2018 French Open

[Vegas]

Sloane is rolling through Keys in the semis. Good for her.

 

[Old Lion]

Nice predictions, then!

I can't remember the last time I got the Final Four right.

I have 3 of the 4 mens too.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

I sincerely hope Stephens beats Halep.

 

[Hs0022]

French open fast turning into a dud as Rafa crawls his way to another title

 

[desert heat]

French open fast turning into a dud as Rafa crawls his way to another title

winning an 11th french open is not crawling. its history in the making. an accomplishment that never gets replicated. nadal is poetry on clay like federer is on grass. appreciate it.

 

[bksballer89]

French open fast turning into a dud as Rafa crawls his way to another title

Thiem should win a set tomorrow IMO

 

[bksballer89]

As an American, I wanted Sloane to win but I'm not mad at Halep winning because I'm a big fan of her coach Darren Cahill

 

[nuraman00]

There have been several great tiebreakers in this year's French Open.

That was a good one between Thiem and Cecchinato. 18 minutes.

The one between Djokovic and Cecchinato was also good. That one was 21 minutes I think.

I hadn't watched a Womens Finals live since 2011, but I got up at 6am for this one. I have been watching them on the DVR, for the following years. This was a pretty good match.

Nice drama, with leads exchanged.

Congrats to Halep.

I think 2014 was the last time I saw a Men's Final live. I'll watch tomorrow's live.

Let's see what Thiem can do.

 

[nuraman00]

Question. During the broadcast, Mary Carillo repeated that Serena was not Stephens' idol, and Stephens has tried to make that clear. Stephens has said that just because they are both black, it doesn't mean that Serena was her idol.

Serena Williams and Sloane Stephens: ‘Idol’ Misrepresentation

So I was wondering who were role models were.

Ok, wiki says Kim Clijsters and her grandfather.

Pretty cool.

I hope to learn more about her grandfather, and his influence, during future broadcasts.

Sloane Stephens - Wikipedia

 

[nuraman00]

Old story, but it always makes me laugh. When Annacone was coaching Stephens, he didn't know how to use Wi Fi. So he racked up a $2000 data bill at the Australian Open.

French Open diary: Paul Annacone's ridiculous cellphone skills - Firstpost

 

[nuraman00]

I have 3 of the 4 mens too.

I got the Womens winner right. I had Halep over Wozniacki in 3, before the tourney started.

I had a Nadal vs. Nishikori Finals on the Mens side. I said Nishikori would upset Thiem in 4. It was the other way around.

Oh well, I wanted to be bold. It seems that Nishikori was terrible in the first 2 sets.

 

[nuraman00]

It is really frustrating watching Thiem miss so many first serves.

@Old Lion should be distressed at his TV (since he likes good serving).

Nadal takes the first set, after a pair of breaks were exchanged early in the 1st. Nadal broke at 5-4 to take the first.

Thiem was serving at about 46% in the first set.

Still, he is doing a lot of good things. He is hitting quick wide shots.

Missing so many first serves is harmful, though.

 

[nuraman00]

winning an 11th french open is not crawling. its history in the making. an accomplishment that never gets replicated. nadal is poetry on clay like federer is on grass. appreciate it.

I like Federer on hard courts, at the Australian Open, more.

14 SFs, better return game, and he can show more variety there. He can play both the baseline, or come forward.

And he has more time to hit great returns.

I liked Federer on grass more from 2001 - 2004, I think. After that, I liked him on hard courts more.

 

[desert heat]

I like Federer on hard courts, at the Australian Open, more.

14 SFs, better return game, and he can show more variety there. He can play both the baseline, or come forward.

And he has more time to hit great returns.

I liked Federer on grass more from 2001 - 2004, I think. After that, I liked him on hard courts more.

he's won more wimbledons than any other slam, with wimbledon up next. his big, all court game is well suited to grass, but he plays well on all surfaces.

 

[Hs0022]

Thiem should win a set tomorrow IMO

Really!! Tell me more!!

 

[nuraman00]

he's won more wimbledons than any other slam, with wimbledon up next. his big, all court game is well suited to grass, but he plays well on all surfaces.

Yeah, but I don't just look at wins. I look at how he's played matches in other rounds as well. And his overall game. I think he doesn't return and break as well on grass, as that surface isn't conducive to it.

For example, he was in trouble in the 1st round against Alejandro Falla in 2010, losing the first 2 sets, because he had trouble breaking him. Only broke him once between the first 2 sets.

Then there was the Tsonga match in 2011, where he forced only 1 break point the entire 5 set match.

Then the Berdych match in 2010, where he only broke him once.

Meanwhile, on other surfaces, such as the Australian Open, Federer breaks those big servers most of the time. And he needs tiebreakers less.

I also think in the early 2000s, Federer came to the net a lot more on grass. That changed at some point, I think 2004 or 2005.

When he played Sampras in 2001, during the final game of the match, Federer hit 3 great returns that Sampras couldn't touch, to help get the break.

Meanwhile, on hard courts, he can show more of his strategy. He can either return a short ball, draw in his opponent, and pass them. Or due to the slightly slower speed compared to grass, he has more time to come to the net and end points there, without the danger of getting passed. I think he's been doing that more the past few years. I don't have hard data which shows how many net approaches he had per year on hard courts, so I don't know if it's a real trend or not.

There was even a clip on ESPN last year where Federer said grass wasn't his best surface, lol. The link doesn't work anymore.

I also didn't like the match vs. Nadal in 2008, because he only broke Nadal once the entire 5 sets.

In the Cilic match in 2016, he lost the first 2 sets because he didn't break Cilic.

So to me, there's too many of these matches, whether it's vs. Falla, Berdych, Cilic, Tsonga, where he either doesn't break them, or has multiple sets where he doesn't break them.

So that's why I don't look at his wins, but how he plays there. It's about the journey. Ever since the mid to late 2000s, he's had too many matches for me where he gets in trouble because he can't break.

Whereas on hard courts, he can get into a return game and make the opponent work. He won the 2007 AO without dropping a set, and in 2018, didn't drop a set until the Finals.

Ok, here are some stats.

In the 2007 AO, he converted 41/76 break points, for 53.9%. He went 7/7 against Roddick! 41 over 7 matches averages out to 5.86 converted per match.

At the 2017 Wimbledon, he went 28/66, 42%. That averages out to 4 converted per match.

At the 2018 AO, he went 29/74, 39%. That averages out to 4.14 converted per match.

Ok, that's still a pretty good amount converted at the 2017 Wimbledon. But as shown at the two AO examples, he generated even more chances there. That's what I like seeing. It gives him a better chance to win a set, and not having it rely on a tiebreak.

 

[nuraman00]

I thought Thiem did a lot of good things. He could hit shots quickly and make Nadal run.

He needed to improve his first serve % in the first 2 sets. And actually convert on his break chances.

He served better in the 3rd set, but didn't generate as many break chances.

On the other hand, he made Nadal save 4 championship points! How often does Nadal have to play that many championship points before converting, on any surface?

Thiem played Nadal better than a lot of other Finalists have.