[bunkmedal]

Virtual Insanity, on 21 January 2011 - 00:16, said:

Agreed with everything you said up until this. Firstly it's slightly disingenuous to imply (intentionally or otherwise) that Murray only made it past Nadal last year because Nadal retired. Nadal wasn't firing on all cylinders but he was playing well, and Murray was in control when Nadal retired. Of course Murray would start as underdog, but based on his form v Nadal since that Wimbledon QF has been impressive, and I certainly think he has a better shot against Nadal than he does Federer. The game in London when both were playing very well showed how close Murray can get to him.

I honestly think that on a hard court there's only a hair's width between Murray and Nadal when they face each other. I'm not saying Murray is as good as Nadal overall (there's a reason why Nadal has hardcourt Grand Slams and Murray doesn't) but the actual matchup between the two is extremely close. The last match at the ATP Tour Finals was won by two tiebreaks (single mini-breaks at that) and could have really went either way - if anything Murray played the better tennis.

There's a school of thought (more of a cliche) that if someone wins an extremely tight match it's because they "produce their best tennis when it counts", but I think these things are vastly exaggerated and Nadal doesn't have a monopoly on winning the big points. The Australian Open match last year was also very close and Nadal played some great tennis, the only difference was Murray was the one winning the big points. I don't see any reason why Murray couldn't beat Nadal if he played him again this year.

[blue4578]

blue4578, on 20 January 2011 - 23:14, said:

Beyond that, if it is Nadal he is up against, he will need Nadal to retire again like he did last year as I don't see Murray getting anywhere near winning otherwise.

In my opinion, getting near winning = winning at least two sets when it comes to a five set match. I just don't think Murray has much chance of doing that.

The ATP World Tour Finals match in London is not really that relevant. By Nadal's own admission the lightning fast indoor hard court is by far his worst surface. The previous year in London he didn't win a match. Murray v Nadal could've gone either way, but Murray missed a couple of easy shots after taking the lead in the final set tie break. Just like he bottled it against Federer in last year's Australian Open Final (which incidentally caused me to have a car crash ). The court in Australia is much slower and higher bouncing than at the O2.

Nadal's serve has improved since this tournament last year, and some of the tennis he played at the US Open was the best I've ever seen. Prior to that tournament I couldn't ever see him winning the US Open. Murray meanwhile has stood still in my opinion, or gone slightly backwards over the past year. Murray did play very, very well against Nadal in last year's Australian Open, and was 6-3 7-6 3-0 up when Nadal gave up, but Nadal in the matches prior to that was clearly a long way below his best and wasn't 100% fit. He didn't play for two months afterwards, which is not what he would normally do. Obviously that's not Murray's fault, and he did what he had to do very well. Nadal was a bit ill a couple of weeks ago in his loss to Davydenko in Doha but seems to be 100% fit and well at the moment.

I'll happily admit I was wrong if Murray beats Nadal, but depending on what happens between now and then (assuming they both win three more matches) you'll be getting between 5/2 and 3/1 on Murray winning the match. I'll be putting lots of my money where my mouth is by backing Nadal at anything 1/3 and over against Murray. Anyone thinking it's fairly close to 50/50 should be backing Murray heavily if they like the odd bet.

[lichtie23]

Henin is OUT!

Beaten in straight sets bt Svetlana Kuznetsova

[IrishBhoy]

Can someone tell me the time of Murrays next match please. I reckon it should be on about Midnight tonight but not 100% sure.

[blue4578]

He is second on Rod Laver after a women's match, so 1am is the absolute earliest you could hope for. Could be after 3am if the first match is an epic.

[H_B]

Loki, on 20 January 2011 - 20:06, said:

How do you think the Soderling Tsonga game will go H_B?

I didn't realise until the other day how bad Soderling's record is in Australia. It's awful. And yet, he's looked pretty good first couple of rounds.

I'd go for RobSod in 4. Couple of tie breaks chucked in there.

I havent actually seen any of Tsonga yet this week though, so not sure how he is playing. Just always worry about his fitness at Slams - third match in, couple of tight matches so far, will he be able to play 5 sets with Soderling? I have my doubts.

This post has been edited by H_B: 21 January 2011 - 09:30

[H_B]

blue4578, on 21 January 2011 - 01:35, said:

you'll be getting between 5/2 and 3/1 on Murray winning the match.

Do you reckon?

I'd be surprised - I agree that Nadal is the rightful favourite and I too would fancy him to beat Murray, but I'd have had it more like a

Nadal - 1.42-1.48

type of thing.

[blue4578]

H_B, on 21 January 2011 - 09:15, said:

I didn't realise until the other day how bad Soderling's record is in Australia. It's awful. And yet, he's looked pretty good first couple of rounds.

I'd go for RobSod in 4. Couple of tie breaks chucked in there.

I havent actually seen any of Tsonga yet this week though, so not sure how he is playing. Just always worry about his fitness at Slams - third match in, couple of tight matches so far, will he be able to play 5 sets with Soderling? I have my doubts.

See my post above. Soderling was dead on his feet towards the end of the match against Muller; he was lucky that Muller was struggling even more. Muller can be decent on his day, but if it hadn't been a grand slam he wouldn't have completed the match as he could barely move in the final set. Soderling has had a dream draw the first three rounds. Starace was never going to be a threat and Hernych is as good as you can hope for in the third round.

Meanwhile Tsonga has struggled massively. Should've lost in the first round, and despite winning in straight sets against Seppi, could've easily lost a set or two there. I have just backed Dolgopolov @ 2.77 to beat Tsonga. Tsonga's price is on the drift and will drift more before the match almost certainly. You can't just assume he will get through to play Soderling because you know little or nothing about Dolgopolov Loki, as there's a fair chance Tsonga will lose (in my opinion, we shall see).

H_B, on 21 January 2011 - 09:25, said:

Do you reckon?

I'd be surprised - I agree that Nadal is the rightful favourite and I too would fancy him to beat Murray, but I'd have had it more like a

Nadal - 1.42-1.48

type of thing.

Murray's price outright has drifted despite him winning two rounds, and Nadal's price has come in. Murray has won both matches easily enough, but without being at all impressive. Nadal has had the steamroller out in his two matches, although the opponents have been very weak. Tomic should provide Nadal with a bit more of a test, but it'll be round four before we can judge Nadal properly. Nadal in the Australian Open and Wimbledon last year was in the low 1.7's to beat Murray, the landscape looks different now.

A lot can happen still, any potential meeting is still a week away with both having to win three matches first. Unless Nadal struggles horribly or Murray starts playing a lot better, I can't see the Nadal price being bigger than 1.4. The price can be different for any number of reasons though. To give one example, Nadal v Djokovic in the US Open Final last year. Nadal was 1.32 or so for a Sunday final, but had drifted to 1.47 because Sunday got rained out and Djokovic had time to rest. If Nadal goes 24-22 in the fifth set in the quarters, obviously the price for the semi will be very much higher. Predicting match odds three matches down the road is pretty tricky, but match to match I normally can predict which way the price is going to move.

[H_B]

blue4578, on 21 January 2011 - 11:17, said:

You can't just assume he will get through to play Soderling because you know little or nothing about Dolgopolov Loki, as there's a fair chance Tsonga will lose (in my opinion, we shall see).

I agree with you actually. Well, I think it will be close. I like Dolgopolov - backed him to win against Tsonga I think it was at Wimbledon and he lost in a marathon. I think he will be a top 10er in time.

[Loki]

I certainly didn't intend to sound like I thought it was a foregone conclusion that both (Tsonga and Soderling) would make the Fourth Round. I just got excited about the hypothetical match and where in my opinion Tsonga would be a good value bet to win in the likelihood both made it through. With the way both have struggled with the fitness it wouldn't surprise me if both got turfed out. This is the first time Soderling has made the Third Round after all.

[bunkmedal]

blue4578, on 21 January 2011 - 01:35, said:

In my opinion, getting near winning = winning at least two sets when it comes to a five set match. I just don't think Murray has much chance of doing that.

The ATP World Tour Finals match in London is not really that relevant. By Nadal's own admission the lightning fast indoor hard court is by far his worst surface. The previous year in London he didn't win a match. Murray v Nadal could've gone either way, but Murray missed a couple of easy shots after taking the lead in the final set tie break. Just like he bottled it against Federer in last year's Australian Open Final (which incidentally caused me to have a car crash ). The court in Australia is much slower and higher bouncing than at the O2.

Nadal's serve has improved since this tournament last year, and some of the tennis he played at the US Open was the best I've ever seen. Prior to that tournament I couldn't ever see him winning the US Open. Murray meanwhile has stood still in my opinion, or gone slightly backwards over the past year. Murray did play very, very well against Nadal in last year's Australian Open, and was 6-3 7-6 3-0 up when Nadal gave up, but Nadal in the matches prior to that was clearly a long way below his best and wasn't 100% fit. He didn't play for two months afterwards, which is not what he would normally do. Obviously that's not Murray's fault, and he did what he had to do very well. Nadal was a bit ill a couple of weeks ago in his loss to Davydenko in Doha but seems to be 100% fit and well at the moment.

I'll happily admit I was wrong if Murray beats Nadal, but depending on what happens between now and then (assuming they both win three more matches) you'll be getting between 5/2 and 3/1 on Murray winning the match. I'll be putting lots of my money where my mouth is by backing Nadal at anything 1/3 and over against Murray. Anyone thinking it's fairly close to 50/50 should be backing Murray heavily if they like the odd bet.

See, on paper you can make a case for saying that Nadal is miles ahead of Murray (the odds might even reflect that) but just looking at the actual matches recently, I really can't see there being that big a gap. In the last four matches in particular (even at Wimbledon), the overall tennis has been extremely tight: Murray's won two, Nadal has won two, they've each won one in Slams. If there is a huge gap between them then it's not in their actual game, it's this mythical ability that Nadal has to "win the big points" - or the opposite, Murray's supposed tendency to "bottle it" at the most important moment - but, like I said above, I think this sort of stuff tends to get grossly exaggerated.

When Nadal loses people fall over themselves to find some physical reason for it (even Murray's win in the US Open semi-final was written off in some quarters as Nadal being fatigued); when Murray loses they look for a mental reason (he bottled it, he's not mentally strong enough, etc.) Often this stuff has little to do with what actually happened on the court - at the tour finals, if anything, it was Nadal that "bottled it" by coughing up an easy break when he was serving for the match.

[blue4578]

Loki, on 21 January 2011 - 14:53, said:

I certainly didn't intend to sound like I thought it was a foregone conclusion that both (Tsonga and Soderling) would make the Fourth Round. I just got excited about the hypothetical match and where in my opinion Tsonga would be a good value bet to win in the likelihood both made it through. With the way both have struggled with the fitness it wouldn't surprise me if both got turfed out. This is the first time Soderling has made the Third Round after all.

Soderling struggled with fitness, Tsonga just looked to be struggling full stop. I don't think he was injured or ill, but just playing quite poorly and seemed to have problems concentrating. Soderling I've no idea what was wrong, but we'll know more after his next match. It's almost inconceivable that he would lose to Hernych unless he has a problem; you can get almost 50/1 if you think he will lose that match. That makes him about 98% likely to win according to the odds, Tsonga according to the odds is about 62.5% likely to win.

bunkmedal, on 21 January 2011 - 18:40, said:

See, on paper you can make a case for saying that Nadal is miles ahead of Murray (the odds might even reflect that) but just looking at the actual matches recently, I really can't see there being that big a gap. In the last four matches in particular (even at Wimbledon), the overall tennis has been extremely tight: Murray's won two, Nadal has won two, they've each won one in Slams. If there is a huge gap between them then it's not in their actual game, it's this mythical ability that Nadal has to "win the big points" - or the opposite, Murray's supposed tendency to "bottle it" at the most important moment - but, like I said above, I think this sort of stuff tends to get grossly exaggerated.

When Nadal loses people fall over themselves to find some physical reason for it (even Murray's win in the US Open semi-final was written off in some quarters as Nadal being fatigued); when Murray loses they look for a mental reason (he bottled it, he's not mentally strong enough, etc.) Often this stuff has little to do with what actually happened on the court - at the tour finals, if anything, it was Nadal that "bottled it" by coughing up an easy break when he was serving for the match.

You make fair points there. A lot of people regard Nadal as a superman who can't possibly lose unless he was severely handicapped in some way.

There's more to it than that though. Murray hasn't won a grand slam, Nadal has won nine despite being only 11 months older. Murray has been in two finals and just completely folded under pressure. The first one you could understand (Federer US Open 2008) but the second one (Federer Australian Open 2010) he just completely bottled it under pressure. In the third set, he served for it, got broken. Then in the tie break he had five sets points, two of which he missed by putting extremely simple volleys wide. I suppose you could argue that Murray hasn't played enough finals to properly judge how he handles it, but the signs aren't good.

The whole mental thing and performing under pressure is a relatively minor point though. The key point for me is that Nadal has continued to improve, while Murray has stood still recently. Nadal's serve has gained 6-8mph due to a different grip. His performance at the US Open, by far the hardest of the four grand slams for him to win, was astonishingly good. The improvement from the previous year, when he lost 6-2 6-2 6-2 to del Potro was vast. The Plexicushion court surface at the Australian Open also bounces high and takes top spin, which makes it much more suited to Nadal than the US Open DecoTurf courts, which play faster and have lower bounce.

Meanwhile Murray got destroyed by Wawrinka at the US Open, crushed in straight sets by Nadal at Wimbledon (again he had chances to win at least one set and folded under pressure) and hammered by Berdych at Roland Garros. There's no guarantee he'll make the semis as he often loses to lesser players. Good luck to him, and in no way am I demeaning his achivements as he is the best British player since the 1930's, but I believe he may already have gotten as close as he is ever going to when it comes to trying to win grand slams. People are naturally biased with him being Scottish, but I'm just telling it how I see it.

[Nightmare]

Zvonareva-Safarova finally ends, and it's Murray time.

[calum_gers]

Nightmare, on 22 January 2011 - 02:15, said:

Zvonareva-Safarova finally ends, and it's Murray time.

That tie-break seemed to go on forever, i'm up at 9.30 to go to Edinburgh for the football aswell. Let's hope he wraps it up sharpish.

[Nightmare]

It was actually a decent match by WTA standards, but they're just so awful on their own serve. It's really weird.

Zvonareva kept breaking to serve for a 2-game lead and kept letting Safarova break back and tie it up. Then the same in the tiebreaker. Bloody women, can't do anything right.

[blue4578]

Just be thankful that Vera won the tie break.

I was wanting to watch Tsonga, if you're watching on Eurosport you'd have noticed how they suddenly cut from that match mid-game to Murray's warmup without a word being said. No MCA on live video tonight either.

[calum_gers]

I guess that could be described as typical Murray, two breaks up and flying. Next thing you know 0-40 on his own serve. Bizarre.

[Nightmare]

That was far too easy for Murray.

Hopefully he keeps it up so I can get to bed before 4.

[blue4578]

Not sure why anyone would stay up specially to watch this if you weren't planning to already (I'm on nightshift for two weeks specially for this). It's a complete mismatch. Garcia-Lopez has served five times and been broken every time. Even if he had played well this was an almost impossible task for him, but he is having an absolute shocker here so far. Murray has had to do nothing much at all to be 6-1 3-0.

[blue4578]

Make that six straight service games with no holds, shocking miss again there. You'll probably get your wish to be all done by 4am at this rate.

[calum_gers]

blue4578, on 22 January 2011 - 03:13, said:

Not sure why anyone would stay up specially to watch this if you weren't planning to already (I'm on nightshift for two weeks specially for this). It's a complete mismatch. Garcia-Lopez has served five times and been broken every time. Even if he had played well this was an almost impossible task for him, but he is having an absolute shocker here so far. Murray has had to do nothing much at all to be 6-1 3-0.

I work late everday anyway, so my sleeping pattern hasn't managed to get back to normal after the ashes.

Murray couldn't have asked for an easier first, second and third round in a Grand Slam than he's had.

This post has been edited by calum_gers: 22 January 2011 - 03:20

[blue4578]

calum_gers, on 22 January 2011 - 03:19, said:

I work late everday anyway, so my sleeping pattern hasn't managed to get back to normal after the ashes.

Mine did, but making a big late night effort for this tournament. No more of this the rest of the year.

calum_gers, on 22 January 2011 - 03:19, said:

Murray couldn't have asked for an easier first, second and third round in a Grand Slam than he's had.

Absolutely. It's hard to tell exactly how well he is playing as he's had it so easy.

[Nightmare]

If it were my choice I'd be a 5am-midday sleeper every day, I'm not a morning person.

But seeing as I work at 7 or 8 fairly regularly, that trend has had to stop in the past few months. Off work until Wednesday though so I'm back into my old ways until Wednesday morning jolts me back to reality.

Garcia-Lopez finally making a bit of a game of it. He's actually won 2 games in this set!

[blue4578]

This is my work so you have to adjust your sleeping patterns accordingly. Next year I might have to go to Australia to make it a little more bearable.


Tsonga has utterly imploded (Eurosport 2). Much more interesting match, it's just a shame I've not been able to see all of it. There's been more swings and roundabouts than the biggest playground.

This post has been edited by blue4578: 22 January 2011 - 03:38

[Nightmare]

Murray breaks in the 3rd. This one is over.

Gambling is your work, eh? Nice one. Happy about that Dolgopolov situation, I'm a terrilbe gambler but this one has paid off (barring some ridiculous Tsonga comeback).