2015 U.S. Open (tennis)

[Troublemaker]

In case anyone's interested.

Serena's going for the rare and coveted Calendar Year Grand Slam (CYGS)!

[BD80]

In case anyone's interested.

Serena's going for the rare and coveted Calendar Year Grand Slam (CYGS)!

You mean "Grand Slam"

No modifiers required, although there is an undeniable impulse to add "real"

[Blue in the Face]

Things were interesting for 2 sets tonight. Then Serena went all Secretariat-at-the-Belmont.

[Troublemaker]

Fognini beat Rafa in a great 5-setter. Despite that, I think Rafa is very close to re-gaining his form. He looked very good in the first two sets against both Fognini and Coric (Round 1) but kind of ran out of gas both times. I think Nadal will be a top-4 player again in 2016.



You mean "Grand Slam"

No modifiers required, although there is an undeniable impulse to add "real"

True.

[Green Wave Dukie]

Fognini beat Rafa in a great 5-setter. Despite that, I think Rafa is very close to re-gaining his form. He looked very good in the first two sets against both Fognini and Coric (Round 1) but kind of ran out of gas both times. I think Nadal will be a top-4 player again in 2016.


True.


That match last night/this morning was amazing. Not sure how Fognini will play next round, but he was AMAZING against Nadal. That half volley forehand up the line from standing right behind/at the baseline was incredible. IMHO, he certainly earned it, Rafa didn't hand it to him.

And agree about Rafa being a top 4 seed come in '16 (assuming he stays healthy). First off, since he didn't play the U.S. Open last year, it's not like he's got a lot of points to defend. Even winning only 2 matches might he may move up.

[JasonEvans]

DY!!!!!

[Green Wave Dukie]

DY!!!!!

Jason - Donald represented you and ATL well. I'm impressed he took a set off Stan. He had a great run.

Kevin Anderson's win tonight over Murray was spectacular. Both men exhausted. 4 hours and 18 mins in 4 long sets.

And Fededer just played 3 incredible points to close out the second set tie-breaker vs Isner. For the life of me, I don't know why John has hit every backhand approach cross court. It hasn't worked yet. Just leaves him too exposed for Roger's backhand up the line passing shot.

And as I write, Gasquet just took a 2-1 set lead over Byrdich. Lots of great tennis.

[gus]

Jason - Donald represented you and ATL well. I'm impressed he took a set off Stan. He had a great run.

Kevin Anderson's win tonight over Murray was spectacular. Both men exhausted. 4 hours and 18 mins in 4 long sets.

And Fededer just played 3 incredible points to close out the second set tie-breaker vs Isner. For the life of me, I don't know why John has hit every backhand approach cross court. It hasn't worked yet. Just leaves him too exposed for Roger's backhand up the line passing shot.

And as I write, Gasquet just took a 2-1 set lead over Byrdich. Lots of great tennis.

Isner is enormous. He must be hitting his serve 11 feet off the ground. But it's no wonder he's responsible for the longest match in history. He's (nearly) unbeatable when serving, and looks hapless and slow when receiving.

This weekend had a lot of entertaining tennis.

Does Kevin Anderson have a Duke connection?

[JasonEvans]

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that a few people may watch Serena versus Venus tonight on TV.

So, who thinks Venus will throw it? Not that we will ever know, if she steamrolls her sister there is no reason it was not the result of Serena just plain being the better player. I can't imagine Venus really trying extra hard to win and ruining her sister's chance for a calendar slam.

-Jason "I'll be watching" Evans

[snowdenscold]

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that a few people may watch Serena versus Venus tonight on TV.

So, who thinks Venus will throw it? Not that we will ever know, if she steamrolls her sister there is no reason it was not the result of Serena just plain being the better player. I can't imagine Venus really trying extra hard to win and ruining her sister's chance for a calendar slam.

-Jason "I'll be watching" Evans

Just when Serena finally returned to Indian Wells earlier this March (for the first time in 14 years) ? The conspiracy theories could get ugly.

I also think Serena is a better play at this point in their careers, but then again, Venus did win in the semi-finals at Canada last year (which is one of the top-tier tournaments just below the Grand Slam events).


Either way, I'm not expecting a great match, since historically Williams vs. Williams has never produced the best tennis. Neither enjoys playing against the other, not surprisingly.

[duke79]

[
Does Kevin Anderson have a Duke connection?[/QUOTE]

Not that I know of. He is from South Africa......and played (I believe) three years at the University of Illinois. I think he might have been NCAA singles champion when he played there.

[Tom B.]

Does Kevin Anderson have a Duke connection?

I was wondering that, too. A guy sitting in Anderson's friends and family box was wearing a Duke hat and shirt.

[duke79]

I was wondering that, too. A guy sitting in Anderson's friends and family box was wearing a Duke hat and shirt.

Yea, I saw that too. Looked like a Duke tennis hat........no clue who that might be?

[Troublemaker]

Not that I know of. He is from South Africa......and played (I believe) three years at the University of Illinois. I think he might have been NCAA singles champion when he played there.

At Illinois, Anderson was a teammate (http://www.tennisexplorer.com/doubles-team/anderson-af8c3/spicijaric/) of current Duke women's tennis assistant coach Marc Spicijaric (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=204785719).

[Tom B.]

At Illinois, Anderson was a teammate (http://www.tennisexplorer.com/doubles-team/anderson-af8c3/spicijaric/) of current Duke women's tennis assistant coach Marc Spicijaric (http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=204785719).

Bingo. I'm pretty sure he was the mystery Duke-apparel-wearing guy in Anderson's box.

[Blue in the Face]

Who had 2 Italians in the women's final? And I don't mean 2 weeks ago, I mean 4 hours ago. Unexpected day of tennis.

[DukieInKansas]

Who had 2 Italians in the women's final? And I don't mean 2 weeks ago, I mean 4 hours ago. Unexpected day of tennis.

Wow!

[Troublemaker]

Serena should've won in two. She dropped her level and started spraying errors, losing set 2. A momentary letdown like that has not been uncommon for her during this season-long run for the Grand Slam, but previously she had always escaped. Not in Set 3, as Vinci legitimately played a great set. Nice sliced backhand from Vinci.

Best-of-3 tennis can go so quickly. Grand Slam dreams dashed, at Serena's best event, where she was defending 3-time champ. Gotta be disappointing.

Still, a great season.

[CDu]

Djokovic destroyed Cilic 0, 1, and 2. Sets up a potentially great final against either Federer or Wawrinka. This is Djokovic's best surface, but either guy tonight has the firepower to win too.

[Troublemaker]

Fed dominated Stan and will be fresh for the final.

I'll be rooting hard for Fed to beat Novak on Sunday (or possibly Monday if there's rain).

I want to say that I watched the best tennis player ever, and it'll be tough to deny Fed that label if he beats Novak here for #18 at age 34.

[CDu]

It should be a great final. The two best players in the world right now facing off with both playing great tennis. I will definitely be looking forward to THAT final.

Djokovic going for slam #10 and Federer going for #18? Should be good.

[Furniture]

Me to my wife. Wow Serena lost. Wife to me. Will she play in the final?

[CDu]

Fed dominated Stan and will be fresh for the final.

I'll be rooting hard for Fed to beat Novak on Sunday (or possibly Monday if there's rain).

I want to say that I watched the best tennis player ever, and it'll be tough to deny Fed that label if he beats Novak here for #18 at age 34.

I would say that #18 would get Federer closer to that honor. But I think Laver's 11 (despite losing 21 opportunities in the prime of his career to the amateur rule) and 9 pro slam (the alternative for pros until the slams allowed pros) titles and twice completing the true Grand Slam keeps him ahead of Federer.

Regardless, it is clear we will be watching two of the greatest ever in the mens final.

[jimsumner]

Me to my wife. Wow Serena lost. Wife to me. Will she play in the final?

Isn't it double elimination?

[brevity]

Me to my wife. Wow Serena lost. Wife to me. Will she play in the final?


Isn't it double elimination?

A few million Kentucky fans had similar fleeting thoughts last April.

[Green Wave Dukie]

I would say that #18 would get Federer closer to that honor. But I think Laver's 11 (despite losing 21 opportunities in the prime of his career to the amateur rule) and 9 pro slam (the alternative for pros until the slams allowed pros) titles and twice completing the true Grand Slam keeps him ahead of Federer.

Regardless, it is clear we will be watching two of the greatest ever in the mens final.


I'm a big Fed fan, but it's hard to argue your logic with respect to Laver.

I hope he can beat Novak tomorrow. Surely one would think each additional opportunity to win a Grand Slam represents the best chance Roger will have going forward. Way too early to tell where history will put Novak. Seems like just recently folks were conceding the GOAT to Nadal. For Federer to be (clearly?) the #2 ranked player in the world competing against the likes of Joker, Murray, Stan the Man, Nadal (though admittedly injury-prone and not currently the player he was in the past), etc, at age 34 is pretty darned impressive.

Should be a great match tomorrow.

[CDu]

I'm a big Fed fan, but it's hard to argue your logic with respect to Laver.

I hope he can beat Novak tomorrow. Surely one would think each additional opportunity to win a Grand Slam represents the best chance Roger will have going forward. Way too early to tell where history will put Novak. Seems like just recently folks were conceding the GOAT to Nadal. For Federer to be (clearly?) the #2 ranked player in the world competing against the likes of Joker, Murray, Stan the Man, Nadal (though admittedly injury-prone and not currently the player he was in the past), etc, at age 34 is pretty darned impressive.

Should be a great match tomorrow.

Oh by no means was that meant to denigrate Federer. He is amazing, and it is incredible that he is still elite at 34. One can certainly make a reasonable argument that he is the best ever, and I don't think anyone can say he is not currently top 2 ever. It is just hard to compare across eras.

What is really impressive is that there are potentially 3 guys (if Djokovic wins tomorrow) still going with double digit Slam titles. If Novak can break through in the French (hard to believe he was a bad Paris Sunday away from pursuing the Grand Slam himself this year), we could have 3 active career Slammers!

Looking forward to seeing these two great champions go at it tomorrow. I doubt it will disappoint.

[Green Wave Dukie]

After a pretty awful first set from Roger, he just took the second set to even it at 1 set a piece. Don't know if Roger can keep it up, but if he had lost that 2nd set after 4 set points, I think he would have been toast. He's definitely got the crowd behind him.

[CDu]

The groundstrokes in that match were amazing. Unbelievable pace. Djokovic is such an amazing returner; one of only two guys who make Federer's serve look ordinary. Federer put up a good fight, but Djokovic's court coverage and shotmaking seemed to wear Fed down over time, and forced him to take more chances, which cost him.

[Troublemaker]

The groundstrokes in that match were amazing. Unbelievable pace. Djokovic is such an amazing returner; one of only two guys who make Federer's serve look ordinary. Federer put up a good fight, but Djokovic's court coverage and shotmaking seemed to wear Fed down over time, and forced him to take more chances, which cost him.

Djoker is just a wall on the baseline. So consistent off both wings and stretches to get tough balls and puts them back deep into the opponent's court. The greatest defender this sport has seen, imo.

The sequence where Novak won the match was at 5-4 in the third-set, serving 15-40. To continue saving break points with his machine-like defense, which he did throughout the match, and then finally winning yet another epic rally where Fed ends up hitting the ball wide and Novak won the hawkeye challenge and finally the set to go up 2-1 in sets. Fed succumbed meekly after that. The old man knew he couldn't win a 5-setter against this machine.

Props to Novak, who really should be in the conversation for greatest ever as well. If he had discovered his gluten problem earlier, who knows what his major count would be right now.

[Troublemaker]

What is really impressive is that there are potentially 3 guys (if Djokovic wins tomorrow) still going with double digit Slam titles

Those three really are amazing. Between them, you have the Australian Open GOAT (Djokovic), the French Open GOAT (Nadal), and Federer, who ties with Sampras for most Wimbledon titles and ties with Sampras and Connors for most US Open titles (modern era) and obviously owns 17 overall, the most in history.

[Bluedog]

Total points won: 147 Djokovic - 145 Federer
Break points won: 6/13 (46%) Djokovic - 4/23 (17%) Federer

Shows you how close the match was, but Djokovic simply capitalized on his break point opportunities at a much better clip than Fed. 4/23 is just devasting.

Federer actually won 8 more points than Djokovic when returning (and a higher percentage too!), but Djokovic had 18 more points on his serve (shows how many times those games went to deuce). Receiving points won: 52/137 (38%) Djokovic - 60/155 (39%) Federer.

Was rooting for Fed, but Djokovic was just too good. Very rare for a tennis crowd to be so animated in rooting against a player in a match like they did when cheering when Djokovic would miss his serve, etc. Clearly, they were overwhelming on Fed's side.

[CDu]

Djoker is just a wall on the baseline. So consistent off both wings and stretches to get tough balls and puts them back deep into the opponent's court. The greatest defender this sport has seen, imo.

The sequence where Novak won the match was at 5-4 in the third-set, serving 15-40. To continue saving break points with his machine-like defense, which he did throughout the match, and then finally winning yet another epic rally where Fed ends up hitting the ball wide and Novak won the hawkeye challenge and finally the set to go up 2-1 in sets. Fed succumbed meekly after that. The old man knew he couldn't win a 5-setter against this machine.

Props to Novak, who really should be in the conversation for greatest ever as well. If he had discovered his gluten problem earlier, who knows what his major count would be right now.

The thing that is crazy with Djokovic is that his second serve is SO bad. Federer was completely idisregarding it, charging in on it to get to the net, even hitting a drop shot on one of them. In an era where seemingly everyone has a big first serve, Djokovic has only just gotten to adequate there. And his second serve is a borderline joke. It is like he is playing the 2010s with a 1990s serve. Despite that, he is still very hard to break, which is a testament to just how amazing his court coverage and groundstrokes are. To be able to win by playing defense for 75% of the match is ridiculous.

I still am trying to wrap my head around the idea that he was one bad day from completing the grand slam this year. The way he has dominated the tour the past few years is amazing.

[Mal]

Despite that, he is still very hard to break, which is a testament to just how amazing his court coverage and groundstrokes are. To be able to win by playing defense for 75% of the match is ridiculous.

Great points. He's never had the consistent ability to crack a couple big serves when facing break points the way others do, yet he's hard to break because he just won't give in. It's almost like he's more comfortable letting someone else have the initiative in a point.

He wins not just by playing defense, but by playing a style of defense where he tilts the court to offense on a dime, and from places where others are purely playing keep-it-alive defense. His return of serve is the perfect example. He's not only almost impossible to ace, but he's not just floating balls back short on serves he stretches to get (and others don't even touch) - he's returning them deep and with pace. He baited Federer into a couple of unforced errors on this last night: looks like an ace, return would normally come to a spot where Roger's got an easy step into it high ball to smash a forehand to the opposite court, so he's thinking "put it away," but then in reality the ball comes back to Federer's feet and Roger, committed to hitting a winner, tries to do so on a ball he should just keep in play and rockets it long. So a great serve turns into a lost point in two shots. That would take anyone off their game.

[CDu]

Great points. He's never had the consistent ability to crack a couple big serves when facing break points the way others do, yet he's hard to break because he just won't give in. It's almost like he's more comfortable letting someone else have the initiative in a point.

He wins not just by playing defense, but by playing a style of defense where he tilts the court to offense on a dime, and from places where others are purely playing keep-it-alive defense. His return of serve is the perfect example. He's not only almost impossible to ace, but he's not just floating balls back short on serves he stretches to get (and others don't even touch) - he's returning them deep and with pace. He baited Federer into a couple of unforced errors on this last night: looks like an ace, return would normally come to a spot where Roger's got an easy step into it high ball to smash a forehand to the opposite court, so he's thinking "put it away," but then in reality the ball comes back to Federer's feet and Roger, committed to hitting a winner, tries to do so on a ball he should just keep in play and rockets it long. So a great serve turns into a lost point in two shots. That would take anyone off their game.

Yeah, the bolded really sums it up perfectly. I heard Andre Agassi (another phenomenal returner/baseliner) talking about Djokovic recently on the radio, and he had a really interesting take. He was asked if he thought Djokovic was the best return of serve ever. He said it's hard to say because the racquet technology is so much better now. A guy like Borg, a guy like Lendl, and a guy like Agassi were considered phenomenal defensive players. But they couldn't do what Djokovic could do now. He was asked whether or not he thought he could beat Djokovic, and he said he didn't know, for the very reason that you mentioned above: Djokovic can turn opponents' should-be-winners into winners the other way, and he'd have to figure out a different way to beat Djokovic rather than the way he liked to play back in his day.

It's just phenomenal the type of shots Djokovic can hit from anywhere on the court and from any strategic position. There is almost no shot he can't hit for a winner. And it's especially true on service points. Federer is such a great example. He completely overwhelmed Wawrinka with his serve. And Wawrinka is a top-5 player! Yet against Djokovic, a large of Federer's serves resulted in solid returns. Djokovic is able to almost immediately take away the service advantage, even against one of the absolute best servers in the game. And then once he does that, he covers so much court and has so many weapons in groundstrokes that he takes a toll on your psyche. As you said, his ability from the baseline forced Federer to take chances that he shouldn't have taken, and that resulted in more errors than Federer would normally make as he tried to hit perfect shots (because you almost have to hit perfect shots to beat Djokovic).

I'm hopeful that Federer has a few great years left and that Nadal can get healthy and back in form next year. The trio has given us some of the best tennis in generations, and it isn't clear yet where the next greats will come from. It's been amazing watching these guys for the past 5-10 years.

[Mal]

it isn't clear yet where the next greats will come from.

That's the only slightly distressing thing for me in the game right now. Not that we should expect another legendary talent to percolate up and be ready to take the torch from Roger and Rafa as they age out. You can't hope for much immediately following a decade+ in which three of the best to ever take the court were competing against one another. But, you would hope that by now one of that next group of guys would have stepped up, or that there would be a 21-year-old out there who looks like the next big thing. Right now, I don't know how you could reasonably expect anyone other than 5 guys (throwing in Stan and Murray here) to win a major next year. Nishikori and Cilic, all credit where it's due, but it's not likely to happen again. Raonic could eventually, if he focuses on becoming a straight serve and volley guy, be a legit threat to win Wimbledon because he'd be virtually unbreakable on serve, but I don't see that happening and he'll never win a big one on hard courts or clay.

Meanwhile, there's one guy in the Top 20 ATP rankings right now who's under 24 (Dominic Thiem, No. 20 at the age of 22), and only 4 others under 26 (Nishikori, Raonic, Dmitrov and Goffin). I don't have the numbers, but my sense is that if you're not solidly in the top 5 or 10 by about 24 years old and staying there, you're just not on the path to winning multiple slam titles. Then again, history tells us that 34 year olds don't make multiple slam finals in a season, and that a guy like Wawrinka just does not make the jump from journeyman to Aussie and French Open champion at the stage he did. Clearly these guys are fitter and playing their best tennis at later ages than ever before, so who knows. But I don't see anyone knocking Djokovic off his perch for at least another three years or so, unless it's a rejuvenated Nadal, so I'm hard pressed to see him not getting to 15 slams.

[CDu]

That's the only slightly distressing thing for me in the game right now. Not that we should expect another legendary talent to percolate up and be ready to take the torch from Roger and Rafa as they age out. You can't hope for much immediately following a decade+ in which three of the best to ever take the court were competing against one another. But, you would hope that by now one of that next group of guys would have stepped up, or that there would be a 21-year-old out there who looks like the next big thing. Right now, I don't know how you could reasonably expect anyone other than 5 guys (throwing in Stan and Murray here) to win a major next year. Nishikori and Cilic, all credit where it's due, but it's not likely to happen again. Raonic could eventually, if he focuses on becoming a straight serve and volley guy, be a legit threat to win Wimbledon because he'd be virtually unbreakable on serve, but I don't see that happening and he'll never win a big one on hard courts or clay.

Meanwhile, there's one guy in the Top 20 ATP rankings right now who's under 24 (Dominic Thiem, No. 20 at the age of 22), and only 4 others under 26 (Nishikori, Raonic, Dmitrov and Goffin). I don't have the numbers, but my sense is that if you're not solidly in the top 5 or 10 by about 24 years old and staying there, you're just not on the path to winning multiple slam titles. Then again, history tells us that 34 year olds don't make multiple slam finals in a season, and that a guy like Wawrinka just does not make the jump from journeyman to Aussie and French Open champion at the stage he did. Clearly these guys are fitter and playing their best tennis at later ages than ever before, so who knows. But I don't see anyone knocking Djokovic off his perch for at least another three years or so, unless it's a rejuvenated Nadal, so I'm hard pressed to see him not getting to 15 slams.

Yeah, the one hope is that with fitness so much better these days, the best can last longer. Agassi had a nice resurgence late in his career at a fairly advanced age. Djokovic, at 28, is already older than Borg was when he retired. And Federer is still near the top of the game (no shame in being #2 right now) at age 34. And as you mentioned, Wawrinka recently found his game at 28/29 years old. Maybe the career arc is no longer 20-30 years old, but extends to the mid (or even late) 30s?

I have trouble seeing a guy like Nadal, whose game relies so heavily on his physical exertion and as such has resulted in numerous injuries, remaining elite into his mid-30s. But perhaps enough can, most notably Djokovic (who still probably has 4-5 years of greatness left) that the lack of elite guys in the early 20s isn't the end of the world.

Still, there was a lull after Borg retired and McEnroe, and Connors declined (filled mainly by Lendl). Then we got Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Edberg, Becker, etc. There was a lull after Becker and Edberg and Courier faded, and then Agassi re-emerged. Then there was a lull when Agassi and Sampras faded away, with Federer alone for a bit. But not long after that, Nadal came through and Djokovic got healthy. So hopefully some new greats will emerge over the next few years as Nadal and Federer fade and before Djokovic goes away.

[royalblue]

Roger Federer the most consistent accomplished graceful athlete I have had the pleasure viewing. Novak may end up the best only time will tell but at 34 to play like Roger is unreal. He takes a loss as well as anyone (Jack Nicklaus his equal) Tip my hat to Novak but Fed has been on a 12-13 year run that only Rod Laver can have an argument about being any better.

[duke79]

Roger Federer the most consistent accomplished graceful athlete I have had the pleasure viewing. Novak may end up the best only time will tell but at 34 to play like Roger is unreal. He takes a loss as well as anyone (Jack Nicklaus his equal) Tip my hat to Novak but Fed has been on a 12-13 year run that only Rod Laver can have an argument about being any better.

Couldn't agree more.........a total class act......and a great player. Obviously, a win yesterday would have been the icing on the cake for his career but the fact that he is still at the top of the game (top 3 at worst) at his age IS remarkable.

[Tom B.]

Still, there was a lull after Borg retired and McEnroe, and Connors declined (filled mainly by Lendl). Then we got Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Edberg, Becker, etc. There was a lull after Becker and Edberg and Courier faded, and then Agassi re-emerged. Then there was a lull when Agassi and Sampras faded away, with Federer alone for a bit. But not long after that, Nadal came through and Djokovic got healthy. So hopefully some new greats will emerge over the next few years as Nadal and Federer fade and before Djokovic goes away.

It may seem like there's nobody waiting in the wings behind Djokovic/Federer/Nadal right now, but strange and unpredictable things can happen in sports.

Remember back at the end of 2003, after Federer won his first Grand Slam at Wimbledon, and Andy Roddick won the U.S. Open, and THAT was supposed to be the great rivalry for the next decade?

(As an aside, you kind of have to feel for Roddick. Any other time, and he'd probably retire with four or five Grand Slam wins to his credit, maybe more. But the rise and peak of his career happened to coincide with the rise and peak of the GOAT, so he'll have to satisfy himself with that one U.S. Open title. His loss to Federer in the 2009 Wimbledon final was particularly brutal -- 16-14 in the fifth, and he only had his serve broken once, in the very last game of the match. Of course, he's worth millions and is married to a supermodel, so my sympathy only goes so far.)