Week 33 - ATP Masters 1000 - Cincinnati, OH, USA (Hard)

steven · Tennis legend

RE: Week 33 - ATP Masters 1000 - Cincinnati, OH, USA (Hard)

RJA · Hall of fame

The individual result doesn't bother me too much but I do find it concerning that since Shanghai 2011, Andy has won just 1 of the next 17 Masters Series events. Especially as that event was Miami this year where neither Federer or Nadal played and Djokovic was beaten by Haas. Obviously Andy's focus is on the slams but I feel that he should be able to pick up the odd Masters Series win as well.

steven · Tennis legend

I remember the days when he used to win a fair number of Masters though (I'm pretty sure that at least one year, he did better in Masters than anyone else) and we just wished he'd win a slam.

It is puzzling that he seems to find it harder than the others to do well in both (even given that, as Miami and this week show, even the best players have blowouts in Masters some of the time)

BeefyDeedz · Pro player

Agreed on the Masters; it seems a little short-sighted of a guy who is only 26 to already be fully focused on the slams in my eyes, although maybe it is a sign of changing times.

Regarding Murray's seeding at the US Open, although I would of course prefer to see Murray maintaining his no.2 seeding, I can have few qualms considering how dominantly Nadal has returned. After all, the world rankings are a portrayal of form and result.

Ratty · County player

steven wrote:
I remember the days when he used to win a fair number of Masters though (I'm pretty sure that at least one year, he did better in Masters than anyone else) and we just wished he'd win a slam.

Oh my, I can put the Legend right on a stat! (My only concession to anorak-dom is to keep a spreadsheet of major tournament winners going back to 1998.)

So ... Andy has won a total of 9 Masters/ATP 1000 events. Djokovic has won 14, Fed 19, and Nadal 25. Andy won 2 in each of 2008, 2009, 2010 & 2011. Nadal won 3 in each of 2008, 2009 & 2010; and Djokovic won 5 in 2011.

steven · Tennis legend

Given that I hadn't checked it, I'm far more shocked that you keep a spreadsheet of anything tennis-related than that I got it wrong smile That must have taken some admitting to wink

I didn't actually mean in terms of numbers won (I knew Rafa had probably got him there most years) but in terms of total points. On reflection, I'm pretty sure Rafa tended to beat him on that basis too, even in his (Andy's) peak years for Masters points, especially if you include Monte Carlo. What I was probably remembering was that back in those years, Andy was getting a far higher percentage of his total points from Masters than any of the other members of the big 4.

indiana · Tennis legend

I'm a little more concerned than after last week.

Yes, Andy has got more matches under his belt, but surely he would want rather better form than displayed against Berdych. Also, actually maybe more of an issue, dropping to no 3 seed; if Nadal wins here, could be problematic.

I still on balance though expect another good Slam campaign.

Spectator · All-time great

Yes, I'm useless on these things, but if he's seeded three, a Federer or Del Potro or Berdych QF, followed by a Nadal or Djokovic SF, followed by a Nadal or Djokovic F would be a possibility, would it not? (Though after Wimbledon, who knows?)

Wish he hadn't lost again to Mr Berdych. Cringe every time I see said gentleman in Mr Murray's draw.

Bob in Spain · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
Yes, I'm useless on these things, but if he's seeded three, a Federer or Del Potro or Berdych QF, followed by a Nadal or Djokovic SF, followed by a Nadal or Djokovic F would be a possibility, would it not? (Though after Wimbledon, who knows?)

Wish he hadn't lost again to Mr Berdych. Cringe every time I see said gentleman in Mr Murray's draw.

Given that the Fed is now outside the top 4, a QF v Fed/Delpo/Berdych, semi v Rafa and Final v Nole is possible whether Andy is seeded 2 or three so I really don't think it makes much difference in the grand slam scheme of things.

Spectator · All-time great

Good point! As I said, I'm pretty useless on these things.

steven · Tennis legend

Looking on the bright side, Muzz did win 50% more matches in Canada and Cincy combined this year than he did last year!

Of course, last year he put a lot of effort into the Olympics which made it less worrying, but I imagine he'll be back on form for the USO. Still, the fact that he won the US Open last year doesn't mean he would definitely have got past Berdych had he met him in the QFs there ...

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes, Andy could still get a "bad" draw as number 2 seed ( but the % is less likely ) and as no 2 seed he could be seeded to meet the winner of the Ferrer quarter in the semis, potentally say seeded to be Ferrer or Gasquet ( or whoever will be seed 8 ). Whereas as no 3 seed, he would be seeded to meet Djokovic or Nadal in the SFs.

So the %s are better if he is seeded 2. I recall Steven produced some %s for potential draws before Wimbledon and the odds did look quite a bit better for the no 1 and 2 seeds.

philwrig · Hall of fame

So Rafa is now number 2 and has number 1 within his sights, who would have thought ;)

indiana · Tennis legend

So Nadal wins the title and goes up to no 2 in the rankings, taking the US Open no 2 seeding and theoretical better draw prospects.

While Nadal always had a very decent chance of taking the no 2 spot post the US Open ( which is now definite ) it took quite a combination for him to take the no 2 spot pre the US Open ( he had to win both masters titles and Andy win no more than 3 matches over the 2 weeks, which happened ! )