2018 Australian Open

Put thoughts in here about the season's first Slam. We are through 2 rounds, and there are 32 players remaining in each draw.

On the women's side, I feel like 20 of those 32 players could win it all. With Serena not back yet, parity is the name of the game. Looking forward to Kerber - Sharapova tomorrow.

On the men's side, it looks like it could be a repeat of last year's final, another Federer-Nadal matchup. In Nadal's half, I think it would be Kyrgios who would throw a wrench in that prediction. The Aussie is getting a lot of hype this year to go far in his home Slam, and it would be nice to see him live up to his talent. In Federer's half, the big name to watch is 6-time champ Djokovic, of course. But this is his first tournament played in a long time coming off of injury, but then again, that was also the case with Federer and Nadal last year. (Coming back from injury is tough, though. I don't know that we should just assume that Federer and Nadal's success last year can be easily repeated. Stan Wawrinka, for example, lost in the 2nd round yesterday after his injury return.)

Very interested in the match between young guns Alexander Zverev and Hyeon Chung tomorrow as well.

Zverev is a bright young star (way ahead in U21 points) but just can't seem to do well in majors, so far. Chung is 11 months older and has come on strong over the past year and would love to beat fellow "next gen" player Zverev.

I haven’t watched at all. Any thoughts on how Djokovic is playing?

I was shocked to see that he is seeded 14. With the layoff, I suppose I shouldn’t be, but it is an odd sight.

It's always weird watching this tournament in the middle of the Australian summer, while in the midst of a North Carolina winter.

We even have snow on the ground outside, with people having heat stoke on the Samsung.

And the heat has been brutal. They were quoting courtside temperatures in the 150F range last night.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimsumner

It's always weird watching this tournament in the middle of the Australian summer, while in the midst of a North Carolina winter.

We even have snow on the ground outside, with people having heat stoke on the Samsung.

And the heat has been brutal. They were quoting courtside temperatures in the 150F range last night.

---

With the brutal cold we've been getting around here it makes sense (though not necessarily cause/effect sense) that the opposite side of the globe would be roasting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cato

I haven’t watched at all. Any thoughts on how Djokovic is playing?

I was shocked to see that he is seeded 14. With the layoff, I suppose I shouldn’t be, but it is an odd sight.

---

Novak has been far from dominant with lots of unforced errors BUT I don't think he looks any worse than last year's Nadal and Federer in the early rounds. (The heat was also probably a factor). The idea is to ramp up and be at his best for the later rounds, and I think he'll receive some help there when Chung takes out Zverev tomorrow who otherwise would be a Sweet 16 opponent.

Novak's been using a new service motion that supposedly takes pressure off the injured elbow. We'll see.

Trouble - thanks for getting this going.

Haven't watched yet, but am getting interested.

And in addition to the matches that Trouble has highlighted and is looking forward to, I'm excited about:

* First off, Federer vs Gasquet in the 3rd round - a battle of beautiful (one handed) backhands. Assume that is Saturday early AM so looking to get up for that one.

* Sort of interested to see Nadal vs Dzumhur in the 3rd round, too. Had 4th row seats to watch Dzumhur in the semis of the Winston-Salem Open last August. A speedy little guy who can cover all over the court. Just think he won't have any/many weapons of offense against Nadal.

* Dmitrov - A. Rublev should be good, too. Dmitrov almost went out 1st round to the reigning NCAA champ. Hopefully Rublev can get his old school serve & volley game going.

* Personally, I just can't get behind all the chatter of Kyrgios making a deep run. Think his tournament is over at the hands of Tsonga next round.


Again, thanks to Trouble for getting this going. Maybe you can set up an AOTennis Betting Contest on Covers!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Trouble - thanks for getting this going.

Haven't watched yet, but am getting interested.

And in addition to the matches that Trouble has highlighted and is looking forward to, I'm excited about:

* First off, Federer vs Gasquet in the 3rd round - a battle of beautiful (one handed) backhands. Assume that is Saturday early AM so looking to get up for that one.

* Sort of interested to see Nadal vs Dzumhur in the 3rd round, too. Had 4th row seats to watch Dzumhur in the semis of the Winston-Salem Open last August. A speedy little guy who can cover all over the court. Just think he won't have any/many weapons of offense against Nadal.

* Dmitrov - A. Rublev should be good, too. Dmitrov almost went out 1st round to the reigning NCAA champ. Hopefully Rublev can get his old school serve & volley game going.

* Personally, I just can't get behind all the chatter of Kyrgios making a deep run. Think his tournament is over at the hands of Tsonga next round.


Again, thanks to Trouble for getting this going. Maybe you can set up an AOTennis Betting Contest on Covers!!

---

Well, had a brain fart there and thought it was Mischa Rublev playing against Dmitrov and not his brother Alexander. Should still be an excellent match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Well, had a brain fart there and thought it was Mischa Rublev playing against Dmitrov and not his brother Alexander. Should still be an excellent match.

---

It's worse than that, my friend. You're thinking of the Zverev brothers. But it's Andrey Rublev, a hard hitting Russian with little net game at this point in his career, who is playing Dimitrov tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

* Sort of interested to see Nadal vs Dzumhur in the 3rd round, too. Had 4th row seats to watch Dzumhur in the semis of the Winston-Salem Open last August. A speedy little guy who can cover all over the court. Just think he won't have any/many weapons of offense against Nadal.

---

Well, in the highlights I saw, Dzumhur got run all over the place by Nadal and got basically run out of the tournament. And Kyrgios took down Tsonga in 4 tough sets.

Looking forward to Federer - Gasquet early tomorrow/Saturday morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

Novak has been far from dominant with lots of unforced errors BUT I don't think he looks any worse than last year's Nadal and Federer in the early rounds. (The heat was also probably a factor). The idea is to ramp up and be at his best for the later rounds, and I think he'll receive some help there when Chung takes out Zverev tomorrow who otherwise would be a Sweet 16 opponent.

Novak's been using a new service motion that supposedly takes pressure off the injured elbow. We'll see.

---

Yep, yep. The 4 seed goes down to Chung, who fed him a bagel in the 5th set.

Djokovic looked really good for the first time, imo, against Vinolas. Would be a huge upset for the Fed-Djoker semifinal not to take place at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

Yep, yep. The 4 seed goes down to Chung, who fed him a bagel in the 5th set.

Djokovic looked really good for the first time, imo, against Vinolas. Would be a huge upset for the Fed-Djoker semifinal not to take place at this point.

---

Well called, Trouble.

Thought Federer looked really solid this morning against Gasquet. Some classic backhand rallies.

During the match, Johnny-Mac made a comment that was startling. Apparently, and I say that cause even he seemed a bit unsure of it, Federer has lost more matches while holding a match point -17 - than anyone else in tennis history. I guess with as long as he has played, how consistently he has progressed to the later rounds of a tournament and therefore played so many more matches than most players, and how many match points he has had (the great, great majority of which he has won, I guess it is not that surprising. Interesting and startling, nonetheless.

I'm starting to believe in one of your other predictions - Kyrgios. Think he might take down #3 seed Dimitrov tonight/tomorrow morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Well called, Trouble.

Thought Federer looked really solid this morning against Gasquet. Some classic backhand rallies.

During the match, Johnny-Mac made a comment that was startling. Apparently, and I say that cause even he seemed a bit unsure of it, Federer has lost more matches while holding a match point -17 - than anyone else in tennis history. I guess with as long as he has played, how consistently he has progressed to the later rounds of a tournament and therefore played so many more matches than most players, and how many match points he has had (the great, great majority of which he has won, I guess it is not that surprising. Interesting and startling, nonetheless.

I'm starting to believe in one of your other predictions - Kyrgios. Think he might take down #3 seed Dimitrov tonight/tomorrow morning.

---

I suspect the number of matches won by Federer would closely correlate to the number of match points he's won.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

Yep, yep. The 4 seed goes down to Chung, who fed him a bagel in the 5th set.

Djokovic looked really good for the first time, imo, against Vinolas. Would be a huge upset for the Fed-Djoker semifinal not to take place at this point.

---

Watched that last set last night. Hadn't seen the earlier action, but Zverev had nothing left. He only won 5 points in the whole set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

During the match, Johnny-Mac made a comment that was startling. Apparently, and I say that cause even he seemed a bit unsure of it, Federer has lost more matches while holding a match point -17 - than anyone else in tennis history. I guess with as long as he has played, how consistently he has progressed to the later rounds of a tournament and therefore played so many more matches than most players, and how many match points he has had (the great, great majority of which he has won, I guess it is not that surprising. Interesting and startling, nonetheless.

---

According to this, it's actually 18 losses for Federer when he's held a match point. Among the Big 4 it's 7 for Nadal, 5 for Murray and only 2 for Djoker. Compared to their respective overall records:

Fed: 1135 wins, 98.44% winning pct when holding match point
Nadal: 876 wins, 99.21%
Murray: 655 wins, 99.24%
Djokovic: 786 wins, 99.75%

So it's not just opportunities, Fed has lost those matches at a higher rate then these guys, but it's obviously a very thin margin between them. Each of them except Djoker has lost after having 5 match points, and his two losses both came after having 3 match points.

It also shows wins after facing match point, and Fed is similarly the leader with 17, compared to 13 for Nadal, 12 for Djoker and 11 for Murray.

Top half still chalky as Nadal, Cilic, and Dimitrov all advance to the quarters. Only Edmund breaks up the high-seed path of that foursome.

Thiem, Djokovic, Berdych, and Federer all look primed to advance tonight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

I'm starting to believe in one of your other predictions - Kyrgios. Think he might take down #3 seed Dimitrov tonight/tomorrow morning.

---

Alas, Kyrgios went down to Dimitrov last night (this morning) in 4 tight sets.

I would say I'm wrong about Kyrgios being the only threat to Nadal in that half of the bracket. Dimitrov could definitely do it with his wonderful defense. He's played Nadal close recently, including the 5-setter at last year's Aussie.

Federer’s draw just got much easier, as both Thiem and Djokovic were upset. This means his match against Berdych will be the only seed he will face before the Finals.

The other side of the draw still has Nadal, Cilic, and Dimitrov.

I was able to watch a good bit of the Chung/Djokovic match this morning. I'm not a big fan of the big players with big serves who end so many their points quickly (probably the reason I enjoy watching the women play more). The Chung/Djokovic match was fun to watch. Lots of long rally's, hustle and great shots to win points. I know Djokovic isn't himself right now but I still enjoyed seeing the young underdog win.

Chung again! Taking out Djokovic this time. This one was a surprise to me because Chung is stylistically a young Djokovic and would've had to beat Djoker at his own game, which he did manage to do. If anyone's seen Chung play, the similarities to Novak's game are striking, especially the Gumby-like stretches out wide.

I feel bad for Novak, who had to call the trainer on his elbow during the match. It seems like after 6 months off, the problem there remains.


Mike Dickson‏Verified account @Mike_Dickson_DM 3h3 hours ago
Djokovic: Elbow 'not great'. 'It's frustrating when you have that much time and you don't heal properly'.' I have to reassess everything'.


Stuart Fraser‏Verified account @stu_fraser 3h3 hours ago
Novak Djokovic answers a question on his right elbow: "It's not great. At the end of the first set it started hurting more. I had to deal with it till the end of the match."


With that said, it was still a great performance by the youngster Chung. I'll be interested to see how he, Shapovalov, Zverev, and Kyrgios develop into the future.

Wow. Unseeded Kyle Edmund takes out Dimitrov. He is in a Grand Slam semi final, likely to play Nadal (2 sets to 1 up on Cilic as I write this). I saw Edmund play in the semi finals in WS last fall. This has got to be his best result in a major - by far I would think. Think he got a default to Kyrgios in the '16 USOpen, then from memory think he got beaten badly by Joker next round (maybe round of 16?).

Wow... Nadal is out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15

Wow... Nadal is out.

---

Yeah, WOW. Obviously didn't see that coming. But in fairness, didn't see any of it, and apparently Nadal was injured and retired down 2-0 in the fifth.

Waters parting quite nicely for Roger. Quarterfinal tonight/tomorrow (probably late match in Sydney so technically tomorrow for us) versus Berdych looming large.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Yeah, WOW. Obviously didn't see that coming. But in fairness, didn't see any of it, and apparently Nadal was injured and retired down 2-0 in the fifth.

Waters parting quite nicely for Roger. Quarterfinal tonight/tomorrow (probably late match in Sydney so technically tomorrow for us) versus Berdych looming large.

---

Cilic ran Nadal side to side, and then would hit behind Nadal, causing repeated direction changes. Nadal had issues in his right hip, and used his last medical time out before starting the 5th set. The trainer was aggressively trying to stretch it out, so it was likely a cramp, but it was clear he wasn't going to be able to continue.

Cilic was an offensive machine in the 4th set, Nadal was amazing not just for getting from sideline to sideline, but for hitting aggressive returns. What really impressed me was that Cilic would occasionally follow a shot into the net and Nadal would hit a top spin return that Cilic would have to reach for and volley about a foot off of the ground. At 6'6", Cilic would not only get the ball back over, he would hit winners. An amazing display of tennis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BD80

Cilic ran Nadal side to side, and then would hit behind Nadal, causing repeated direction changes. Nadal had issues in his right hip, and used his last medical time out before starting the 5th set. The trainer was aggressively trying to stretch it out, so it was likely a cramp, but it was clear he wasn't going to be able to continue.

Cilic was an offensive machine in the 4th set, Nadal was amazing not just for getting from sideline to sideline, but for hitting aggressive returns. What really impressed me was that Cilic would occasionally follow a shot into the net and Nadal would hit a top spin return that Cilic would have to reach for and volley about a foot off of the ground. At 6'6", Cilic would not only get the ball back over, he would hit winners. An amazing display of tennis.

---

Agreed, Cilic was awesome. It was a miracle that Rafa won that third set. Cilic had easy service games while Nadal consistently struggled in HIS service games, and yet somehow it went to a tiebreaker in which Cilic choked on a putaway at 5-5 followed by Rafa finishing with a clutch serve-and-volley to win the tiebreak 7-5. It was typical Rafa really, gutting one out. I thought Cilic might mentally break down after losing the 3rd, but he stayed strong and Nadal eventually broke down physically.

I hope you're right that it was just a cramp and not another major injury for Rafa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Yeah, WOW. Obviously didn't see that coming. But in fairness, didn't see any of it, and apparently Nadal was injured and retired down 2-0 in the fifth.

---

I'm not sure why you guys would be surprised (unless by "wow" you just meant "another big name out") by the No. 6 seed winning a QF match. It's not like Cilic hasn't been here before. I guess I always considered him the bigger threat to Nadal's Finals aspirations than Dimitrov, despite the No. 3 seeding for Grigor. I suppose he's earned that 3 seed with a strong finish to 2017, but he's still never managed to not fall apart on the big stage. I can't recall him ever beating one of Djokovic, Nadal, Fed, Murray or Wawrinka in the later stages of a big tournament.

Anyway, I wouldn't put it past Cilic to win this tournament, but it certainly looks like Roger's to take if he's on his game. Would be interesting to see a rematch of the Wimbledon Final from last year where Federer and some injuries combined to just emotionally destroy Cilic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mal

I'm not sure why you guys would be surprised (unless by "wow" you just meant "another big name out") by the No. 6 seed winning a QF match. It's not like Cilic hasn't been here before. I guess I always considered him the bigger threat to Nadal's Finals aspirations than Dimitrov, despite the No. 3 seeding for Grigor. I suppose he's earned that 3 seed with a strong finish to 2017, but he's still never managed to not fall apart on the big stage. I can't recall him ever beating one of Djokovic, Nadal, Fed, Murray or Wawrinka in the later stages of a big tournament.

Anyway, I wouldn't put it past Cilic to win this tournament, but it certainly looks like Roger's to take if he's on his game. Would be interesting to see a rematch of the Wimbledon Final from last year where Federer and some injuries combined to just emotionally destroy Cilic.

---

Yeah, my wow had nothing to do with Dimitrov, who I fully expected to lose to Kyrgios in the round of 16. But I was surprised to see Nadal lose a quarterfinal match at a major in which he was up 2 sets to 1. That was what surprised me. Doesn't seem to me like that is any kind of frequent occurrence, though sure it has happened previously once or twice.

Mal, you may be correct with Cilic being a definite threat to win it all. I was overlooking him for sure.

Whoa, congrats to Wozniacki.

I think I long ago pegged her as someone who would never win a Slam. Sort of like a Danish version of Kournikova or something. Her draw at this year's Aussie was REALLY good for her, but she still had to win the matches and she still had to beat in the final World #1 Halep, who has had her own issues in Slams.

Rooting for Fed tonight to get #20.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

Rooting for Fed tonight to get #20.

---

Me, too, brother. 3:30am alarm gonna come pretty early, but I look at it like it is a chance to see history. I am 53 and at this point, I would not at all be surprised if no one gets past 20 grand slams in my lifetime. Obviously, a LOT can happen in the future (just ask Doc & Marty), but I just love watching Roger play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Me, too, brother. 3:30am alarm gonna come pretty early, but I look at it like it is a chance to see history. I am 53 and at this point, I would not at all be surprised if no one gets past 20 grand slams in my lifetime. Obviously, a LOT can happen in the future (just ask Doc & Marty), but I just love watching Roger play.

---

Same. I think he would be safe from anyone overtaking him at 20 Slams.

Really, if Novak (elbow), Andy (hip), and Rafa (everything) continue to have health problems over the next few seasons, you could even say Roger outlasted his rivals despite being much older than them. A lot of credit would have to go to his natural talent to play a graceful style of tennis that ends points early. That's how he's still playing so well at 36 years of age and maybe why the relative-to-him defensive grinders are having issues physically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Me, too, brother. 3:30am alarm gonna come pretty early, but I look at it like it is a chance to see history. I am 53 and at this point, I would not at all be surprised if no one gets past 20 grand slams in my lifetime. Obviously, a LOT can happen in the future (just ask Doc & Marty), but I just love watching Roger play.

---

I believe you'll be able to watch it tomorrow on replay on espn.com. I mean, if you really need your beauty sleep.

Just watch it as soon as you get up, you don't want to inadvertently catch any sports news. I can't stand to know the ending ahead of time, that's the best thing about sports.

C’mon Roger! One more set!

And there's #20! Congrats to Federer, who has seemingly gotten more clutch later in his career, among his many wonders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dudog84

I believe you'll be able to watch it tomorrow on replay on espn.com. I mean, if you really need your beauty sleep.

Just watch it as soon as you get up, you don't want to inadvertently catch any sports news. I can't stand to know the ending ahead of time, that's the best thing about sports.

---

Fed's worth getting up for, though. It's doubtful we'll ever see someone win 20 Slams again, and rarely does a great player come along who plays an aesthetically pleasing game with such variety. And the combination of the two -- aesthetically pleasing 20 Slam winner -- is going to be impossible to duplicate.

The guy is just incredible.

After losing the 4th set he was down game points in the first 2 games of the fifth. Could have easily been down a break to start the last set - after serving a dismal 39% in the 4th. It was that tight. Johnny Mac made an interesting comment about the possibility of him losing his serve for a third straight time. He was really on the ropes.

But he raised his level and battled back. He stood so close to the baseline during rallies, taking the ball on the rise on second service returns from inside the baseline, and hitting almost half-volleys on several rallies and keeping the pressure on Cilic; despite Marin being a bigger hitter.

And he got incredibly emotional during the trophy presentation - as he has a tendency to do.

Glad I got up for it. Just hope I don't fall asleep during church.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

And there's #20! Congrats to Federer, who has seemingly gotten more clutch later in his career, among his many wonders.



Fed's worth getting up for, though. It's doubtful we'll ever see someone win 20 Slams again, and rarely does a great player come along who plays an aesthetically pleasing game with such variety. And the combination of the two -- aesthetically pleasing 20 Slam winner -- is going to be impossible to duplicate.

---

I don’t know if it is doubtful. Folks were discussing a few years ago that it was unlikely anyone would ever get to his 17, yet Nadal will be a heavy favorite to do so in 5 months. It is certainly possible Nadal doesn’t get there, but I wouldn’t go as far as doubtful.

Not to take anything away from Federer, who keeps winning well beyond when others have in the past, and continues to blaze trails of accomplishments. But I do suspect he won’t be the only guy of this group to get to 20.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Green Wave Dukie

Glad I got up for it. Just hope I don't fall asleep during church.

---

I definitely had some some trouble with that this morning, my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CDu

I don’t know if it is doubtful. Folks were discussing a few years ago that it was unlikely anyone would ever get to his 17, yet Nadal will be a heavy favorite to do so in 5 months. It is certainly possible Nadal doesn’t get there, but I wouldn’t go as far as doubtful.

Not to take anything away from Federer, who keeps winning well beyond when others have in the past, and continues to blaze trails of accomplishments. But I do suspect he won’t be the only guy of this group to get to 20.

---

Well, it'd have to Novak or Rafa getting there, right?

Novak is sitting at 12 Slams and is considering surgery on his right elbow, which would knock him out of contention for this year. At the start of next year, he'll be 31.5 years old, 2.5 years removed from winning his previous Slam, and 8 Slams away from 20 Slams. I'd call him a longshot.

Rafa is at 16 Slams, and I agree he should win his 17th Slam at Roland Garros, where he'll also celebrate his 32nd birthday. With how injury-prone he is, can Rafa really win 3 more Slams after turning 32? Especially since he's become a non-factor at Wimbledon in recent years, so he really only contends at three Slams a year (if healthy).

I'm sticking with "doubtful" and you're more than welcome to remind me of that if Rafa or Novak (or both) reach 20 :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troublemaker

I definitely had some some trouble with that this morning, my friend.



Well, it'd have to Novak or Rafa getting there, right?

Novak is sitting at 12 Slams and is considering surgery on his right elbow, which would knock him out of contention for this year. At the start of next year, he'll be 31.5 years old, 2.5 years removed from winning his previous Slam, and 8 Slams away from 20 Slams. I'd call him a longshot.

Rafa is at 16 Slams, and I agree he should win his 17th Slam at Roland Garros, where he'll also celebrate his 32nd birthday. With how injury-prone he is, can Rafa really win 3 more Slams after turning 32? Especially since he's become a non-factor at Wimbledon in recent years, so he really only contends at three Slams a year (if healthy).

I'm sticking with "doubtful" and you're more than welcome to remind me of that if Rafa or Novak (or both) reach 20 :-)

---

Weren't people making the same statements about Nadal in 2016? At that point, he'd not won a major in 2 years. He then went on to win 2 finals last year and was VERY close to taking a third. And he was playing as well as anyone before he suffered the muscle strain that knocked him out. If he wins 3 more French titles in his career, then he just needs one more major. Given that players are playing well later in their careers than in the past (and Federer is proof of that), I kind of think he's a reasonably good possibility to get there.

I don't think Djokovic is at all likely to get there, but I'm not ready to completely write him off either. But he would need to either rebound to his career-best form, or stay fairly elite into his mid/late 30s. And/or he would need to win one or two this year rather than miss the season.

Going back a year-plus, the thought of Fed/Nadal running off 5 straight (and counting) Slams would have seemed absurd. 6 now seems almost assumed, and continuing beyond that is hardly unlikely. These guys are something very very special.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue in the Face

Going back a year-plus, the thought of Fed/Nadal running off 5 straight (and counting) Slams would have seemed absurd. 6 now seems almost assumed, and continuing beyond that is hardly unlikely. These guys are something very very special.

---

The two most accomplished players ever, and on a short list with Laver (missed the slams in his prime because they were for amateurs only; only player to complete a single-year slam and only player to career slam twice) and Borg (rarely played the Aussie as it was the year-end tourney back then; retired in his prime at 26) for greatest players ever.

No question they are the greatest post-30 players ever. Hard to argue that either is nearing done now, whereas as of late-2016 that was the conventional wisdom for both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CDu

Weren't people making the same statements about Nadal in 2016? At that point, he'd not won a major in 2 years. He then went on to win 2 finals last year and was VERY close to taking a third...I don't think Djokovic is at all likely to get there, but I'm not ready to completely write him off either.

---

With you on both of these. I'd go further on Djokovic. I know that only two years ago he looked like he might be threatening 20 by right NOW, but his drop has been pretty precipitous since then, even before the elbow issue that scuttled the second half of last season and has him still struggling to regain form. His resilience and movement are so critical to his game that he's likely to fall off pretty fast as Father Time starts putting his arm around Novak. I just don't see him having opportunities after about 2020, as a baseline defensive machine with a good but never top tier serve game. Of course, I thought Federer was done about 4 years ago, so what do I know?

20's achievable for Nadal because of the clay. One of the interesting aspects of his career and success has been how no clay court specialist has emerged as a legitimate longterm threat to him in Paris. Ever. He's easily the greatest clay court player of all time, but who's been No. 2 on clay over the last 12 years or so? There's been no Gustavo Kuerten to come along and supplant Rafa. Soderling might have become that guy, but he retired at age 26. Ferrer or Gasquet maybe had a chance, or maybe Fognini or someone, and perhaps someone like Thiem can still get there, but at the end of the day none of those guys have even made a final at Roland Garros. Nadal's finals wins there have almost exclusively been against his biggest rivals who are better on hardcourts - Federer, Djokovic, Wawrinka. That speaks to a lot of things - the overall quality of Fed and Novak et al, Nadal's own greatness as he knocks a lot of guys out in the QF and SF rounds, the growing trend away from specializing in clay as a straight business proposition, since 3/4 of the season is on other surfaces. The bottom line, though, is that there's no reason to think that Nadal won't win another 3 or 4 French Opens. Who's going to beat him there, even at age 32 through 35? He doesn't even have to win anywhere else to reach 20 slam titles.

Maybe give Muguruza a whack at him?