Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 10 topics

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:18AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 8:37:54 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> She got nice muffins
 
Jo's jugs?
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jul 11 04:45PM +0100

On 11/07/2017 12:40, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
 
> It's not what you think :-)
 

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4684800/British-tennis-star-Jo-Konta-reveals-s-baking-fan.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490>
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:49AM -0700

She is a Manchester. She's got nothing
Garvin Yee <drsmith004@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:45AM -0700

On 7/11/2017 7:31 AM, Court_1 wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 10:16:30 AM UTC-4, SliceAndDice wrote:
>> Not counting Ostapenko out, but seems to be heading in that direction. Would be nice to see Coco Vandeweghe get to the final, personally. She has a true blue grasscourt game, which I like.
 
> You can't count out Konta/Halep yet either. With the women, you simply don't know.
 
Agreed. They are both playing very well.
 
 
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/34735015@N03/sets/72157623566520134/
 
http://fineartamerica.com/art/all/garvin+yee/all
 
https://www.facebook.com/garvin.yee.37
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jul 11 10:00AM -0500

Awesome job Venus!
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:02AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 11:00:44 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
LOL..your "odds on favorite".
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:33AM -0700

> Awesome job Venus
 
She is getting better and better
Garvin Yee <drsmith004@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:37AM -0700

On 7/11/2017 8:00 AM, stephenJ wrote:
> Awesome job Venus!
 
Damn, I missed it!
 
Gotta set my alarm this week.....
 
:/
 
 
--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/34735015@N03/sets/72157623566520134/
 
http://fineartamerica.com/art/all/garvin+yee/all
 
https://www.facebook.com/garvin.yee.37
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:44AM -0700

Ostapenko sucks on grass. Too much of a back swing. Weak serves. Good enough for clay but won't translate to grass. She is not even as good as Seles on grass
 
I was sure she would lose. All the ass clown rsr analysts got it wrong.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jul 11 04:12PM +0100

On 11/07/2017 14:13, The Iceberg wrote:
 
>> How was it fixed?
 
>> Do you understand how the draw works?
 
> yes they fix it to give Fed the easiest ride possible. A few years ago, even the Fedfans laughed at how easy they'd made the draw for him. It's cos of $$$ and audience.
 
Translation: 'No'
 
OK, only the first round pairings are drawn, in later rounds only
winners from the previous round go forward. No one knows who will
win any match - it's sport, it's unpredictable.
 
The seeds are distributed through the draw following well-known
rules. There are 128 players in singles, 32 are seeded and avoid
playing any other seed until round 3. Sixteen players come through
the qualifying tournament. An additional 8 are awarded Wild Cards.
 
In R1 any seed could play any one of 96 players, all of whom will
be ranked lower than 32nd. In R2 only 64 players remain, 32 of
those are seeded, so seeds can play any of 32 players. In R3 the
seeds begin to play each other, but those seeded at 16 or above
will play seeds below 16. The same is true in later rounds - R4
seeds 1-8 play seeds 9-16, R5 1-4 play 5-8, R6 1-2 play 3-4.
 
To ensure the non-seeds are distributed fairly the draw is carried
out, in public, in a similar fashion to that used in football's World
Cup. Names (or numbers) are drawn from a bag. Here's a photo:
 

<http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/interactive/galleries/2017-06-30/2017-06-30_the_official_draw_2017.html>
 
Lets say that a hard draw for a top 8 seed means playing highly-
ranked opponents in R1 & R2. Lets look at the rankings from 26
June:
 
1 Murray 228 Avg. 114.0
2 Djokovic 180 90.0
3 Federer 162 81.0
4 Nadal 184 92.0
5 Wawrinka 176* 88.0
6 Raonic 132 66.0
7 Cilic 169 84.5
8 Thiem 111 55.5
 
Lowest number or average is 'hardest', so Thiem's was hardest and
Murray's easiest. Murray has higher numbers because Bublik, a lucky
loser, was ranked 134.
 
* Stan lost in R1, so his rating assumes he might have played Bemelmans
in R2.
 
Hardest first:
 
Thiem 55.5
Raonic 66.0
Federer 81.0
Cilic 84.5
Wawrinka 88.0
Djokovic 90.0
Nadal 92.0
Murray 114.0
 
From Fed to Rafa there is a range from 81 to 92, quite a small
difference, indicating reasonable equality.
 
For the sake of it I'll add their R3 opponents:
 
Raonic 51.3
Thiem 58.7
Federer 64.0
Nadal 72.6
Cilic 66.0
Wawrinka 73.7 *
Murray 85.7
Djokovic 252.0 #
 
# Djoker has a high average because his R3 opponent, Gulbis, has
dropped to an official 576. However, he began 2017 ranked 151,
and has a Protected Ranking. If his 151 ranking is used Djokovic
would still average ~110.
 
Of course there is so little data and it has limited meaning to
argue one way or another.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jul 11 06:25PM +0300

Brian W Lawrence kirjoitti 11.7.2017 klo 18:12:
> Lets say that a hard draw for a top 8 seed means playing highly-
> ranked opponents in R1 & R2.
 
That's a wrong assumption I think... it's hardly relevant whether one
plays #42 or #82. Including early rounds just messes up the averages
while the really important/challenging matches come from 4th round onwards.
 
Any case using 'ranking equals difficulty' is a bit flawed on grass
since the ranking is based mostly on hard and clay.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jul 11 04:39PM +0100

On 11/07/2017 16:25, TT wrote:
 
 
> That's a wrong assumption I think... it's hardly relevant whether one
> plays #42 or #82. Including early rounds just messes up the averages
> while the really important/challenging matches come from 4th round onwards.
 
Well I wasn't necessarily assuming anything, I said, 'lets say', or what
if. Of course you can only play the opponent in front of you on the day,
and though you may be confident or the opposite, the end result is
almost impossible to predict with any certaincy - although it
will either player A or player B, so any prediction stands a 50% chance.
 
> Any case using 'ranking equals difficulty' is a bit flawed on grass
> since the ranking is based mostly on hard and clay.
 
I also wrote at the end, 'Of course there is so little data and it has
limited meaning to argue one way or another.' It is real data though,
but it need to be interpreted, which leads to arguments without
resolution.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
fymido_lenito@yahoo.com: Jul 11 07:56AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 6:53:51 AM UTC-7, ahonkan wrote:
> 'injuries', Rafa has never missed a single April - June season. It's
> as if he deliberately skips the grass/ HC season citing 'injuries'
> to rest & return refreshed for the next clay season.
 
This has been my feeling too observing his pattern of injuries in the last 7 years.
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Jul 11 07:58AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 6:53:51 AM UTC-7, ahonkan wrote:
 
> 'injuries', Rafa has never missed a single April - June season. It's
> as if he deliberately skips the grass/ HC season citing 'injuries'
> to rest & return refreshed for the next clay season.<
 
 
+1
"Javier González" <jagonzal@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:33AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 8:25:43 AM UTC-4, SliceAndDice wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 1:15:30 AM UTC-4, Javier González wrote:
> > Not to detail your little Nadal bashing party, but, um, Sampras?
 
> Sampras was dominant on 70% of the tour surfaces (grass + hard + carpet), Nadal on 30%. Not the same thing. Plus, surface heterogeneity was much more pronounced during his time.
 
Nadal has the career slam and, has been less than one match away from a double career slam, multiple runner-ups at W/AO/USO. Sampras has three clay titles, two of them Mickey Mouse and one of them against someone with zero clay titles. Nadal on hard/grass > Sampras on clay.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:38AM -0700

> Nadal on hard/grass > Sampras on clay
 
Sampras is much better than Nadal in three slams while Nadal is superior to any other player in one slam.
"Javier González" <jagonzal@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:37AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 10:25:36 AM UTC-4, Carey wrote:
 
> What I wanna know is, what happened to Raffi's hair? Odd to be going bald
> at 31, when his whole extended family have thick heads of hair...
 
> Or not.
 
Not at all. Baldness is a fickle and cruel mistress...
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Jul 11 08:19AM -0700

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/world-facing-annihilation-species-extinction-animal-population-proceedings-of-the-national-academy-a7834531.html
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:29AM -0700

This is another lie like global warming :)
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:06AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 10:18:33 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
> > That is Whisperian logic, commonly called 'illogic'.
 
> Well, I didn't predict Nadal would beat Federer in straights in the final, that's for sure! :)
 
> Future Wimbledon success for Nadal looks bleak if he couldn't make a dent this year considering his blistering form. I think if Nadal can keep his 2017 form going, he can perhaps do well at the USO. You would agree with that wouldn't you?
 
His "blistering form" works well on clay, not so much on other surfaces. He is beatable elsewhere by a quality opponent.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:18AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 8:06:23 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 10:18:33 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > Future Wimbledon success for Nadal looks bleak if he couldn't make a dent this year considering his blistering form. I think if Nadal can keep his 2017 form going, he can perhaps do well at the USO. You would agree with that wouldn't you?
 
> His "blistering form" works well on clay, not so much on other surfaces. He is beatable elsewhere by a quality opponent.
 
Plus he's won exactly as many USOs as he has Wimbledons. So why would we assume he'd be a terror there in 2017? Because he got to the AO final (and lost)?
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 12 12:51AM +1000

Unique returning stance - she shuffles to the left, then right & then
hops up in the air as Venus serves. Fun to watch.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jul 11 07:59AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 10:51:35 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Really needs that serve to be more of a weapon to do well here. Venus playing very well, has a real chance to grab number 6.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 11 07:51AM -0700

Op dinsdag 11 juli 2017 16:06:42 UTC+2 schreef Court_1:
 
> > Well, you answered your own questions already. Muller plays so differently to how Rafa likes to play. No rallies, no big hitting from the baseline. All serve and volley. Rafa camping way too far behind the baseline...
 
> > Another part is the pressure Rafa must have felt to do well at Wimbledon again. Obviously there is still a big difference between Wimbledon and the FO though, regardless of the slowing grass. Two entirely different animals. Can you imagine Muller being competitive on clay... vs Rafa? The idea of picking Rafa to win Wimbledon based on that FO, straight-setting Federer in the final, like a certain poster here predicted was always too ludicrous to entertain.
 
> Yes, despite the claims of many tennis fans that the surfaces are more homogeneous these days which they are, there are still huge differences between the surfaces. Look at the players in the QFs of Wimbledon--Querrey, Raonic, Muller, Cilic, Berdych and compare that to some of the players who made the QF of the FO--Nishikori, Carreno Busta, Thiem, etc. However, the Big Four players are consistent from surface to surface. The only exception to that is Nadal at Wimbledon. The rest of the Big Four players tend to go deep at all the majors and Nadal himself tends to go deep at all majors except Wimbledon.
 
True. Exceptionally good at one slam, exceptionally bad at another.
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jul 11 02:59PM

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 06:26:17 -0700, undecided wrote:
 
> spots that totally destroyed Nadal's confidence in his shots and when he
> had legitimate openings he overplayed and UE'd a lot of them. I am not
> sure why a guy like Rafa could not do better.
 
Muller WON!!
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment