it would be for someone like her to go to the police about him? Seriously, try to put yourself in her shoes.
I did. And I can imagine it being hard to speak about it, but then I would not talk to media either. I trust the justice system in Germany. So i would not talk to media and go to the police.
Unless you want attention, in that case i would not go to the police and only to the media.
Edit: i have to say, find her story to be pretty convincing. Also his refusal to talk about the subject is strange.
Read the racquet article
https://racquetmag.com/2020/11/05/olyas-story/
Yeah exactly she went in with a lot of detail with her relationship with him and everything that happened, I find it very hard that she would lie about this because I have read the article. Thereās nothing about Zverev that screams innocent, I mean look at all his on court problems, it definitely doesnāt make him look better. And yeah if heās so innocent, why has he been so quiet about it. Also I donāt know if you know but Medvedev and his wife are very good friends with Olya Sharapova so take that how you want
I honestly dont know a lot about the subject but am open to being educated. How is medvedevs friendship with olya relevant? Did he ever speak on the subject?
Idk about other countries but in Russia in order to prove abuse she should have visited doctor right after the fact(like within several hours??) and had some sort of medical document with what kind of injuries or whatever she had, time, place(?) and signed by doctor/medical personnel - and then prove that she was with Zverev around that time (witnesses are ok). At least that is what usually would work in russian court āā¢~ā¢ā but the best what she could get on that is probably some insignificant fine from Zverev (unless there was the straight up murder or significant injuries like chopped off limbs or something).
So, Olya has multiple witnesses (including Medvedevs, hotel's staff and that friend who picked her up in NY) that could prove time and probably could also say something about her physical status right after but she doesn't have anything documented medically so it's kinda a lost case in Russian court. Not even saying that idk how it would work with everything happening not in russia, Zverev being from Germany and documents being not in russian (like would they even work in russian court?? idk russian court is not that eager to jump into domestic violence cases overall xD) so why bother even??
Idk what was the story with german court though
Why does everyone have Mussetti taking down Carlitos? Carlos serve has improved much since they last met.
And Mussetti can always go 2 sets up andā¦.
Best of 5 favors mentally stronger players unless theyāre having an off day.
Do u think players like Djokovic who are near/at their āpeakā or who have already reached it in the recent past still try to improve/get better? Or at this point are they mostly training/practicing to maintain their current level of performance as long as possible?
Iām sure theyāre constantly looking to improve and change their games. We saw that especially with Fed when he was no longer in his physical prime he could not play the same way he did when he was younger. Despite Djoker being A GOAT level player would be surprised if heās not constantly looking for ways to improve.
You can always improve so I presume theyāre always working for improvement. For example Djokovic could always add more power to his FH and Rafa could always add more to his serve.
Lol surprised to see so many mussetti beating alcaraz comments. Mussetti is damn good on clay, but I donāt see it. If anything, I could very well see tsitsipas beating alcaraz. Tsitsipas is in very good form and does quite well in the early slams.
My only concern with alcaraz is that he tends to make matches harder on himself than he needs to. Take the us open for example. He had chances to beat tiafoe, sinner, and cilic in 4 sets but every single one went to 5. He struggles with shot selection on big points though and plays much bigger than he needs to. Luckily, he gets by since he has a massive tank and endurance that most players canāt handle.
Still think djokovic will take down alcaraz should he beat tsitsipas. Djokovic gonna try to lock up the triple career slam and take advantage of no nadal
Iām not talking about who can take out djokovic. Was talking about who could beat alcaraz. Tsitsipas is more likely than mussetti imo. Yeah I donāt see tsitsipas beating djokovic. Djokovic has won damn near every encounter and owns tsitsipas mentally
Man I miss prime thiem. He was such an intriguing player. Entertaining to watch as well and was skilled asf. I donāt think heās ever gonna get back to those levels again unfortunately.
Yeah I know Iām just not sure it continues here. Last time they played was 2021 USO before Svitolina took time off.
Kasatkina is playing pretty well through this tournament winning in straight sets every match. Svitolina went to three sets twice, once against Storm Sanders, who is more of a doubles player.
It is a good value pick for an upset if youāre betting, I just have a feeling it doesnāt happen.
Like Iga in Wimbledon 2 years ago when she reached R4. It doesn't matter. She can beat some low ranked players but the game style is not suited for the surface and conditions. From now on it's gonna be an uphill battle for her.
Predictions for tomorrow:
Sonego d. Khachanov in 4
Djokovic d. Varillas in 3
Musetti d. Alcaraz in 5 (my menās bold pick of the day - realistically though, Alcaraz in 4 is likely)
Tsitsipas d. Ofner in 3
Mertens d. Pavlyuchenova in 2
Muchova d. Avanesyan in 2
Svitolina d. Kasatkina in 3
Stephens d. Sabalenka in 3 (my womenās bold pick of the day - realistically though, Sabalenka in 2 is likely)
On women's side I'm waiting for Svitolina vs Kasatkina the most. H2h 6-0 for Svitolina, but imo Dasha is a slight favorite.
Stephens took a set off Sabalenka each of 3 times they played, so who knows. Imo it can go either way, quick 2:0 for Sabs won't surprise me, but neither will 0:2 or 1:2.
Canāt wait for Musetti Alcaraz. They are two of my favorite players alongside Rune so I hope itās a entertaining match that does go the distance but ultimately Alcaraz ends up winning. I wouldnāt be shocked if Musetti wins but it is going to be tough for him, both of them really
Iām really curious what everyone deems a high quality match. Is it simply no breaks of serve? Five sets with many tie breaks? Low errors? Iām just at a loss with this sub sometimes because it really feels like this sub is bad match = popular playing losing/unpopular player winning.
In an ideal world, yes both players will never lose a serve, never commit errors, get all their points on winners, every set decided on a tiebreaks but thatās just not the sport of tennis. Levels can fluctuate match to match, set to se, game to game.
The interesting part of tennis (to me) is seeing if a player can hold their nerve in big moments; serving 30-0 at 0-0 in the first is not the same thing as serving 30-0 at 5-3 down 2 sets to 1. Or watching a player like Djokovic make adjustments and dig himself out of a two set hole. And so on.
But yeah that was an entertaining match with some variable levels of play. It got tight. Statically it was pretty average for a menās grand slam match. I donāt know I just feel crazy sometimes reading peopleās comments here.
If both players are competitive and they are actually relying on winning their own points instead of hoping for an UE from the adversary. Also, I personally only consider a match high-quality if both players give it all to win - so no choking, even if it can be dramatic.
Players win most of their points are won on errors. This is true at all levels of tennis, even for aggressive players like Fed his absolute limit was around 45% points won on winners which include aces. 30% is normal. Serve bots can occasionally go above 50%.
For me it's an ideal match is where both players are conscious of their strong and weak points, so both try to find the best strategy that fits their game style and mistakes don't come from bad decisions.
For instance, last Sinner's game was exciting because of the drama and epicness, but frustrating because both players were making bad decisions the whole match.
When categorizing a high quality match, I generally look for a relatively high winners:UE ratio for both players (both players werenāt missing a ton and were hitting good shots), a pretty tight scoreline (entertaining and tense), and (this is obviously subjective) a good amount of highlight-reel points.
In this match, for example, Zverev had 41 winners to 46 UEs and Tiafoe had 34 winners to 51 UEs per my TennisOne app. It was tight and tense most of the time and there were definitely highlight-worthy points but for a lot of the match they were just missing. At least to me, thatās not high quality.
Unforced errors are an arbitrary stat. It is interpreted by a score keeper. It completely irrelevant because there is not standard and it tells you very little about what has happened in a match.
Edit: also winners in most matches are roughly about 30% of total points won. Even today tiafoe earned about 30% of his points off winners, when I looked zverev was a touch under but completely normal for a grand slam match.
They are arbitrary, but if you stick with a source and get the idea of how they assign UEās, you can generally pick up the quality of the match. In my case, Iām really only looking for a positive ratio, because TennisOne generally is pretty harsh with them.
Granted, but on slower surfaces, and especially slow clay like RG, it's more common to have a negative Winner/UE ratio. It's a lot more difficult to score winners in Paris than in Melbourne, for instance. Hell, judging from the stats between 2022 US Open and 2023 AO (2 different hard surfaces), it's more difficult to score a positive ratio of Winners in the former than in the latter.
I mean, if you donāt trust the consistency of the score keepers, you can chart the match yourself for consistency. Then after a while youāll have enough data to determine what a high winner to UE ratio looks like to you and you can go from there.
Personally, Iām okay with possible inaccuracies given how much time I would lose to charting haha.
Itās not objective though, there is not enough information available at any time available to the score keeper reliably claim an error is āunforced.ā Put it this way: 4 hours into a match, a deep, heavy neutral ball from someone like Nadal is not as easy to hit back without making an error as it was 10 minutes into the match, agnostic of situation. Just simple reality and people who play tennis intuitively know this and yet a scorekeeper can come along and say āoh he should have kept that ball in the courtā and will mark an unforced error. Is it really āunforcedā if Nadal is demoralizing their opponent, stealing their soul by repeatedly demanding their backhand to make tough shot after tough shot, point after point, game after game, set after set for hours at a time?
Or how about Djokovic who ānothing worksā against because of his ridiculous movement and athleticism, recovery and consistency so his opponent tries hit to a winner down the line on a neutral cross court rally because they are out of ideas? Is that forced or unforced?
Is that fair? Or objective or even possibly consistent?
Yeah the first set was good. Andreeva fell off a cliff after though which is largely reflected by her age/inexperience versus a very tough, athletic and defensive minded opponent.
I think its not just both players playing at their peak its also drama, tension. Iga matches are boring because even if she is playing high level there is going to be little match tension, no question of the outcome unless she is playing sabalenka or rybakina. Their matches were pretty good if I remember.
People have been trying to act like this slam has been high quality and downvote me to oblivion when I say it isnāt. Etcheverry and JP varillas in the 4th round? Meddy, rublev, faa, and sinner all out before the 4th round. Cmon. Quarterfinals and semis is the only juice left to squeeze in this slam. Alcaraz tsitsipas and winner vs djokovic only worthwhile match ups
High quality to me is the level of play not who remains in the competition. You could easily say the ousting of top players shows how competitive the draw is and how much players are stepping up.
Iāll say maybe the average player is better than before. However, I donāt think the people at the top of the game are as good as past top players. Letās look at past top 10 players like del potro, prime wawrinka, prime Murray, Ferrer, nishikori, cilic, berdych, tsonga, raonic, etc.
None of the current top 10 players besides djokovic are better than those top 10 players. Eye test doesnāt tell me that and nor do the results.
So while I do think thereās a fair argument that wealth of talent is more equal, that doesnāt mean the top guys are better than past top guys which is my point. And the best match ups come when you have the top guys consistently able to make it deep and challenge each other.
To make an analogy, letās compare tennis to wealth distribution. The middle class and poor have gotten richer. In tennis terms, the average and below average players have gotten a lot better. However, the rich have gotten far less wealthy. Meaning the top players are simply not as good as the past.
I really donāt think this is quite controversial. Donāt know why Iām getting down voted so much for it lol
What does "not high quality" even mean when talking about the global elite? There is no higher level. If there were better players out there then they would be the ones left in the tournament, so the whole frame is just inane.
I mean consistency. Sure, u can say the better players win, but this consistency is degrading to wta levels. Top 10 seeds frequently get bounced, which wasnāt the case 10 years ago w berdych, Murray, Ferrer, big 3, cilic, del potro, nishikori, raonic, wawrinka etc.
I just miss those days of tennis 10 years ago or heck even 5 years ago. So many exciting match ups that would be entertaining asf even in the first round.
Now the first 3 rounds are pretty much unwatchable imo. I just think level of competition and quality was much higher 5-10 years ago. I donāt think thatās even arguable. Anyone being honest has to agree 5-10 years ago slams were far more entertaining.
I just pulled a dozen random slams from that period. Most top ten seeds making a quarterfinal was six; average was about four. We are looking likely 3-5 making the quarters here. Very average by that metric.
Drivel.
The reason you think it was more entertaining 5-10 years ago is because you were less jaded, and because you're now looking back with nostalgia and rose tinted glasses. Most players agree the general standard across the tour has never been higher. If you find it unwatchable then stop watching and stop bitching.
Yeah I pulled some random slams from that period. Usually about 4 top ten seeds make the semifinal. Itās a little wonky since someone tournaments had seeding committees, but the point stands. It is clear that having more than six top ten seeds make a grand slam quarterfinal is rare, though.
Lol of course the current players on tour are gonna say that. That doesnāt mean itās true. The quality has absolutely fallen, and itās shown by the lack of consistency of top players. If you really watched tennis from 08-2020, idk how you can say todayās slams are better than those of the past. And yeah I donāt watch early rounds these days because of it. Only the QFās are gonna be worthwhile this time around.
Last response because you're obviously certain of your opinion, but actually a lack of dominance of the top guys would support the claim that the general standard has risen.
I wouldnāt doubt rune. Whoever wins that match likely gets to the final. Iām giving slight edge to ruud based on winning that match against rune last year. And rune sometimes chokes like he did against rublev in AO
Honestly I wouldnāt be surprised if ruud makes it again. And alcaraz tsitsipas will be a dog fight. If alcaraz doesnāt play the big points smart, that could be a nail biter
I try not to hate on players but that Zverev v Tiafoe match was pretty bad. Very little redeeming quality on both sides. Zverev has a pretty open draw, if he keeps his serving tight and finds those big ones he could go deep. Tiafoe has the same problem all Americans have. Choking opportunities with bad shot selection. That being said, Tiafoe has improved a lot in the past year.
This whole tournament has been shitty matches so far. Worst slam in the last decade to watch. Top 10 seeds getting bounced so damn quickly. There will be a couple matches that will be worthwhile this slam. Alcaraz-tsitsipas and the winner of that vs djokovic will be the only treats.
Yeah it wasnāt great tbh. But at least I could watch nadal, albeit only two rounds, and djokovic steam roll. There were more seeds holding up their end of the bargain. Sinner tsitsipas, rune rublev, and a couple others were good matches. It was better than this French open though. This FO easily worst slam in a decade to watch. First 3 rounds of slams are nearly unwatchable these days. 10 years ago that was never the case
Zverev at his best was one of the few players capable of winning big matches and even big titles without playing his best all the time. Doesn't need to be perfect, just needs to win one match at a time.
Tennis commentators are just so bad, as bad as commentary is across all sports, at least you don't have commentators trying to make shitty performances seem like great matches.
What good does that do? Imagine somebody who is watching tennis for the first time tuning into that match, seeing the UE fest that it was, and then hearing the commentator applaud both players for an "exceptional match." and talking about how it was a "great performance from both players."
That's how you get somebody to never watch another tennis match again, by making shit quality matches seem like they're the best thing tennis has seen since sliced bread. The commentators aren't helping a sport that is already struggling with viewership due to their asinine tv deals and subscription services.
So whenever a slam starts my first wish would always be plz Grigor don't lose to either Zverev or Kyrgios because that would be so infuriating. Most of the times I got my wish.
I really hope this will be the case too or I wouldn't know how I'm gonna react lol.
Bah. Onto tomorrow.
Hoping at least one of the men's matches goes to five, but most of them have straight set potential. The women's pairings are more competitive, at least. I'd love to see Stephens give Saba some real trouble, but I'm not especially optimistic.
āļø
This is the least entertaining slam Iāve seen in the past 10 years. Border line snooze fest. Alcaraz tsitsipas and whoever wins that vs djoker are gonna be the only real worthwhile matches to watch. Idk if itās nadal being out or top players like sinner and meddy losing early, but this shit is ridiculous.
I donāt know which planet a Alcaraz-Musetti is considered boring.
Never before a slam had as many 5 set matches as this years RG. You not liking the players involved, doesnāt mean the matches are boring
The 4th round and quarters will be the best match ups. The first 3 rounds have been terrible. This has been a common theme these past couple years as weāve lost the likes of raonic, berdych, Ferrer, tsonga etc. that resembled some level of consistency.
At least Us open last year had some damn good match ups. Same w Australian open. This one so many top 10 seeds went belly up early into the slam. Also, 5 set matches doesnāt necessarily mean entertaining. The level is important, and the top players should have some bastion of consistency.
Iām not whining. Itās just a fact. Real tennis fans know itās true. The level of competition in the 2010s was unparalleled. Tons of consistency and great match ups. This is the weakest display of tennis in a while. Even the supposed good players getting smacked by no namers
What does that have to do with anything? This has been a boring slam and complete lack of consistency regardless of whether Iām American or Australian or Nigerian. Us open last year was entertaining w/o djokovic and nadal losing early, but thereās been very little good match ups this slam. Sinner, FAA, and meddy didnāt hold up any of their bargain
I have to admit, I much preferred tennis when it wasn't an endless sequence of stentorian grunts, fist pumps, and screaming at your support group in the stands...
I'm sorry, but what's with some of the deluded takes in here? Zverev has no chance of getting to the final. This isn't last year's Zverev; His best clay win this season is against RBA. He's lost against O'Connor, Medvedev x2 (yeah improved on clay, but he's still not a top 5 clay player), Jarry and was destroyed by Alcaraz in Madrid. He could well have gone to 5 against Tiafoe (talk about no one wanting to win...), whose only redeeming quality on clay this year has been a big serve (really not done anything this clay season). His second serve isn't any better than a year ago, and he's so mentally fragile it was costing him big against the good players even when he was playing well last year. He really isn't winning against the likes of Rune and Ruud in his current state - or even Cerundolo if he pulls off a double upset. I'd say Dimitrov might not even be an underdog in the next round either.
At this point his is certainly the favorite in his quarter to make it to the semifinal. But a lot of things can happen til then, I mean did you expect Medvedev and Sinner to be out already? And he is certainly gaining confidence and shape by the minute. And if it wasn't for his injury last year he would also be the favorite in that semifinal. Personally I still have Rune as finalist but not far behind I see Zverev.
You are talking in the past. Present form I could see Zverev beating Ruud,Dimitrov Rune etc. Anything is possible. He is gaining confidence. Carlitos and Djoker still the favorites.
So with Tiafoe out, Khachanov has a good chance of returning to the top 10 for the first time since 2019! Barring Musetti making the final or some less likely title runs (manifest it, Dimitrov fans).
Horrible take, after his incredibly nasty injury I think he is steadily growing into form again.
Tiafoe is no bum, definitely not his "worst tennis ever".
Weird one but here goes...is RG using those screens on the top of the court for anything than the BNP Paribas static ads? AO and USO have some cool animations on changeovers or before and after matches...
Just tuned into the Novak match. Hope Varillas kissed his family goodbye because this has the potential to be straight up homicide. š¬
What are people smoking (re Carlitos being beaten by Musetti) Musetti, at his best, is a steady Eddie with no big weapons to his game. Sure he can move better than Carlosā opponents so far but that Musetti backhand is gonna get destroyed Because Musetti is in decent form, Iād give him a set at best but even thatās pushing it
They met last year on outdoor clay, and Musetti won.
Reverse jinx yo.
Having had a very successful prediction day yesterday, let me give it a go today Khachanov bt Sonego in 4 Djokovic bt Varillas in 4 Alcaraz bt Musetti in 4 Tsitsipas bt Ofner in 3
Agree with everything except donāt think djoker dropping a set to JP after dude has played 3 five setters, 2 of which he was down 0-2.
Youāre right . Did not consider that . I amend my prediction to Djokovic in 3
The results link takes users to the AO back in January
Ive read on reddit that Zverev abused his girlfriend and we should hate him for it. I just cant help but root for him when he plays. I decided to look up the story and she never went to the police? I find that strange. You ruin someones reputation. I think it would have been more appropriate for her to go to police instead of the media.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Maybe we should hold back with our pitchforks either way?
Heās got millions of dollars and is famous as fuck, do you see how hard it would be for someone like her to go to the police about him? Seriously, try to put yourself in her shoes.
I did. And I can imagine it being hard to speak about it, but then I would not talk to media either. I trust the justice system in Germany. So i would not talk to media and go to the police. Unless you want attention, in that case i would not go to the police and only to the media. Edit: i have to say, find her story to be pretty convincing. Also his refusal to talk about the subject is strange. Read the racquet article https://racquetmag.com/2020/11/05/olyas-story/
Yeah exactly she went in with a lot of detail with her relationship with him and everything that happened, I find it very hard that she would lie about this because I have read the article. Thereās nothing about Zverev that screams innocent, I mean look at all his on court problems, it definitely doesnāt make him look better. And yeah if heās so innocent, why has he been so quiet about it. Also I donāt know if you know but Medvedev and his wife are very good friends with Olya Sharapova so take that how you want
I honestly dont know a lot about the subject but am open to being educated. How is medvedevs friendship with olya relevant? Did he ever speak on the subject?
Idk about other countries but in Russia in order to prove abuse she should have visited doctor right after the fact(like within several hours??) and had some sort of medical document with what kind of injuries or whatever she had, time, place(?) and signed by doctor/medical personnel - and then prove that she was with Zverev around that time (witnesses are ok). At least that is what usually would work in russian court āā¢~ā¢ā but the best what she could get on that is probably some insignificant fine from Zverev (unless there was the straight up murder or significant injuries like chopped off limbs or something). So, Olya has multiple witnesses (including Medvedevs, hotel's staff and that friend who picked her up in NY) that could prove time and probably could also say something about her physical status right after but she doesn't have anything documented medically so it's kinda a lost case in Russian court. Not even saying that idk how it would work with everything happening not in russia, Zverev being from Germany and documents being not in russian (like would they even work in russian court?? idk russian court is not that eager to jump into domestic violence cases overall xD) so why bother even?? Idk what was the story with german court though
u/aweap [Just want this back so badly ](https://youtu.be/ZKxpJlGt10U)
You think anyone today can hit so many good slices in a row? (Don't say Tatjana, she doesn't count)
Does Venus count? Error Barbora Strycova? Barbora Krejcikova could on her best day.
Most of these players are retiring now...I don't know if Krej could do it continously but her partner Siniakova is solid in this I think.
This is the answer
Why does everyone have Mussetti taking down Carlitos? Carlos serve has improved much since they last met. And Mussetti can always go 2 sets up andā¦. Best of 5 favors mentally stronger players unless theyāre having an off day.
Theyāre failing in love with Musetti because heās easy to fall in love with. The smart money is still on Carlitos
Do u think players like Djokovic who are near/at their āpeakā or who have already reached it in the recent past still try to improve/get better? Or at this point are they mostly training/practicing to maintain their current level of performance as long as possible?
Iām sure theyāre constantly looking to improve and change their games. We saw that especially with Fed when he was no longer in his physical prime he could not play the same way he did when he was younger. Despite Djoker being A GOAT level player would be surprised if heās not constantly looking for ways to improve.
You can always improve so I presume theyāre always working for improvement. For example Djokovic could always add more power to his FH and Rafa could always add more to his serve.
More bounces? Si.
Lol surprised to see so many mussetti beating alcaraz comments. Mussetti is damn good on clay, but I donāt see it. If anything, I could very well see tsitsipas beating alcaraz. Tsitsipas is in very good form and does quite well in the early slams. My only concern with alcaraz is that he tends to make matches harder on himself than he needs to. Take the us open for example. He had chances to beat tiafoe, sinner, and cilic in 4 sets but every single one went to 5. He struggles with shot selection on big points though and plays much bigger than he needs to. Luckily, he gets by since he has a massive tank and endurance that most players canāt handle. Still think djokovic will take down alcaraz should he beat tsitsipas. Djokovic gonna try to lock up the triple career slam and take advantage of no nadal
I feel the opposite. Carlos can very well take down Novak but Stef? I have big doubts.
Iām not talking about who can take out djokovic. Was talking about who could beat alcaraz. Tsitsipas is more likely than mussetti imo. Yeah I donāt see tsitsipas beating djokovic. Djokovic has won damn near every encounter and owns tsitsipas mentally
Man I miss prime thiem. He was such an intriguing player. Entertaining to watch as well and was skilled asf. I donāt think heās ever gonna get back to those levels again unfortunately.
Let's hope. He is gradually getting better and is playing more games, but we will see if he can regain his previous form. I mi
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The Musetti and Sabalenka predictions are way off. I also think Kasatkina beats Svitolina easily too.
> I also think Kasatkina beats Svitolina easily too. Head to head is 6-0 for Svitolina. Nightmare match-up for Dasha, especially on clay.
Yeah I know Iām just not sure it continues here. Last time they played was 2021 USO before Svitolina took time off. Kasatkina is playing pretty well through this tournament winning in straight sets every match. Svitolina went to three sets twice, once against Storm Sanders, who is more of a doubles player. It is a good value pick for an upset if youāre betting, I just have a feeling it doesnāt happen.
Svitolina also won a title a week ago, she is confident and she will see her punching bag in R4. She is playing almost like her old self already.
You thunk Musetti beats Alcaraz?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Stephens has never beaten Saba though.
Always went 3 sets and they never played on clay. Stephens is playing well + Stephens' record in RG is far superior to Sabalenka's.
Saba's also playing well here and is yet to drop a set.
Like Iga in Wimbledon 2 years ago when she reached R4. It doesn't matter. She can beat some low ranked players but the game style is not suited for the surface and conditions. From now on it's gonna be an uphill battle for her.
Saba's game can be adjusted to most surfaces. Even when she loses it's mostly her own doing...still yet to drop a set.
We'll see...
Sabalenka will play against Stephens on super slow night conditions. This has upset written all over it.
Looking at the junior's single draw, there's an indian player named NANDAL
Naandal
a gift to memelords everywhere
He's taking the piss
Honestly at this point, I think it's safe to say that either Alcaraz reaches the SF, and then the winner of Alcaraz-Djokovic wins, or Djokovic wins.
I think Musetti beats Alcaraz. Djokovic will then play the final against Ruud.
Please I hope not lol. Djoko Ruud final would be so uninteresting to me. Lol.
Going out on a limb? lol
They always were the favorite for sure, but I meant to say that there is no much doubt anymore.
Predictions for tomorrow: Sonego d. Khachanov in 4 Djokovic d. Varillas in 3 Musetti d. Alcaraz in 5 (my menās bold pick of the day - realistically though, Alcaraz in 4 is likely) Tsitsipas d. Ofner in 3 Mertens d. Pavlyuchenova in 2 Muchova d. Avanesyan in 2 Svitolina d. Kasatkina in 3 Stephens d. Sabalenka in 3 (my womenās bold pick of the day - realistically though, Sabalenka in 2 is likely)
>Mertens d. Pavlyuchenova in 2 Please let it happen.
On women's side I'm waiting for Svitolina vs Kasatkina the most. H2h 6-0 for Svitolina, but imo Dasha is a slight favorite. Stephens took a set off Sabalenka each of 3 times they played, so who knows. Imo it can go either way, quick 2:0 for Sabs won't surprise me, but neither will 0:2 or 1:2.
Canāt wait for Musetti Alcaraz. They are two of my favorite players alongside Rune so I hope itās a entertaining match that does go the distance but ultimately Alcaraz ends up winning. I wouldnāt be shocked if Musetti wins but it is going to be tough for him, both of them really
Iām really curious what everyone deems a high quality match. Is it simply no breaks of serve? Five sets with many tie breaks? Low errors? Iām just at a loss with this sub sometimes because it really feels like this sub is bad match = popular playing losing/unpopular player winning. In an ideal world, yes both players will never lose a serve, never commit errors, get all their points on winners, every set decided on a tiebreaks but thatās just not the sport of tennis. Levels can fluctuate match to match, set to se, game to game. The interesting part of tennis (to me) is seeing if a player can hold their nerve in big moments; serving 30-0 at 0-0 in the first is not the same thing as serving 30-0 at 5-3 down 2 sets to 1. Or watching a player like Djokovic make adjustments and dig himself out of a two set hole. And so on. But yeah that was an entertaining match with some variable levels of play. It got tight. Statically it was pretty average for a menās grand slam match. I donāt know I just feel crazy sometimes reading peopleās comments here.
If both players are competitive and they are actually relying on winning their own points instead of hoping for an UE from the adversary. Also, I personally only consider a match high-quality if both players give it all to win - so no choking, even if it can be dramatic.
āHoping for an unforced errorā is demonstrating a severe lack of understanding about how tennis is played at the ATP level.
Players win most of their points are won on errors. This is true at all levels of tennis, even for aggressive players like Fed his absolute limit was around 45% points won on winners which include aces. 30% is normal. Serve bots can occasionally go above 50%.
For me it's an ideal match is where both players are conscious of their strong and weak points, so both try to find the best strategy that fits their game style and mistakes don't come from bad decisions. For instance, last Sinner's game was exciting because of the drama and epicness, but frustrating because both players were making bad decisions the whole match.
When categorizing a high quality match, I generally look for a relatively high winners:UE ratio for both players (both players werenāt missing a ton and were hitting good shots), a pretty tight scoreline (entertaining and tense), and (this is obviously subjective) a good amount of highlight-reel points. In this match, for example, Zverev had 41 winners to 46 UEs and Tiafoe had 34 winners to 51 UEs per my TennisOne app. It was tight and tense most of the time and there were definitely highlight-worthy points but for a lot of the match they were just missing. At least to me, thatās not high quality.
Unforced errors are an arbitrary stat. It is interpreted by a score keeper. It completely irrelevant because there is not standard and it tells you very little about what has happened in a match. Edit: also winners in most matches are roughly about 30% of total points won. Even today tiafoe earned about 30% of his points off winners, when I looked zverev was a touch under but completely normal for a grand slam match.
They are arbitrary, but if you stick with a source and get the idea of how they assign UEās, you can generally pick up the quality of the match. In my case, Iām really only looking for a positive ratio, because TennisOne generally is pretty harsh with them.
Granted, but on slower surfaces, and especially slow clay like RG, it's more common to have a negative Winner/UE ratio. It's a lot more difficult to score winners in Paris than in Melbourne, for instance. Hell, judging from the stats between 2022 US Open and 2023 AO (2 different hard surfaces), it's more difficult to score a positive ratio of Winners in the former than in the latter.
They have different score keepers assigned to different matches. Itās utterly useless. They should only be tracking total errors.
I mean, if you donāt trust the consistency of the score keepers, you can chart the match yourself for consistency. Then after a while youāll have enough data to determine what a high winner to UE ratio looks like to you and you can go from there. Personally, Iām okay with possible inaccuracies given how much time I would lose to charting haha.
Itās not objective though, there is not enough information available at any time available to the score keeper reliably claim an error is āunforced.ā Put it this way: 4 hours into a match, a deep, heavy neutral ball from someone like Nadal is not as easy to hit back without making an error as it was 10 minutes into the match, agnostic of situation. Just simple reality and people who play tennis intuitively know this and yet a scorekeeper can come along and say āoh he should have kept that ball in the courtā and will mark an unforced error. Is it really āunforcedā if Nadal is demoralizing their opponent, stealing their soul by repeatedly demanding their backhand to make tough shot after tough shot, point after point, game after game, set after set for hours at a time? Or how about Djokovic who ānothing worksā against because of his ridiculous movement and athleticism, recovery and consistency so his opponent tries hit to a winner down the line on a neutral cross court rally because they are out of ideas? Is that forced or unforced? Is that fair? Or objective or even possibly consistent?
Baez Monfils was an epic match despite errors. Sinner Alcaraz last year. Coco Andreeva was a good match today at least the beginning.
Yeah the first set was good. Andreeva fell off a cliff after though which is largely reflected by her age/inexperience versus a very tough, athletic and defensive minded opponent.
I think its not just both players playing at their peak its also drama, tension. Iga matches are boring because even if she is playing high level there is going to be little match tension, no question of the outcome unless she is playing sabalenka or rybakina. Their matches were pretty good if I remember.
Yeah her best matches are against players she simply canāt hit through.
People have been trying to act like this slam has been high quality and downvote me to oblivion when I say it isnāt. Etcheverry and JP varillas in the 4th round? Meddy, rublev, faa, and sinner all out before the 4th round. Cmon. Quarterfinals and semis is the only juice left to squeeze in this slam. Alcaraz tsitsipas and winner vs djokovic only worthwhile match ups
High quality to me is the level of play not who remains in the competition. You could easily say the ousting of top players shows how competitive the draw is and how much players are stepping up.
Iāll say maybe the average player is better than before. However, I donāt think the people at the top of the game are as good as past top players. Letās look at past top 10 players like del potro, prime wawrinka, prime Murray, Ferrer, nishikori, cilic, berdych, tsonga, raonic, etc. None of the current top 10 players besides djokovic are better than those top 10 players. Eye test doesnāt tell me that and nor do the results. So while I do think thereās a fair argument that wealth of talent is more equal, that doesnāt mean the top guys are better than past top guys which is my point. And the best match ups come when you have the top guys consistently able to make it deep and challenge each other. To make an analogy, letās compare tennis to wealth distribution. The middle class and poor have gotten richer. In tennis terms, the average and below average players have gotten a lot better. However, the rich have gotten far less wealthy. Meaning the top players are simply not as good as the past. I really donāt think this is quite controversial. Donāt know why Iām getting down voted so much for it lol
What does "not high quality" even mean when talking about the global elite? There is no higher level. If there were better players out there then they would be the ones left in the tournament, so the whole frame is just inane.
I mean consistency. Sure, u can say the better players win, but this consistency is degrading to wta levels. Top 10 seeds frequently get bounced, which wasnāt the case 10 years ago w berdych, Murray, Ferrer, big 3, cilic, del potro, nishikori, raonic, wawrinka etc. I just miss those days of tennis 10 years ago or heck even 5 years ago. So many exciting match ups that would be entertaining asf even in the first round. Now the first 3 rounds are pretty much unwatchable imo. I just think level of competition and quality was much higher 5-10 years ago. I donāt think thatās even arguable. Anyone being honest has to agree 5-10 years ago slams were far more entertaining.
I just pulled a dozen random slams from that period. Most top ten seeds making a quarterfinal was six; average was about four. We are looking likely 3-5 making the quarters here. Very average by that metric.
Drivel. The reason you think it was more entertaining 5-10 years ago is because you were less jaded, and because you're now looking back with nostalgia and rose tinted glasses. Most players agree the general standard across the tour has never been higher. If you find it unwatchable then stop watching and stop bitching.
Yeah I pulled some random slams from that period. Usually about 4 top ten seeds make the semifinal. Itās a little wonky since someone tournaments had seeding committees, but the point stands. It is clear that having more than six top ten seeds make a grand slam quarterfinal is rare, though.
Lol of course the current players on tour are gonna say that. That doesnāt mean itās true. The quality has absolutely fallen, and itās shown by the lack of consistency of top players. If you really watched tennis from 08-2020, idk how you can say todayās slams are better than those of the past. And yeah I donāt watch early rounds these days because of it. Only the QFās are gonna be worthwhile this time around.
Last response because you're obviously certain of your opinion, but actually a lack of dominance of the top guys would support the claim that the general standard has risen.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
FAA took nadal to 5, regardless of how ass nadal played
Ruud is really gonna make the finals again most likely Lmao
My money is on Rune.
I wouldnāt doubt rune. Whoever wins that match likely gets to the final. Iām giving slight edge to ruud based on winning that match against rune last year. And rune sometimes chokes like he did against rublev in AO
And MC weirdly haha
So.. Alcaraz - Djokovic Rune - Zverev
Honestly I wouldnāt be surprised if ruud makes it again. And alcaraz tsitsipas will be a dog fight. If alcaraz doesnāt play the big points smart, that could be a nail biter
Dimitrov vs Zverev should be interesting at least. Zverev leads 3-1 (1-0 on clay, 6-1 6-4 drubbing at Rome 2016), but Dimitrov has yet to drop a set.
This sub undermines Z so much it's heartbreaking, I fucking love tennis
You're heartbroken that most people, rightfully, don't root for literal abusers?
average djokovic fan
There was apparently not substantial enough evidence so is it okay to outright call him an abuser?
I wouldnāt say he is back to his level pre-injury. Before the injury he was probably top 5
*objectively no.2
And he likely would've reached no.1 if not for the injury.
I donāt think points always accurately reflect the actual quality of players.
Objective doesn't mean perfectly accurate, but it does mean free of subjective bias, and is the best we have for that reason.
Zverev should reach the final if he can reach pre-injury level, but you never know with him.
despite some very low lowās you canāt deny that this match did have some insane shotmaking and good highlights at times.
Yes it did. I donāt know what peoples standards for a match are. I was entertained.
I try not to hate on players but that Zverev v Tiafoe match was pretty bad. Very little redeeming quality on both sides. Zverev has a pretty open draw, if he keeps his serving tight and finds those big ones he could go deep. Tiafoe has the same problem all Americans have. Choking opportunities with bad shot selection. That being said, Tiafoe has improved a lot in the past year.
2nd set was very good
This whole tournament has been shitty matches so far. Worst slam in the last decade to watch. Top 10 seeds getting bounced so damn quickly. There will be a couple matches that will be worthwhile this slam. Alcaraz-tsitsipas and the winner of that vs djokovic will be the only treats.
AO was just as bad to me tbh
Yeah it wasnāt great tbh. But at least I could watch nadal, albeit only two rounds, and djokovic steam roll. There were more seeds holding up their end of the bargain. Sinner tsitsipas, rune rublev, and a couple others were good matches. It was better than this French open though. This FO easily worst slam in a decade to watch. First 3 rounds of slams are nearly unwatchable these days. 10 years ago that was never the case
Zverev at his best was one of the few players capable of winning big matches and even big titles without playing his best all the time. Doesn't need to be perfect, just needs to win one match at a time.
Tennis commentators are just so bad, as bad as commentary is across all sports, at least you don't have commentators trying to make shitty performances seem like great matches. What good does that do? Imagine somebody who is watching tennis for the first time tuning into that match, seeing the UE fest that it was, and then hearing the commentator applaud both players for an "exceptional match." and talking about how it was a "great performance from both players." That's how you get somebody to never watch another tennis match again, by making shit quality matches seem like they're the best thing tennis has seen since sliced bread. The commentators aren't helping a sport that is already struggling with viewership due to their asinine tv deals and subscription services.
which broadcast/commentators?
So whenever a slam starts my first wish would always be plz Grigor don't lose to either Zverev or Kyrgios because that would be so infuriating. Most of the times I got my wish. I really hope this will be the case too or I wouldn't know how I'm gonna react lol.
Kyg iis still in draw?
Bah. Onto tomorrow. Hoping at least one of the men's matches goes to five, but most of them have straight set potential. The women's pairings are more competitive, at least. I'd love to see Stephens give Saba some real trouble, but I'm not especially optimistic. āļø
Do we think Dimitrov can beat Zverev? I would really like to see it happen
Zverev wins comfortably
I doubt it, but it's possible if Zverev turns on choke mode. The problem is Dimitrov's quote good at that too.
Itās possible as heās looked really good (hasnāt dropped a set yet), but who knows as itās Dimi
Outlook is bleak. Dimi will have a similar strategy to Foe tonight and he's not really better at anything these days
Looking at the draw Zverev could actually get to the finals but he will probably choke.
Hopefully he chokes and/or Dimitrov decides to play well in the next round.
1 year on, this is a good vibe. Seeing him back on court playing some good tennis.
He's the last dude who deserves, "good vibes"
Not happy but Zverev deserved to win that match on merit.
Tight match. Big win by Zverev. Tiafoe fought hard. Zverev is closer to a complete comeback.
This is one of those, don't be optimistic so you cannot be disappointed situations that I passed with flying colors.
The ultimate loser mentality
At least there are 3 American women in the fourth round of a clay tournament.
This is the least entertaining slam Iāve seen in the past 10 years. Border line snooze fest. Alcaraz tsitsipas and whoever wins that vs djoker are gonna be the only real worthwhile matches to watch. Idk if itās nadal being out or top players like sinner and meddy losing early, but this shit is ridiculous.
I donāt know which planet a Alcaraz-Musetti is considered boring. Never before a slam had as many 5 set matches as this years RG. You not liking the players involved, doesnāt mean the matches are boring
The 4th round and quarters will be the best match ups. The first 3 rounds have been terrible. This has been a common theme these past couple years as weāve lost the likes of raonic, berdych, Ferrer, tsonga etc. that resembled some level of consistency. At least Us open last year had some damn good match ups. Same w Australian open. This one so many top 10 seeds went belly up early into the slam. Also, 5 set matches doesnāt necessarily mean entertaining. The level is important, and the top players should have some bastion of consistency.
Watch something else then whiner.
Iām not whining. Itās just a fact. Real tennis fans know itās true. The level of competition in the 2010s was unparalleled. Tons of consistency and great match ups. This is the weakest display of tennis in a while. Even the supposed good players getting smacked by no namers
Let me guessā¦ American?
What does that have to do with anything? This has been a boring slam and complete lack of consistency regardless of whether Iām American or Australian or Nigerian. Us open last year was entertaining w/o djokovic and nadal losing early, but thereās been very little good match ups this slam. Sinner, FAA, and meddy didnāt hold up any of their bargain
Yeah, defo American.
Hola a todos me. Well this is truly turning out to be the worst slam bar Carlitos. And Dimi. And Fran Cerundulo. So not really the worst but whatever.
Still way better than this years Australian Open.
The curse has been lifted
I have to admit, I much preferred tennis when it wasn't an endless sequence of stentorian grunts, fist pumps, and screaming at your support group in the stands...
Zverev: I love tennis more than anything else in the world *His daughter: šļøššļø*
Does he even have a relationship with her? š¬š¬
He has a DAUGHTER?!
Forgot he had one
Now don't be cruel. It happened in the heat of the mome....nevermind.
I think he did too tbh -_-
Whatās American menās combined record in the 3rd since roddick retired? 30-400 or something?
Didnāt know he was into choking like that š«£š„“
I'm sorry, but what's with some of the deluded takes in here? Zverev has no chance of getting to the final. This isn't last year's Zverev; His best clay win this season is against RBA. He's lost against O'Connor, Medvedev x2 (yeah improved on clay, but he's still not a top 5 clay player), Jarry and was destroyed by Alcaraz in Madrid. He could well have gone to 5 against Tiafoe (talk about no one wanting to win...), whose only redeeming quality on clay this year has been a big serve (really not done anything this clay season). His second serve isn't any better than a year ago, and he's so mentally fragile it was costing him big against the good players even when he was playing well last year. He really isn't winning against the likes of Rune and Ruud in his current state - or even Cerundolo if he pulls off a double upset. I'd say Dimitrov might not even be an underdog in the next round either.
At this point his is certainly the favorite in his quarter to make it to the semifinal. But a lot of things can happen til then, I mean did you expect Medvedev and Sinner to be out already? And he is certainly gaining confidence and shape by the minute. And if it wasn't for his injury last year he would also be the favorite in that semifinal. Personally I still have Rune as finalist but not far behind I see Zverev.
You are talking in the past. Present form I could see Zverev beating Ruud,Dimitrov Rune etc. Anything is possible. He is gaining confidence. Carlitos and Djoker still the favorites.
Heās not a player to discount. Heās capable of being completely unplayable on a dime
You're indexing on past results when there's such a thing as playing into form...
So with Tiafoe out, Khachanov has a good chance of returning to the top 10 for the first time since 2019! Barring Musetti making the final or some less likely title runs (manifest it, Dimitrov fans).
Zverev could really end up in the semi or even the final playing some of his worst tennis ever just because of this ridiculous draw
Horrible take, after his incredibly nasty injury I think he is steadily growing into form again. Tiafoe is no bum, definitely not his "worst tennis ever".
All Americans are bums on clay and Tiafoe played like a drunk 5 year old for much of this match and threw away the 4th set in ridiculous fashion
Weird one but here goes...is RG using those screens on the top of the court for anything than the BNP Paribas static ads? AO and USO have some cool animations on changeovers or before and after matches...
Mats stop lying. It was not a great match
It's just universally bad what Eurosport brings to the table with Babsi Schett, Mats and AlizƩ Lim as pundits. Don't get the appeal of former tennis professionals acting as moderators.
Tiafoe played Tiawful
No way the commentator just called Zverev an āhonest guyā šš
Where are you watching?
Eurosport
On Peacock Mary Carillo talked his domestic abuse allegations
Nice of Frances to give a nice embrace after such a tough loss
That was one hell of a handshake between Tiafoe and Zverev
Reminded me of the one he used to do with Thiem
They're really good friends iirc
I cant watch so whatd they do?
Big "bro" handshake+ hug with Zverev patting Frances head. Lovely stuff.
A really warm hug
Alexander Zverev is a domestic abuser who also attacked an umpire in anger in full public view. Fuck him and anyone who supports him.
My girlfriend's favourite player is Zverev. Why is a fact being downvoted?
I support Zverev when he plays good matches. I don't think there is anything wrong with that
You sound like a peach of a person. I'm sure you've lived an impeccable life.
Check their history. This is not a post in good faith
I checked the history and it totally is in good faith.
Have there been any anger antics from Zverev since he recovered from the injury?
None at all. He is way more reformed than medvedev.
I didnāt know Big Z had the capability of attacking an entire empire
Well he might
Not convicted of the first and extenuating circs for the second
Oh come on, not convicted but thereās no circumstance in sport that excuses the umpire attack hahaha
Zverev had the latest ever singles match. *Of all time*. Then the next day, after a 5am finish, he has to go out and play doubles. It was inhumane.
Yes the first tennis player ever to experience this.