2017 U. S. Open Championships...ATP 2000...New York, New York, U. S. A.

[don_budge]

With all the withdrawals, looking good for Federer or one of the future generation players. Am I missing something, or shouldn't the draw be corrected to have Roger and Rafa at opposite ends? Seems not to have happened...

Nobody to my knowledge has ever accused the ITF or the USTA of being "too" intelligent. Too as in overly. Not that there aren't some intelligent people involved...but there is little evidence to suggest it.

But...guess what? There is a silver lining in every cloud according to you know who. To me of course. Guess who is in the bottom half of the draw as a qualifier? If you guessed Denis "The Menace" Shapovalov you are absolutely correct. Didn't he just beat Fafa in Montreal? I think that he did. This kid is just itching to explode and the timing of this event could not have been better. He is coming off a tremendous confidence booster in Montreal and his position in the draw is how should I say...interesting.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/scores/current/us-open/560/draws

He has been positioned in the bottom half in the quarter with Marin Cilic. It looks to me as if Marin has been moved to the spot that Andy Murray had originally. So perhaps they have adjusted the bottom half somewhat. There are a bunch of seasoned hard players in his quarter besides Marin but who's to say. "The Menace" is there to spoil there day. He doesn't know the meaning of "I cannot" yet. The sky is the limit. He is dreaming...the stuff children do. Anything is possible. Let's keep an eye on things...ok?

[gzhpcu]

Once a draw is out, it's tricky to redo everything, you simply try to spread the seeds out. Here is an explanation of from an old NYT article.
https://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.c...s-and-seeding/

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Granted, but if the number 2 seed exits, the nr 3 seed should take his place.

[don_budge]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZKxKWfzUic

Here...watch this while waiting for the action at the 2017 U. S. Open.

Here read all about it in a "brief four page thread" that I started on this match.

https://www.tennisplayer.net/bulleti...-s-open-finals

Every point in this epic was a masterpiece. That is not to say there weren't mistakes and mishits. But taken as a whole the match must nearly be described point by point. I had to watch the match several times to come up with the words to describe the action. The points were like single brushstrokes that make up a great masterpiece. It reminded me of the moment only a couple of months ago when I stood at the very top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris looking down at that classic and old traditional city in Europe. Each building from that height looked like a single brush stroke and put them all together you had the wonderful visual whole that makes up the city of Paris. Like a beautiful painting every single brush stroke adds up to make up the whole.

The individual buildings on the ground were masterpieces of architecture as well. You walk along the streets admiring the craftsmanship and beauty from the ground level in the micro view as opposed to the macro view from the top of the Eiffel tower.

The same as this match. Such an intricate tapestry of tennis and all of its nuances. The variety of strokes...the variety of tactics. The infinite number of possibilities...permutations and combinations. Then there is the complexity of the players and their emotions and their tactical acumen and their individual interpretation of THE GAME. THE GAME OF TENNIS as it was meant to be played.

In tennis, in art and in life there is a balance. Even the universe is somehow balanced although theoretically. Equal parts positive and negative. Perhaps the human race has an equal balance as well...the summation of all of our actions and intents equal parts good and evil. But one thing is very clear to me and there is absolutely no way around it because in this very case for once and for all I am right...the game of tennis has been compromised by the actions of the very human hands that invented it. That precious balance that the game had and endured for so many years was compromised by an overabundance of speed in the game. It's simple. What was lost was tennis that was played like on this September afternoon between the last of the great rivalries in tennis...John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg.

Pat Summerall in the opening remark..."I wonder how much of an effect that will be...the fact that McEnroe played later last night than Borg did."

Tony Trabert quick to discount the obvious..."Oh I don't think any Pat...if the adrenalin doesn't take care of that nothing will. They are in shape beyond..."

It's old school philosophy. None of the modern day wimpiness. No pussyfooting.

The Draw Sheet for the 1980 U. S. Open...

Here is the singles draw for the 1980 U. S. Open...Björn Borg had tough come from behind wins in the quarters and the semis. He faced a booming left handed serve with Roscoe Tanner in the quarters which should have served him well in his preparation for John McEnroe. He came from two sets down against Johan Kriek in the semis to get to the finals.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Event-Draws.aspx?e=560&y=1980

McEnroe for his part defeated Ivan Lendl in the quarters and then gutted out a tough five set win over Jimmy Connors in the semis. A great match in its own right...I considered writing about this one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4YfqSg-NzI

Keep in mind that Johnny Bad Boy also played in the doubles. He and his partner Peter Fleming lost in a tough, tough final against Stan Smith and Bob Lutz in five sets. In all he played 16 additional sets of tennis that two weeks at the Open. Considering that he played Connors the night before and got off of the court around 8 PM or so it is rather remarkable that he performed at the extremely high level that he did. Perhaps he wasn't given the credit that he deserved in some respects. No wonder he "appeared" to be ornery at times.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Share/Event-Draws.aspx?Year=1980&EventId=560&Draw=md

Side note: See the name Francisco Gonzales in the doubles draw...Johan Kriek's partner. I lost to him in 1977 in a dual college match with Ohio State. He had a win over Connors at some point. I have played some pretty good competition...just in case you were wondering. But I have always considered myself to be a better teacher than a player. I started rather late...14 years old was the first time that I touched a racquet and we didn't have indoor courts until I was 18 years old in my town. But enough about me. Let the match roll...Action!

[don_budge]

Gentlemen...a word of advice from good old don_budge. Forget about the draw. It is what it is. It would actually be more constructive to go back to the video I posted of the great John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl to discuss the shortcomings of the modern game of tennis with the oversized bazookas. It's a sneaky way of promoting the latest darling...Alexander Zverev. I doubt though that even this manipulation will get him through in two weeks of best of five. A different universe.

All of the withdrawals are a thing of the past...the rearview mirror. Now the games begin and to the victor will go the spoils. At the end of the day it is only hindsight. It doesn't matter. The trophy will be viewed twenty years from now only defined by who won and maybe...just maybe...by who lost in the finals.

Andy Murray pulling out at the last second is another blemish on his character. It's become a large stain at this point. Probably one of the worst examples of a number one player ever. But it is fitting. This is how far the game has fallen. How far it has been dumbed down. By pulling out he has now done the draw a huge disfavor and in the process his profession. He has defied everything that was tennis etiquette...a word that no longer exists as the modern tennis brain trust rewrite history. By destroying the past they control the future.

The New York Times is a very poor source for information. On anything really. I hardly think of it as more than "Fake News"...right in there with CNN. They all parrot off one another. The article on Gail Monfils was pathetic. About ten thousand words too long about a bit player in the game of tennis. I didn't make it halfway through it. It was boring. Trying to drum up interest in an era where athletes are considered entertainers. I call Gail "The Amazing Mr. Monfils" in that vein. Speculation as to what might have been if he concentrated on being the best he could be. Instead of concentrating on being the number one hot dog in the game. I haven't read the article on Roger Federer and probably will not. Even though Roger being who he is. Who cares if he is slow to take it back and quick to finish. The New York Times will not change that reality because they say so. Consider the source...an important aspect of discernment.

Come on Roger. Injured back or not. There are drugs to render you superhuman throughout this fortnight. If you use them...use them judiciously.

[klacr]

With all the withdrawals, looking good for Federer or one of the future generation players. Am I missing something, or shouldn't the draw be corrected to have Roger and Rafa at opposite ends? Seems not to have happened...

Once a draw is out, it's tricky to redo everything, you simply try to spread the seeds out. Here is an explanation of from an old NYT article.

https://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/22/a-primer-on-tournament-draws-and-seeding/

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[gzhpcu]

With all the withdrawals, looking good for Federer or one of the future generation players. Am I missing something, or shouldn't the draw be corrected to have Roger and Rafa at opposite ends? Seems not to have happened...

[don_budge]

Fed is the favorite per oddsmakers followed by Nadal, Zverev, Murray, Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Thiem, Del Potro

With the state of the draw there has to be a good pick in there somewhere. One that will pay off. Federer has a potentially tough draw and if he isn't 100% it may be tough going for him. Perhaps a dark horse...or a "sleeper". Like Marin Cilic a couple of years ago. Do you see something in this?

[don_budge]

Yes, that was the Stak match I saw (read later he lost 3rd round). Felix has a great future ahead of him! Based on the first 8 games, really expected him to win the match. But he had a few break points, and he just got a little tight / tentative and couldn't convert. In the 1st set tb, Stak immediately got up a mini break, then a few more - Felix leveled the breaker, but just couldn't close it out. It was really a match that demonstrated how essential the maturity / comfort aspect is; Stak has a lot more experience in all these situations, and that made the difference. Felix has all the shots, a great all court game, but needs that all-important comfort to not get tense on the critical points. He will get there....

You might be right about the grip. Only thing I could tell for sure is that Gasquet in particular was just driving the ball with the 1hbh harder than I've ever seen him drive, and it really looked to me like his shoulders were getting just a bit more open through the finish. His beautiful form now looks to me more powerful as well. Very interested to see how he does....

Ok faultsnaces...thanks for the observations. Felix Auger-Aliassime (first time spelling correct unassisted) has been on our radar here on the forum for some time. Too bad that Stakhovsky was eliminated in the next round. It would have been interesting to take a peek at his "beefed up" backhand. The qualifying matches at the U. S. Open can have great bearing on the future of tennis. I know...I watched the great John McEnroe lose to Zan Guerry in 1976 I think it was. McEnroe was so pissed off in the parking lot...it was at some country club outside of the main tournament site. Watching Auger-Aliassime you may have gotten a sneak peak into the future of tennis. McEnroe was actually 16 or 17 at the time...same age as Felix.

Back to Gasquet...great backhand. His serve and forehand are somewhat less than formidable by modern tennis standards but Richard is playing a different game. Most players are running around the backhand clear to the opposite side of the backhand alley. I don't think Gasquet sees this to be in his best interests as his backhand is so tough pound for pound compared to the rest. Your observation about the shoulders being more open tells me that his body is "fitting" to his racquet incrementally differently which to me indicates where the player meets the racquet. The grip. The all important grip...you cannot overemphasize the importance of the grip. Just a small incremental change can make a big impact on a stroke.

Gasquet plays Leonardo Mayer in the first round...an Argentine with an excellent one hand backhand as well. To go along with his somewhat unorthodox service motion. In the second round Gasquet will get the winner of Yuichi Sugita (which means "you suck" in Japanese) and an unknown French player named Geoffrey Blancaneaux who is barely 19 years old. See how we are educating ourselves on the basis of your Gasquet/Stakhovsky observations...connecting the dots. If Gasquet plays his way into the third round he will most likely be facing Fafa Nadal which will be the ultimate test of that backhand and what you see is an adaption to Gasquet's game. An excellent litmus test.

Don't be a stranger faultsnaces. Always some good stuff from your keyboard. I will never forget the "straw man" comment that was so perfectly timed...like a flat serve up the "T". Ace!!!

[klacr]

Yes that is one of the rumours I was talking about in my previous post. A rumour that came true.

The other rumour is Roger. I can't see Roger pulling out as slams are all he's playing for and time is running out. No Djokovic, no Murray, no Wawrinka, no Nishikori. Roger must be pleased about those names not being present. Nevertheless his draw looks less than straight forward.

Perhaps with grand slams, we can only look at the previous one for a true barometer of a player's grand slam level. The two best players at Wimbledon, dare I say, were Federer and the player that gave him his toughest match, Tomas Berdych. Berdych in top half with Nadal and Fed...but you never know. Hope to see Berdych when I go up to the tourney on Thursday.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Good news for Roger and other attacking players, courts are playing fast.
Mischa Zverev, I'm talking to you. This is your moment.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Those acrylic hard courts are all over the place here. Sure you can make them slightly quicker than medium paced but you can't make the ball do much off the bounce like you can off grass or clay. It's taken a player of gargantuan genius to make like acrylic courts look they are an all round surface that entertaining tennis can be played. Way too much of the tour is played on these types of courts and it's tough to understand why that's come about given the money in the game. Everyone loves grass yet a mere month is given over to grass court tennis, and virtually all except Wimbledon are merely limbering up events for Wimbledon itself. It's completely bonkers when you think about it.

Murray is out of the Open. Bottom half of Draw is Zverev's if he can be a big boy and step up.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Yes that is one of the rumours I was talking about in my previous post. A rumour that came true.

The other rumour is Roger. I can't see Roger pulling out as slams are all he's playing for and time is running out. No Djokovic, no Murray, no Wawrinka, no Nishikori. Roger must be pleased about those names not being present. Nevertheless his draw looks less than straight forward.

[klacr]

Murray is out of the Open. Bottom half of Draw is Zverev's if he can be a big boy and step up.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[klacr]

Good news for Roger and other attacking players, courts are playing fast.
Mischa Zverev, I'm talking to you. This is your moment.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

I cannot say I'm looking forward to the US Open. More tennis on these detestable, soulless hard courts. Some say speed the courts up. I say get rid of them. Around 70% of the world tour is played on these monotonous, shot-stifling, boring courts.

I can see the attraction. They are low maintenance and alter little whatever the climate is doing, but that is exactly what makes them soulless and downright boring. Grass is a living court...literally. It changes throughout the day never mind throughout a fortnight. Clay is an interesting surface if you have a artist playing on it, an artist with feel and touch and imagination.

Get rid of those horrible, acrylic hard courts. Turn 'em into parking lots. Reduce the number used for tour events down to 20%. Better still, banish them altogether.

I heard a rumour Roger is still impaired, and Murray too for that matter. It won't be easy for Nadal as he has couple or more nasty obstacles in his way...Fognini being the first up. I have a feeling we might get a new US Open champion.

[bottle]

Tomic plays Muller 1st round. Tomic has not played since his Wimbledon blunder. He is now ranked # 146 and I read somewhere he is using some kind of ATP rules that allow him to get in these late season tournaments based on his previous year results. He could very well be out of tennis if he does not get it going with some quality wins. It will be interesting to see his effort level vs Muller, a very good player.

And you compared him to me. Really!

[stroke]

Tomic plays Muller 1st round. Tomic has not played since his Wimbledon blunder. He is now ranked # 146 and I read somewhere he is using some kind of ATP rules that allow him to get in these late season tournaments based on his previous year results. He could very well be out of tennis if he does not get it going with some quality wins. It will be interesting to see his effort level vs Muller, a very good player.