2018 Western and Southern Open...ATP 500...Cincinnati, Ohio USA

[klacr]

I think Roger may have tipped passed his best. I don't see him winning another slam.

It's hard to disagree. But then again, many people said the same when he lost to Nadal in 2008 at Wimbledon. And also when he went on a slide because of injury. And then when he came back off injury and won Aussie Open many chalked it up as a fluke and his last hurrah. He won two more slams after that. It's easy to write him off, and if we keep believing he inevitably be will be. As the saying goes..."A hypochondriac will eventually be justified, at their funeral."

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

But as you can see these assumptions might be false assumptions. So often is the case. What appears to be the case is often not the case at all. Many times it is an illusion that the less discerning individual will bet on...thus the oddsmakers knowing something that we do not. I am beginning to get an idea about what they may be about. Factor in that Federer is also in the decline physically at 37 years old as of August eighth...the same day as my father's wife Madeline. The younger legs of Novak Djokovic have no doubt turned to steel under the stress of battle this week. He is getting some serious match play under his belt. Something which the Amazing Roger Federer does not have the luxury of having. You see...I have been harping on this for a while now and I think it showed up at Wimbledon just when he needed it most. He failed to close out an opponent that he should have.

So it is too close to call. Everything seems to cancel each other out. So it might just come down to the service game as we were discussing earlier in the thread. The Federer serve when it is on is as good as it gets in the modern game. He doesn't need the shot clock. He is a gunslinger. He gets up to the line and he delivers the goods. gzhpcu notes he is an artist. He steps up to the canvas and just starts painting away. Djokovic on the other hand takes a lifetime it seems to get the ball in play with the endless bouncing that is one of the most nauseating aspects of modern tennis. But Novak and Roger have one more thing in common with regards to their service games. These two guys are both relying on placement and tactical serving to win their service games as opposed to brute serving. Bully serving. Novak takes care of his serve so well and one reason is what he has that follows up the serve...his forehand and backhand are among the best in the world.

So if the courts are quicker I could see Federer getting on top of Djokovic and going for some heavy haymakers and knocking the bejeezus out of Novak. But if he falters at all on his service game he is going to have his work cut out for him. The one thing that lack of match play can have the most pronounce effect upon is the serve. If Federer does not have the good rhythm that enables him to "roll" on his serve he is going to be working harder on his service game than he would like to. His strategy will be to keep it short and sweet on his service game and try to slice and dice his way to a break on the Djokovic serve. Novak on the other hand is trying to get as much work out of Federer as he can...especially on Federer's own serve so he can win a battle of attrition. He wants to grind the old man into the Cincinnati pavement.

Djokovic loses his robotic moniker when he encounters Federer. Roger brings out the best or the worst in his opponents. Against the guys that believe they have a chance against him he has the effect of raising their games so he has to elevate his too. Against those that are disbelievers he rolls over them like yesterdays news. Federer wants to take an even head to head record against Novak into the U. S. Open and Novak wants to go two up. It is a mind game all the way. Physical form is such an important factor and so much of the physical form is going to be psychological. No wonder those oddsmakers stay in business. They have all of the permutations and combinations covered in the spread.

Right from the start out of the gates it was one of two things. Either Roger lost his nerve looking down the barrel of the Novak Djokovic return of serve or he for some strange reason...played it soft. The serve wasn't there. What was the average mph on his first serves? He was serving up soft balls on the second and Novak was just tagging him. Roger managed to win his first service game but my fear that Novak was going to make him work came to fruition. He really struggled in that first game to hold serve and the writing was clearly on the wall. It ain't your night kid...said the fat man with the cigar in the dressing room.

Somewhere in this thread stotty and stroke are discussing the point of who wants it more. It appeared to me as if Roger didn't want it all. And his performance prompted the kind of discussion that that kind of performance would warrant. Is that what Federer wants? Does he want his opponents thinking that he is in full decline and he was taking it on the chin from an otherwise sharp opponent? What did Federer have to gain by winning? Not much when you take into consideration the broad depth of his career. He is only interested in Slams. Against an otherwise sharp Djokovic he gives him the limp leg and just rolls over. Djokovic has to believe he has his number now. Maybe...just maybe that is what Federer wants him and everyone else to think. He's done. He's through. His best days are behind him. They surely are that is for sure. His best days were probably wasted on that stupid 90 square racquet he was using since 2004 until 2014. He missed out on so many more Slams...what a monumental blunder.

Either way you look at it the end result will have little effect on either player. Novak is already reaching his form without this win. He managed a rather steely performance in this tournament going three sets four times and staring down Roger Federer in the final. He did say in an article that I read that Roger wasn't at his best and he wasn't moving anywhere near his best. True enough and the question becomes why. Why wasn't he? Was making the final all that he had set out to accomplish in Cincinnati? It looked like it was because after not losing his serve once in the tournament he suddenly lost it three times and it appeared that he lost it without much of an effort. That's what it looked like to me. Or he other side of the coin is that he was just not match tough enough to engage a fully engaged Novak Djokovic toe to toe. But it looked suspicious to me. The court was playing fast yet there was nothing to suggest that the Federer serve was making any kind of impression on Novak Djokovic. I saw Federer play Novak in similar condition at Dubai a year or two ago and he just took the racquet out of Novak's hands. Handcuffed him on the serve.

It's a wash. There was little to take away from that match except the fact that it might be that Roger is really in decline. Even so he makes the final which the other 60 players a bit envious. At his age it is no small feat.

It is totally passionless tennis.

It was a boring display of tennis too. With all of the high expectations it certainly didn't live up to its billing. It was so one sided that I went to sleep here in Sweden at 11:30 pm just after Djokovic broke back in the second set. I was already losing interest. First of all a positive comment about Novak Djokovic. This guy makes some remarkable gets and he has an uncanny ability of running down really tough balls and somehow getting the ball back in play where his opponent is nearly handcuffed with his ridiculously good defensive return. He is such a Houdini at escaping a situation that looks to be sign, sealed and delivered and just like that he is back on the offence. Did you see how routinely he took care of his serve except for the one careless game in the second set where he even double faulted to hand Federer a break? Then he just took it back as if it were written in a script. Novak is a tremendous talent at what he does and the game is certainly perfectly engineered for him with the big racquets that allows him to turn the racquet face upside down on his forehand. Most of the court surfaces favour his defence and counter punch style of play. He is the epic iconic modern day tennis player...yet he is practically inept playing in the forecourt or at the net. He doesn't come to the net unless he is guaranteed a sitter of a volley and he muffs his fair share of these. Yet he gets away with it.

Another thing that I like about Djokovic is that he started beating on Rafael Nadal like nobody else was beating on him. For this I would almost give him carte blanceh. But alas...there is something about Novak that I find as about as ultimately boring and irritating and you might just be able to guess what it is. What is with that infernal bouncing of the ball? That is just so sickening I cannot begin to articulate just how unnecessary it is. It makes me wonder just what kind of person would think that they have the right to make an opponent wait for him to go into motion each and every time he serves a point. If he misses his first serve now the opponent has to wait for the second. At one point when things were getting a bit crucial in the first set he bounced the ball seventeen times and that didn't include the little four or five ball bounce routine where he bounces the ball with the opposite side of the racquet for good measure. He is playing within the rules but he is also using the rules to his advantage and it is called gamesmanship. His counterpart Rafael Nadal does the same thing. They make the opponent wait and wait until they are out of patience and have lost any sense of rhythm for play. Another thing is the audience. Who would pay to watch some prima donna stand there and bounce the ball umpteen times before he finally gets ready to play.

Djokovic has got all of the titles. He has all of the money. He gets more than his share of his attention. But I don't like him. I don't admire him. I think he is using gamesmanship and if he isn't boring in the way that he plays the game he is boring period with his incessant bouncing of the ball before he serves. There is no logical reason that I can think of to bounce it that many times except to try his opponents patience and this my fellow forum contributors stinks of some really sucky gamesmanship. When I remember Novak Djokovic in the future I will of course remember that he won a lot of tournaments and made a lot of money. I will remember that he discovered a good strategy to put a good ass whipping on the other idiot who incessently bounces the ball before he serves. But most of all I will remember him for that very thing...he is the guy who incessently bounced the ball before he served and made his opponent wait the full entire legal limit before every point that he served. I'm afraid that I don't have that much respect for him after all.

[stroke]

Even though I am not entirely on the same page as you db. I still liked your post. You own it and you are a great writer.

[stotty]

It's hard to disagree. But then again, many people said the same when he lost to Nadal in 2008 at Wimbledon. And also when he went on a slide because of injury. And then when he came back off injury and won Aussie Open many chalked it up as a fluke and his last hurrah. He won two more slams after that. It's easy to write him off, and if we keep believing he inevitably be will be. As the saying goes..."A hypochondriac will eventually be justified, at their funeral."

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Sure, but I just got the impression that Roger couldn't keep up. It wasn't a bad day thing it was an age thing. He's still brilliant but at the very top level yesterday his game folded...he couldn't keep up., mentally or physically. It was actually an easy win for Novak...straightforward.

Roger has always kept up with anyone in the past, not matter how well they play. Cincinnati is a quick surface and, as don_budge said, Roger can take the racket out of the hand of anyone in that kind of a game. Yet yesterday he was nowhere near doing that. I could be wrong but I think Roger has finally gone past his best.

[gzhpcu]

The only hope is the new generation. Hope they take over soon....

[arturohernandez]

Sure, but I just got the impression that Roger couldn't keep up. It wasn't a bad day thing it was an age thing. He's still brilliant but at the very top level yesterday his game folded...he couldn't keep up., mentally or physically. It was actually an easy win for Novak...straightforward.

Roger has always kept up with anyone in the past, not matter how well they play. Cincinnati is a quick surface and, as don_budge said, Roger can take the racket out of the hand of anyone in that kind of a game. Yet yesterday he was nowhere near doing that. I could be wrong but I think Roger has finally gone past his best.

So it is decline?; Has he lost his edge? Or as don_budge noted is he trying to trick everyone?

I think a bit of both. It is clear that he cannot play three tournaments in a row anymore at the highest level.

Last year he got hurt at the Rogers cup and was not the same after that. Note that not the same still gets him to the quarters at the US Open last year.

At the same time he needs to play in order to get practice.

So the solution is play the master's as if it was match practice.

I mean all week he was winning sets ala Sampras. Just biding his time and holding his serve until the others buckled.

The fire is still in there and I think the US Open will reveal if his plan was to try and take the last GS he has not won in a long time.

If it is physical, then we will also know. He simply won't be able to summon that same level.

His interviews reveal that he felt he needed to rest and that Master's were tough because there was no way to get a rhythm.

All of this points to him kind of tanking. Not losing purposefully but saving himself.

If he fought tooth and nail at Cincy and took it to three sets and won or lost no one would remember or care years from now.

But if he does the same at the US Open whatever the result, it will be much more memorable.

[don_budge]

So it is decline?; Has he lost his edge? Or as don_budge noted is he trying to trick everyone?

I think a bit of both. It is clear that he cannot play three tournaments in a row anymore at the highest level.

Last year he got hurt at the Rogers cup and was not the same after that. Note that not the same still gets him to the quarters at the US Open last year.

At the same time he needs to play in order to get practice.

So the solution is play the master's as if it was match practice.

Roger has a bit of a dilemma. I suspect that there is some truth to all of your points. I thought that he should have played the French as you said...for practice. But the last couple of years have been a bit suspicious from another point of view. There is the question of using substances for performance enhancing. Could the dodgy schedule and the brilliant performances be an indication of some sort of cycling these substances so as to go undetected?

I am not saying he is or even suggesting he is. This is another possibility. Another permutation or combination. He disappears and returns stronger, faster and better than ever. It's a question.

[don_budge]

The only hope is the new generation. Hope they take over soon....

The emergence of Stefanos Tsitsipas has given the "Next Generation" a glimmer of hope. Let's keep an eye on him. It looks as if he and Alexander Zverev, Francis Tiafoe, Hyceon Chung and Denis Shapovalov are going to see a lot of air time in the near future.

[don_budge]

Sure, but I just got the impression that Roger couldn't keep up. It wasn't a bad day thing it was an age thing. He's still brilliant but at the very top level yesterday his game folded...he couldn't keep up., mentally or physically. It was actually an easy win for Novak...straightforward.

It looked to me as if he played it pretty "soft" from the very beginning. It was almost as if he was pitching batting practice to Djokovic. Just serving up "gopher balls".

Do you know what a gopher ball is?

[stotty]

Do you know what a gopher ball is?

I didn't, but I do now.

[bottle]

stroke...the great thing about you is that it isn't necessary to be on the same page to have an interesting and respectful conversation. I'm glad you have upped your participation on the forum as you add another unique perspective. We don't have to agree or disagree on anything as you know. Obviously we both love the game...and the conversation. We just have to call it like we see it. Thanks.

Ignoring one another works very well. Unfortunately, however, this is not a good example.

[don_budge]

If he fought tooth and nail at Cincy and took it to three sets and won or lost no one would remember or care years from now.

At the beginning of the second set Federer broke Djokovic to go up 2-0 with Roger serving. He immediately gave the break back with a rather lame effort. To me...he played it soft there instead of putting the pedal to the metal which is what I am accustomed to seeing once he gets up a break. He handed it right back to Djokovic. Very uncharacteristic. I went to bed immediately...not wasting my precious sleep on an obviously losing effort. If there had been honest effort...clawing tooth and nail...I would have hung in there to the bitter end.

[don_budge]

Even though I am not entirely on the same page as you db. I still liked your post. You own it and you are a great writer.

stroke...the great thing about you is that it isn't necessary to be on the same page to have an interesting and respectful conversation. I'm glad you have upped your participation on the forum as you add another unique perspective. We don't have to agree or disagree on anything as you know. Obviously we both love the game...and the conversation. We just have to call it like we see it. Thanks.

[stotty]

The draw has just come out for the US Open and it isn't a good one for Roger. He's had sublime draws in the last handful of slams but not this time. He could face Kyrgios in round 3. Djokovic, Zverev and Cilic are also in Roger's half. Djokovic and Roger could potentially meet in the quarters.

[don_budge]

The draw has just come out for the US Open and it isn't a good one for Roger. He's had sublime draws in the last handful of slams but not this time. He could face Kyrgios in round 3. Djokovic, Zverev and Cilic are also in Roger's half. Djokovic and Roger could potentially meet in the quarters.

A gentle reminder from Stotty to get this party started.