Monte Carlo, ATP 1000

[jimlosaltos]

Rune routines Med in 1st set, really pushing him around and hurting him with very good drop shots. It will be interesting to see Med's response.

Perhaps, but Medvedev had to play 3 tough sets against Zverev with their match & post match obligations likely running until 1 AM, then has an early match with Rune who had a walk-over. Hardly a good measure of either.

Points out continuing problems with scheduling of early matches at events with large draws, too few courts for those matches, and no roofs during rainy season.

[tenniscoach1]

Not so fast Snarky. But great call on your hunch...you should have bet a bunch! Again...it all comes down to performance and I question something very fundamental in the Tsitsipas camp now. I have been questioning it for a while. Maybe Daddy-O has to go. Just a hunch. I see Mr. Patrick (Coaching Whore) Mouratoglou in the Tsitsipas box again. This guy has never said anything beyond high school Tennis 101 that I have heard. A bunch of yada...yada...yada if you know what I mean. Father Tsitsipas does not have the experience to make meaningful input for developing the vast potential waiting to be mined from his son.

Daddy is a world class coach. Watched him carefully over three or four practice sessions - and he's one the best on the tour. Runs a very well organized practice and treats the hitting partners like gold. The son - walked past a group of young fans without signing autographs ... and, I did not really like a lot of his interaction with his team. Best to not say more. Other players always whine about his dad - but, it's a good tactic - complain against the old man, say he is doing this and that, pin the kid against dad, good narrative - etc ... it's a great tactic. Dad seems fine. I saw a old Ukrainian player that acted like this Tsitsipas - he acted this way at 45 ... some never learn and he pissed away a superb career. I called him out on it and told him it doesn't fly in pro sports ... he went away pouting like a 6 year old child - baby. Borje Salming the Swede who passed away is probably the gold standard for how to interact with kids, players, etc ... he was a great guy - sad he passed away - such a great player ...

read this ... great story ...

A lesson to all NHL stars who balk at signing autographs for a kid: you never know what that kid is going to be when he grows up.

As a 14-year-old in 1983, Brendan Shanahan approached Leafs star Rick Vaive for an autograph.

Vaive turned the kid down.

And the snub would stay tucked away in Shanahan's memory.

"When I was 14 years old I was skating in the summertime at a rink in Toronto," recalled the Mimico native. "Rick Vaive happened to be skating at an adjoining rink and we were actually in dressing rooms that were right next to each other. I went in when he was sort of settled and asked him for an autograph. I didn't get the best response from Rick Vaive at that time."

Retelling the story to the Newark Ledger and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman's radio show, Shanahan never forgot the snub.

His career rocketed, with the Devils selecting him in the first round in 1987. He'd eventually meet up with Vaive four years later, the two lining up for a faceoff in Buffalo when Vaive was finishing out his career with the Sabres.

"Fast forward four years later and Rick Vaive is waiting for a meaningless faceoff in Buffalo," Shanahan said. "He's now playing for the Sabres. He's lined up next to some 18-year-old kid from New Jersey. When the puck dropped, I attacked Rick Vaive.
"It was a quiet, uneventful game. He couldn't believe the rage I had, not only in attacking him, but it took two (linesmen) to restrain me afterwards and throw me in the penalty box."

Vaive hardly knew what hit him. He approached former teammate Jim Korn – then with the Devils – to find out what was wrong with Shanahan.

"He said... `By the way, what's wrong with that kid and why was he coming after me?'" said Shanahan. "Jim Korn said, `Apparently he asked you for an autograph when he was a little kid and you weren't that friendly to him. So he's harboured those feelings since then.'"

Vaive approached Shanahan about three years ago in Toronto and introduced him to his 14-year-old son – with different results.

"I signed the autograph, took a picture and gave him a piggy-back," Shanahan said. "I didn't want karma to come back and get me."

[stroke]

Sinner dominates the 1st set, particularly with his forehand, the biggest shot on the court.

[stroke]

Rune clearly the better player out there vs Med. He will play Sinner or Musetti. Fritz will be Rublev next round. I would think he would be the slight favorite.

[don_budge]

Rune routines Med in 1st set, really pushing him around and hurting him with very good drop shots. It will be interesting to see Med's response.

Rune "runetines" Mr. Pencil. That's a good one. Yeah...the response is so important. Down a set and things aren't going your way? How do you stop the bleeding and turn the tables? Medvedev doesn't look to be all that interested. Somewhat distracted. Shades of Djokovic yesterday. He looked to not be into the match 110%. Medvedev looked to be out of it when I turned it off last night. Somewhat of a snooze fest. Similar to today's match. I fully expected to read of a Zverev upset. So he can turn the tables but he has to be motivated.

[stroke]

Rune routines Med in 1st set, really pushing him around and hurting him with very good drop shots. It will be interesting to see Med's response.

[don_budge]

Fritz looked like a FO contender with that win over Tsitsipas.

Not so fast Snarky. But great call on your hunch...you should have bet a bunch! Again...it all comes down to performance and I question something very fundamental in the Tsitsipas camp now. I have been questioning it for a while. Maybe Daddy-O has to go. Just a hunch. I see Mr. Patrick (Coaching Whore) Mouratoglou in the Tsitsipas box again. This guy has never said anything beyond high school Tennis 101 that I have heard. A bunch of yada...yada...yada if you know what I mean. Father Tsitsipas does not have the experience to make meaningful input for developing the vast potential waiting to be mined from his son.

Fritz a contender. Let's just see how he does in the next round before we go all jumping the gun here. Mr. Pencil and Holger (Brat) Rune next. Runestone even. A Nordic thing.

[stroke]

Fritz looked like a FO contender with that win over Tsitsipas.

[stroke]

He is going to have to claw his way back. Fritz beat him comprehensively in the 1st set. Tsitsipas is a slightly better mover, his forehand is equal to the Fritz forehand. Fritz has a better serve. The big advantage Fritz has is his backhand. It is much more of a weapon that Stef's. Fritz does not need to runaround to hit forehand. This looks like bad matchup for Tsitsipas. If Tsitsipas comes forward to the net, he better have Fritz under duress.

[don_budge]

Now the moment of truth for Fritz...serving out the set. First point ace. Missed first serve...30-0. Near ace...40-0. Missed first serve...game. No muss...no fuss. Just the way it is supposed to be. Huge first set from Taylor...now the question. Can he maintain the pressure on his opponent?

[don_budge]

Yeah...two breaks in a row for Fritz. I have always wondered about that little hitch in the Tsitsipas motion. So far he has not found his timing (tempo) on the serve. Can he right the ship? One thing that I was impressed with when he first appeared on the scene was his ability to grind it out. He could get behind and claw his way back into a match. A very necessary trait in tennis. Does he still have that...it has been a question of mine for a while.

[don_budge]

Rune a slight favorite over Medvedev. Tsitsipas is a solid favorite over Fritz. Fritz looks primed for an upset here it looks to me.

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/apos...-feature-2019/.

Taylor Fritz primed to upset Stefanos Tsitsipas? Number three ranked player in the world versus number ten. Tsitsipas was more than likely more or less raised on red clay in Europe. Most Americans are a bit like fish out of water on the surface. Stefanos has not really progressed like I thought that he would. I was curious to how good a player his father Apostopolis or whatever it is...is or was. The answer to that was he is not a player at all. Not in the sense of a tour player. So I wonder about his qualifications. He did go to school and was educated in tennis. But what exactly does that mean? If Fritz does upset Stefanos here...it is going to raise some more questions to me. Tsitsipas seems to be stalled a bit. But number three isn't all that bad...is it?

[stroke]

Rune a slight favorite over Medvedev. Tsitsipas is a solid favorite over Fritz. Fritz looks primed for an upset here it looks to me.

[don_budge]

Can't resist sharing this screen cap. For those of you suspicious of ATP stats, here's some fodder:

Zverev's fastest serve was 869 MPH or 1,400 Km/h. But did he have good technique?
https://www.atptour.com/en/scores/cu...lo/410/results

I'd hate to get hit with that !

Stats are one thing. Technique is another. Lately I have been discussing technique in service motions at length and there is a very good reason for it. Technique is so important in the long run because it affects the most important stat of all...percentage of potential realized. It is a game of millimetres at times and particularly so with the service lines...so accuracy matters. Speed can carry a player so far but then it seems inevitably it hits a wall. Better to rely on a balance between the three elements of power. Oops...I meant control.

Did Zverev have good technique? Again...this is a question of potential. What potential is there left in this big time athlete who at 6'6" should have a boatload of serving prowess that will not fail him when it matters most? That is the question.

Performance is another thing. As a self described "Performance Analyst" it is part of my function to observe what can potentially go wrong. Thus the discussion of service motion technique and the quest for the perfect motion. With regards to performance...all of these players and athletes are performers. In any given match they perform to a percentage of their ability at any given moment. There are a plethora of reasons and excuses that enhance performance or detract from it. The question is always why. The players arrive at their conclusions as to what makes them perform their best through an accumulation of experience and having been through the ringer before. But they are human and are not always capable of arriving at the lowest common denominator as it relates to their optimum performance.

"The Big Four" and more notably "The Big Three" sans Andy Murray have been big time performers for that past umpteen years. It would seem that on any given night that these guys were capable of approaching their limit in terms of optimal performance. Sometimes they were not capable of even approaching that limit yet with all of their experience and training they were somehow capable of delivering the goods. Under all conditions and circumstances. Let's face it...they have their excuses too. They are human too. But somehow God makes some of us just a cut above the rest and these were the chose few. Performance. The bottom line.

So technique is not the end all and be all. It is not the end itself. It is the means to the end. Better technique is going to enhance your percentage of performance by giving a player more repeatable strokes and shots under any and all circumstances and conditions. But in the end it isn't going to win stand alone for you. Performance is the end.

I think that the Musetti and Djokovic match was a good case in point. Djokovic was obviously not fully invested in the match...probably for a number of reasons. First of all...what's in it for him? Nothing of great importance. Certainly not. He had been out of action for a number of weeks and depending how he invested his time between training, his family and any other number of factors more or less dictated something to the effect of his performance. But the biggest underlying factor is one of desire. What did he want out of this tournament? Was it important that he won it? Was it even important that he even won a match? I doubt it. This is all about preparation. Preparation for the French Open. I suspect somewhere between here and the French Open we will see the "real" Novak Djokovic.

Btw...for what little I saw of Musetti I thought he had a pretty darn good motion. On the serve. I have never been a big fan of the Zverev motion. I know he can generate big time MPH...but that is merely a third of the entire proposition. His motion looks like it has been cobbled together over the years...and again from what little I saw yesterday it looked to me as if it had been modified a bit. I guess I will have to wait and see to look at it again...seeing as Mr. Pencil sent him packing. After he failed to perform when he needed it most. For whatever reason.

[don_budge]

Novak Djokovic versus Lorenzo Musetti...everyone looking for Musetti to duplicate the effort at the French when he had Novak two sets to zero...before folding. Probably not going to happen.

Hubert Hurkacz versus Jannik Sinner...see my comments earlier in this thread about a big lug hugging the baseline against more mobil opponents.

Daniil Medvedev versus Alexander Zverev...maybe the most interesting match story wise on the agenda. Medvedev up 7-6 Head to Head and this is their first meeting on clay. Medvedev in form and Zverev is always somewhat of a question mark.

Matteo Berrettini versus Holger Rune...Berrettini's service motion under the microscope and Rune's dysfunctional tennis coach the story here.

Andrey Rublev versus Karen Khachanov...two leading tennis players in the modern game currently without a flag which cannot be discussed on tennisplayer.net due to gag order on politics.

Jan-Lennard Struff versus Casper Ruud...Ruud trying to make a believer of himself and Struff trying to make a believer of just about anybody. Good win over Minaur who might be clay challenged.

Taylor Fritz versus Jiri Lehecka...Just want to make a brief comment/analysis about the fashion statement of Fritz against Wawrinka. Nice off white shirt and shorts. The headband is a wise choice over the backwards baseball cap eight days a week. But why the black socks? Just curious...such a poor choice.

Nicolas Jarry versus Stefanos Tsitsipas...my "MATCH OF THE DAY" because of a two fold criteria. First of all is the conversation of service motions and secondly is the question surrounding the coaching paradigm behind the development of Stefanos Tsitisipas. What is the path forwards for Stefanos? Is there a vision? Once a boatload of potential now a anchor of under developed potental. Why?

Gee...I did pretty good yesterday. Not that I actually called anything but just a little food for thought. Nothing actionable. Musetti? Novak didn't care...hardly a twit. He went down without a whimper. Hurkacz...need I say more. The third third set was the kiss of death. Mr. Pencil versus Zverev...very, very interesting. Question mark? Failure to serve out the match twice. It's a sign. Berrettini blew a cog serving lights out in the previous match? Gag order on Rublev...a man without a flag. Is Ruud having a tough time believing? Fritz...why the black socks? Doesn't that pretty girl have any say so in your fashion statement? Tsitsipas...nothing to add.