Cincinnati Masters - Final: Andy vs Novak Djokovic

indiana · Tennis legend

Cincinnati Masters - Final: Andy vs Novak Djokovic

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
Be really good if he could get another Masters title in the 2 remaining to make 4 years in a row with 2 titles. Although I guess he ( and we ! ) would be prepared to foresake that for the US Open title !!

You're not wrong there, Indy! Not as far as I'm concerned, anyway. wink

JAMES4578 · Social player

Not the way I'd liked the match to finish but Andy is a Master for the 7th time and can take confidence in his display in many of the scintillating rallies even in Nole wasn't 100%. Of course it will be tougher at Flushing Meadows but hopefully can find his best form at the right time.

Julia Carrot · All-time great

Shame he didn't appreciate the Rookwood vase. It's kind of American Moorcroft and very highly rated stuff. Hope the organisers didn't hear his BBC interview!!

steven · Tennis legend

Slagging off the trophy doesn't sound like a great idea (if that's what he did), though I must say it didn't look that attractive to me. I wonder why they changed it this year though.

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes, Andy may never be PR perfect, which in many ways can be quite good.

It wasn't that bad at all, and was just a lead in to quite a short interview, or at least recording : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/14609306.stm

Interviewer : As trophies go, that's a pretty big one, isn't it ?

Andy : Yeah, it is. It's not the prettiest trophy I've got, but it's big, that's for sure.

It was just said quite cheerily ( and things can be great art and not seen as pretty smile ) in what was generally a pretty cheery upbeat interview, compared to how he can sometimes come across.

-- Edited by indiana on Monday 22nd of August 2011 11:25:21 AM

steven · Tennis legend

LOL yes, I listened to it afterwards and it wasn't too bad. His last two tweets have been making me laugh though:

In answer to a question about whether he might award the vase to the winner of the fantasy football league he plays in:

"wont be giving it to anyone its so bloody ugly!"

... and then in answer to someone else saying "lovely vase" (ironically, I think):

"it is lovely! Thinking of giving it to my gran...."

Btw, I was wrong about them changing to the 'vase' this year - Fed got one last year too (see http://randomthoughtsofalurker.blogspot.com/2010/08/roger-federer-cincinnati-masters.html)

Hard to tell from the pic, but I think the main part of the vase probably does look quite special, even if it's not to my taste - but even for people who like that kind of thing, surely the base/plinth ruins it ...

-- Edited by steven on Monday 22nd of August 2011 12:23:31 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

Ah. "it's so bloody ugly" is a step futher than "It's not the prettiest" smile

pabbers · Improver

indiana wrote:
Yes, Andy may never be PR perfect, which in many ways can be quite good.
It wasn't that bad at all, and was just a lead in to quite a short interview, or at least recording : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/14609306.stm
Interviewer : As trophies go, that's a pretty big one, isn't it ?
Andy : Yeah, it is. It's not the prettiest trophy I've got, but it's big, that's for sure.
It was just said quite cheerily ( and things can be great art and not seen as pretty ) in what was generally a pretty cheery upbeat interview, compared to how he can sometimes come across.

-- Edited by indiana on Monday 22nd of August 2011 11:25:21 AM

All I can say is...........Tracey Emin!!

-- Edited by pabbers on Monday 22nd of August 2011 04:42:17 PM

Ratty · County player

Since the start of 2005 the "big 4" have won 49 out of 61 Masters Series events, and 25 out of 27 Slams. (Safin won the 2005 Aus Open, and del Potro the 2009 US Open.) So in fact the "big 3" have won 25 out of the last 26 Slams.

Things could get a bit more mixed up over the next year or two. I think that Federer has lost his ability to win a big tournament. Nadal seems to be going the same way, although he has bounced back from previous bad patches.

And surely Djokovic can't keep winning EVERYTHING ... or can he?

-- Edited by Ratty on Tuesday 23rd of August 2011 04:57:27 AM

Ratty · County player

Nadal is an interesting player. He's a bit like Hewitt was, except better. He doesn't really have consistently big shots, and it's often puzzled me how he keeps winning. I think it's just his extraordinary mental resilience and determination, and the psychological hold he exerts over his opponent.

But once that starts to slip, things can go haywire fairly quickly if you haven't got a bomb of a serve and a crunching flat forehand to get you out of trouble. And he hasn't got either.

I don't really do predictions, but I think he's going to struggle to win many more big titles. And it's difficult to see him sticking around for years after his best days have gone, like Hewitt has done.

Sheddie · administrator

Well Nadal age 18-19 was similar to Hewitt in that he won matches with his extraordinary defensive skills, speed and passing shots on the run. I've never seen a defensive player quite like him, Hewitt was very quick but the teenage Nadal could have easily burned him in a sprint.

I don't agree about him not have consistently big shots. His forehand was the best shot in the game in 2008 and 2010 and that's why he became nigh unbeatable on clay and began to win the big titles on all surfaces. That forehand can turn defence into attack like no other in the game and it's not just the pace, it's the way the ball rears up off the court with the sheer amount of topspin on it. Speak to Murray and Djokovic and they'll all say Nadal's ball is the toughest to get used to in tennis because it's such a heavy shot.

He rarely strikes a clean winner off it from the back of the court unlike say Federer but it then sets up the mid-court ball and Nadal at his best is about the deadliest at killing those off in men's tennis.

But the deadliest thing about Nadal's forehand is its consistency over 5 sets due to his freakish technique which takes the net almost completely out of the equation. Even when he's attacking it's such a high percentage shot.

It's why, despite almost rolling his serves in at times, Nadal's service games are so tight as his first strike is almost better than anyone.

Interestingly, in recent interviews Nadal denied that a change in his serving made any difference to his play at the US Open last year. As far as I'm concerned, this is bull****. Like everyone, I was stunned when Nadal turned up in New York and started slamming down 130mph deliveries in his opening matches. I'm also sure that in interviews at the time, he admitted he'd been putting huge amounts of work into it on the practise court and it all came together that fortnight. That's why he blitzed through that fortnight, suddenly he was getting cheap points on his serve regularly and he was unplayable.

As for where it's gone since then, only he knows...

I can see him definitely winning more big titles. He was written off after the Aussie Open in 2010 and look what happened after that. No single player has dominated the men's game for more than a year since Federer's utopia ended in 2008. Djokovic is here to stay at the top but I don't think he'll be able to consistently win 3 slams a year like Federer used to. There'll be opportunities for others and Nadal may well catch him up.