So is anyone excited about Roland Garros?

I have to admit to feeling rather ambivalent about RG right now.

The last few weeks have shown us 2 things:

1) Novak is the only player on tour with a chance of beating Rafa over 5 sets on clay.

2) Novak's form is very inconsistent right now and he may end up not even playing Rafa.

Whilst I recognise the brilliance of Rafa's dominance on this surface, my goodness it saps the excitement and anticipation from a Slam!

All the other slams have 3 or 4 likely winners and a number of dark horses.

RG has one strong favourite and one other player who might be able to beat him. That's it.

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

Definitely agree there HM. Even if Novak was firing on all cylinders we would still be relying on him being on the other side of the draw to Rafa. Federer is not as able to string 7 great matches together as he was and always struggled against Rafa, especially on clay. Even when fit, Murray is cannon fodder from QF onwards at RG. I would say DelPo was in with a shout but he is injured too. May as well start the engraving now.

Some truth in this, but Wimbledon looks the most exciting and most open. I would say that AO and even US Open you have DJokovic as the clear favourite.. who is the favourite for Wimbledon? I am not even sure. Probably Djokovic because of his ranking, but apart from his one win, in 2011, against Rafa who played badly in the final, he doesn't have a great record there.

Because there is no 1 dominant player at Wimbledon even someone like Berdych or Tsonga or Del Potro has an outside chance of champion if someone does them a favour and pulls out a shock result to give them an easy semi say, and they then play a blinding final to upset the odds.

My least favourite major on my least favourite surface with my least favourite crowd and my favourite player likely to be missing..... Pass. I'll be in Novak's camp for the tournament and hope he can achieve the career Slam. Roll on Queen's club

Yep, hoping for a Novak title here. Really needs him to play well to make this a decent tournament.

Not me to be honest. Certainly nowhere near as excited as I'd like to be.

Australia and Wimbledon are the ones that float my boat the best ..........

In terms of the final stages maybe not, the winners often predictable, but the early rounds of slams are always a treat.
Roland garros is especially good for this, often youll get a flamboyant frenchman in a 5 setter, and they can be good.

With Seppi and Tsonga stretching Djokovic, there are very few players capable of stopping Nadal at RG.

As CarrieG4 says, start the engraving now. Amazing to have a player layoff for seven months and be a certainty to win a slam.

The Special Juan wrote:My least favourite major on my least favourite surface with my least favourite crowd and my favourite player likely to be missing..... Pass. I'll be in Novak's camp for the tournament and hope he can achieve the career Slam. Roll on Queen's club

TSJ, of course, the crowd. I'm completely with you on this one.

They're the mean-spirited cherry on the predictable cake.

Nadal's achievement is fantastic, but his very excellence on the red stuff tends to sap anticipation out of RG for me and 2013 feels like every year since 2007 (when, even as a Fed fan, I lost all hope of Fed beating him there).

Barring an upset vs. a hot player before he finds his tournament rhythm, there are only two things that can beat Nadal - another flare-up of his knee problems (which nobody wants) or Djoko, should he find his (these days oft misplaced) mojo.

Let's hope that on the way to what feels like an inevitable denouement we see some great matches and a good run by an entertaining player (step forward Stan?) or a young player staking his claim. Assuming Nadal gets to the final I'd like to see someone at least take him to 5 sets even if they can't beat him.

Oh - and perhaps a continuation of the current cool, damp weather might test Nadal a bit, so let's see some more of that.

I am! Because ITV have got quite a lot of live tennis to show! Not all of us have the luxury of sky!

As a Nadal fan, Im a little nervous to be honest. He has just been so diminant so far, that I fear the bubble might get too big and burst. He has looked really good in spurts, and I sense that was due to him pacing himself, so as not to cause undue damage to himself, but also so he can peak at the right time (RG-Wimbledon).

My big worry is that he is only practising 50-minutes a day now, compared to 2 hours a year ago. So I am concerned that, like a marathon runner who didnt clock enough mileage pre-race, he may find himself undercooked.

In normal conditions Nadal should win. But I fear that whilst it all looks good on the surface, Nadal may be paddling like a madman under those waters, and eventually they will give way.

Interesting point on the shortened training sessions, kingraf.

I'm perhaps inclined to agree.

If a hypothetical match against Novak goes to a 5th set, then possibly the match starts to tilt in Novak's favour.

But the harsh truth is that I can't see anyone outside of Novak even taking Rafa to a 5th. Maybe one of the big hitters if they have a perfect day but they tend not to be the fittest and I can't see them outlasting Rafa, even on limited training.

The key thing with facing Nadal (in general) on clay (specifically) is you have to win the first set. The reasoning is two-fold:

1) Losing the first set to Nadal means you are going to have to win three of the next four. An almost impossible task on Clay (in fact it actually hasnt been proven to be possible)

2) Nadal is a slow starter, especially in his current state with a lack of practise. The first set is as bad as he will play, if you cant win that, barring an injury or a lapse in form (or you getting ridiculously hot), you probably arent going to win three sets against Nadal that day.

The key thing with facing Nadal (in general) on clay (specifically) is you have to win the first set. The reasoning is two-fold:

1) Losing the first set to Nadal means you are going to have to win three of the next four. An almost impossible task on Clay (in fact it actually hasnt been proven to be possible)

2) Nadal is a slow starter, especially in his current state with a lack of practise. The first set is as bad as he will play, if you cant win that, barring an injury or a lapse in form (or you getting ridiculously hot), you probably arent going to win three sets against Nadal that day.

HM Murdoch wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:My least favourite major on my least favourite surface with my least favourite crowd and my favourite player likely to be missing..... Pass. I'll be in Novak's camp for the tournament and hope he can achieve the career Slam. Roll on Queen's club

TSJ, of course, the crowd. I'm completely with you on this one.

They're the mean-spirited cherry on the predictable cake.

Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! They're so annoying and a poor crowd in general, although last year when they turned on Gasquet I found it rather funny.

The Special Juan wrote:Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy! They're so annoying and a poor crowd in general, although last year when they turned on Gasquet I found it rather funny.

And they cheered Tsonga when he looked like beating Novak but then booed him when he didn't.

Classy bunch.

kingraf wrote:The key thing with facing Nadal (in general) on clay (specifically) is you have to win the first set. The reasoning is two-fold:

1) Losing the first set to Nadal means you are going to have to win three of the next four. An almost impossible task on Clay (in fact it actually hasnt been proven to be possible)

2) Nadal is a slow starter, especially in his current state with a lack of practise. The first set is as bad as he will play, if you cant win that, barring an injury or a lapse in form (or you getting ridiculously hot), you probably arent going to win three sets against Nadal that day.

Robin Soderling

bogbrush wrote:

kingraf wrote:The key thing with facing Nadal (in general) on clay (specifically) is you have to win the first set. The reasoning is two-fold:

1) Losing the first set to Nadal means you are going to have to win three of the next four. An almost impossible task on Clay (in fact it actually hasnt been proven to be possible)

2) Nadal is a slow starter, especially in his current state with a lack of practise. The first set is as bad as he will play, if you cant win that, barring an injury or a lapse in form (or you getting ridiculously hot), you probably arent going to win three sets against Nadal that day.

Robin Soderling

... who beat Nadal 6-2, 6-7(2), 6-4, 7-6(2) at RG 2009.

According to the ATP, Nadal's record of converting a win in the first set into a match win is an overwhelming 550-29, which drops down to a negative 69-95 recovery rate from losing the first set. I think it can be safely said that the first set against Nadal is of huge importance (hence the heartbreak as a Fed fan of the first set in the RG 2011 final).

bogbrush wrote:

kingraf wrote:The key thing with facing Nadal (in general) on clay (specifically) is you have to win the first set. The reasoning is two-fold:

1) Losing the first set to Nadal means you are going to have to win three of the next four. An almost impossible task on Clay (in fact it actually hasnt been proven to be possible)

2) Nadal is a slow starter, especially in his current state with a lack of practise. The first set is as bad as he will play, if you cant win that, barring an injury or a lapse in form (or you getting ridiculously hot), you probably arent going to win three sets against Nadal that day.

Robin Soderling

Yes Soderling - also one who's results suddenly went into transformational overdrive.

From 2003 to RG 2009 he'd never got past the 3rd round of any slam, he'd also only got to QFs of 2 Masters events.
In that period he got to 9 ATP finals - every single one of them indoors (quicker matches, less physically demanding).
That was just about up to age of 25.

Then within the space of 24 months from May 2009, he reached 2 slam finals, 3 slam QFs, won a Masters, got to the SFs of 2 more, and QFs of 3 more.
He also got to a further 11 ATP finals, inc. a remarkable 6 clay finals culminating in the very his last event he played where he beat Ferrer 6-2 6-2 (!) to take the clay title in Bastad.

After Bastad he disappeared without trace with mono and hasn't been seen since.
It was some 24 month window.

If I am honest then yes I am looking forward to it. Let's look aside from the usual suspects. Dimitrov has had a decent showing on the clay and also Haas will have designs on making the top 10.

I don't for a second believe Nadal is invincible. He has shown signs of nerves in his close encounters and also for me he is a step slower. It is frustrating to watch in form players succumb mentally to Nadal. Ferrer has had him for the taking and buckled. Federer went to pot completely. Gulbis and Dimitrov have played him without the fear and that is the way to play against him. Yes right now Djokovic is the main threat who can stand up to Nadal both mentally and physically. At Indian Wells Del Potro showed how to play Nadal. Granted he lost but he really mixed up and varied his play.

I am hoping that Dimitrov can make a little splash at RG. It's not all doom and gloom if you are specifically looking at the business end of the tournament.

Soderling on drugs lydian?

I'm looking forward to the fact that my holiday to Majorca is the first week of RG this year - usually it is the 2nd week, so I often miss some big matches, including the final, depending on the flight time.
Will be a shame if both Murray and Delpo are missing though.

No idea LS...I was just surprised by the sudden upturn, then immediate fall off the cliff after beating Ferrer.
RG09 is also interesting given Nadal humiliated Soderling 6-1 6-0 at Rome just 2 weeks prior to that fated match. Again, some turnaround.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I'm looking forward to the fact that my holiday to Majorca is the first week of RG this year - usually it is the 2nd week, so I often miss some big matches, including the final, depending on the flight time.
Will be a shame if both Murray and Delpo are missing though.

Ask Rafa of he can recommend a good restaurant JM???

Haddie-nuff wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:I'm looking forward to the fact that my holiday to Majorca is the first week of RG this year - usually it is the 2nd week, so I often miss some big matches, including the final, depending on the flight time.
Will be a shame if both Murray and Delpo are missing though.

Ask Rafa of he can recommend a good restaurant JM???

We're on half-board
We often have an afternoon out to Porto Cristo - I think he has a house/apartment there? It's a nice little town. One day he'll get knocked out of RG early*, and I'll bump into him at the local sweet shop or something.

* More likely after he's retired!

I was in Majorca last week, nice little place in the hills called Galilea.

http://www.seemallorca.com/mallorca/galilea.html

Majorca is lovely if you can get away from the "touristy" areas.. and go more inland where there are so many pretty quaint little villages teeming with History.
Though when I enquired from the locals about Manacor.. the reply came
"what do you want to go there for there is nothing there " (ooops sorry Rafa)

Haddie-nuff wrote:Majorca is lovely if you can get away from the "touristy" areas.. and go more inland where there are so many pretty quaint little villages teeming with History.
Though when I enquired from the locals about Manacor.. the reply came
"what do you want to go there for there is nothing there " (ooops sorry Rafa)

They know a stalker when they see one.

Now really !! as though I would

A guy at my tennis club wrote this book :-
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Journey-Majorca-Glyn-Pitchford/dp/1781485011/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369059430&sr=8-1&keywords=glyn+pitchford

What was his name?

Er, Glyn Pitchford - it's on the cover!

Lydian,

That was an injured Nadal, he missed Wimby afterwards so you cannot lay the entire success at Soderling's door, nor could I blame the injury completely for the loss either. Even when Rafa, Roger and Novak drop by a mere 3 or 4% their opponant increases his chance of winning 5 fold. Robin was on a hot streak, you're own stats show that, so while he isn't a Top 4 player, he was having his career peak.

As for the heavy intimation from yourself and LS that Soderling wasn't/isn't clean, your evidence is essentially improved result "late" in his career. So basically that is Roger Federer's entire successful career then, under suspicion.

Now, I am not being naiive, such upswings can, indeed, very often be indicitive of underhand tactics but more likely it is because the guy had matured mentally and can handle the pressure that the Name the otherside of the net brings and (I'm not sure if this is strictly relevant in Soderling's case) but that if the "Other guy" had a chance v Rafa or Roger etc before that they did not take, that they learned from it afterwards. Because it really is true what they say, you learn more from losing than you ever do from winning. At 25 you have that mental experience while retaiing the physical ability to maximise your performance.

Changing sports to Rugby Union, and I know a I'm losing a lot of people right now, Ronan O'Gara missed 4 kicks in the Heineken Cup Final in 2000 which ultimately cost his team the victory. He played in 3 Finals after that and posted a 100% kicking success rate, winning the last 2 Finals in 2006 and 2008, because he had learned the hard way how to win.

This post could well be relevent in a cuple of weeks to see if Rafa can beat Novak again at RG and definately so at Wimby. Has Rafa learned what Roger seemingly couldn't; the ability to adapt to beat his nemisis? We shall see.

LuvSports! wrote:Soderling on drugs lydian?

The strangest thing in the Soderling disembowelment of Nadal at Roland Garros in 2009 was this: three weeks earlier in Rome, Nadal did a similar disembowelment of Soderling, thumping the Swede 6-1 6-1. Soderling was able to go from winning two games against Nadal on clay to winning three whole sets against Nadal on clay in less than 3 weeks. It's a notable reversal, to say the least . And a mere year later at the same French Open, Soderling squared off against Nadal again. And went home a set-less runner up.

To be fair to Soderling, he did beat Federer in Roland Garros 2010, and then had to go five sets with Berdych for a place in the (in what might have been the least thrilling five-set thriller, ever)

Sure I am excited about RG. A slam is a slam; you only get them four times a year. You get 128 players, all trying their best. In the early rounds, there are plenty of matches, good opportunity to follow some of the lesser known names to see how they will be doing. Will X finally break through? How will A's recent good form translate to a slam? What will the match between Y and Z be like?

Then in later rounds - around the round of 16 - you start looking at who actually made it that far. Who is missing among those who should have been there? Who made it there as a surprise - perhaps their first round of 16 in a slam - and can they go further?

And once we reach SF and F, we are looking at the big matches - so even if they are likely to be one-sided, the magnitude of the occasion is enough to make it interesting (though obviously competitive matches are even better).

I cannot wait.

I am excited as well, Nadal has accomplished so much on the clay and off of it he represents the ultimate challenge. Novak's form has been hit or miss this season but I think he will be better at RG and primed for the fight. The glory belongs to those who accomplish great feats and what greater feat is there in tennis than beating the greatest player in the history of the surface when he is playing well.

Part of me hopes that if Novak wins then he goes on to do the calendar slam, even if it is just to stick it to those that believe he brings nothing new while Nadal brings so much.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Part of me hopes that if Novak wins then he goes on to do the calendar slam, even if it is just to stick it to those that believe he brings nothing new while Nadal brings so much.

I agree B05, there will always be detractors. I have never been a fan of Nadal's game but have always given the man his due but I don't really see anything approaching the same type of respect for Djokovic for his accomplishments.

socal1976 wrote:

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Part of me hopes that if Novak wins then he goes on to do the calendar slam, even if it is just to stick it to those that believe he brings nothing new while Nadal brings so much.

I agree B05, there will always be detractors. I have never been a fan of Nadal's game but have always given the man his due but I don't really see anything approaching the same type of respect for Djokovic for his accomplishments.

From certain corners of the 606v2 goldfish bowl perhaps.

But I think the corner has been turned out in the real world.

The general tone I get from most of the media coverage and even from casual sports fans is that he's seen as an outstanding player who's gradually becoming a great. His status is in the game is not as high as Roger and Rafa but nor should it be yet.

It's only a few on this forum who take the view that Novak being good in some way diminishes Roger and Rafa.

I agree his status is not as high as Nadal or Federer and he has a long way to go to get there, and he may never match those two in that respect. But I don't think he even gets the due afforded to other greats of the game who have 6 slams or so. The general media coverage I agree, just recently I was floored by a comment by Navaratilova in which she said we may have the 3 best players playing today. I don't espouse that view as I think Pete and Borg would have something to say about that, but the media at large is much more positive about Novak and his game.

RG? for me sadly, has no interest whatsoever, which is a shame as there are many good players to watch, I just find clay an attritional surface that provides no excitement, I played a lot of my tennis on clay, but always loved the grass more than anything and H/C wasn't too bad, but cranked my ankle too many times to feel safe on it.

As for Djoko, he had that year....2011, that put him up there, but not on the plinth of greatness, he needs to cement another 2 yrs of slam wins before that imo, but he was nigh on unbeatable that year.

Roll on Wimbly and hope Murray is fit enough to go two weeks of 5 setters.

On the subject of Djokovic I would be very surprised if he retires with less than ten slams. As for Andy - best that he rests his back and hopefully allow the injury to heal so that he can come out firing for the grass court season where, if fit, he will be a contender.

A few points...

Firstly, I think Roland Garros has tended to provide less gripping tennis than other slams in recent years - a combination of things, the Sunday start dilutes the drama of 1st round over 3 days, Nadal's dominance (the guy is a legend on the surface, but his claycourt domination can get a bit boring, in the same way that Sampras' domination of Wimbledon got) and the number of supposed claycourters who underperform there - Almagro, Bellucci, Wawrinka, etc. I would say that this year definitely needs a decent mens' final.

Obviously Nadal is the favourite, with Djokovic a reasonably close 2nd favourite (albeit in less consistent form). If they were to meet in final, I'd make Nadal 65:35 favourite over Djokovic, but would give Djokovic more of chance if they were to meet in semis (far less pressure, a career slam won't be at stake).

There's a real opportunity for a slightly lower ranked player to go on a run to the semis here, as out of the top 4, only Djokovic and Nadal look certs to reach the semis, some question marks on Federer, and as for Ferrer, he doesn't actually have a great record at Roland Garros, other than a single appearance in semis. Dmitrov has obviously been having a good year, but I don't feel has enough consistency yet. Would be lovely for Haas to go on a great run, but being honest, the surface is too physical for a player of his age to go so far in best of 5 sets. Wawrinka ought to do better here than he has done, but frankly, as much as I love his game, he's as likely to lose in 1st round as he is to get to the semis. As for Gasquet, he's more consistent than he used to be but seems to have a mental block on progressing past 4th round in a slam.

My tip for 'unexpected run to semis' is Tsonga. He played well on the clay in Davis Cup tie in Argentina and is better on the surface than many of us would think. Other than that, maybe Kohlschreiber (though, like Wawrinka, he's prone to 1st round upsets).

Finally, what about the womens'? To me, it seems unpredictable and I wonder if we could get a 1st time slam winner (Radwanska?)

Interesting thoughts, Mr Invisible.

Re Rafa and Novak, should they meet, I'd possibly give Novak the edge. I think that match up now favours him.

I think Rafa has a much better chance of navigating the draw though. I expect him to sail through to the semi and/or final.

Novak has a much greater chance of suffering an early defeat or getting dragged into 5 setters.

Just to get back to the original question, of course I'm excited about Roland Garros. Which true tennis fan wouldn't be excited about seeing 3 of the all-time greats in the Mens' game competing at the French Open??

The best Slam of the 4 as far as I'm concerned and I'm lucky enough to be there for the first few days....though being on Lenglen I'm not sure if I'll see any of the big 3.

There are basically two tournaments taking place next week at RG : the one in which Rafa is competing, and a second where everyone else will play.

Rafa will cruise through to the business end in practise match mode, with virtually no possibility of an upset along the way. Should he then meet Djokovic, he will hopefully be pushed hard ; but in reality he has little to fear from anyone else.

Djokovic is undoubtedly clear second favourite but (unlike Nadal) he is also vulnerable enough to being stopped by a number of players who might suddenly find themselves on a hot streak - in the way that JWT did last year.

Simply because this is RG, I'm not sure I would quite go with HMM wrt odds favouring Novak in a Rafa clash, but with the Monte Carlo result still fresh in their minds the match should at least prove a serious mental challenge for both - and as far as Rafa is concerned, the only challenge.

Excellent preview/analysis MrInvisible. Always good to read calm and balanced assessments which are not tainted by unhealthy bias or the nasty noise of a grinding axe. And if you DO by chance happen to have some sort of an axe to grind, then you hide it extremely well ......

lags72 wrote:Simply because this is RG, I'm not sure I would quite go with HMM wrt odds favouring Novak in a Rafa clash, but with the Monte Carlo result still fresh in their minds the match should at least prove a serious mental challenge for both - and as far as Rafa is concerned, the only challenge.

Yes, I think the mental challenge will decide it.

I only give Novak the edge because I think, due to the style match up, Novak's A game beats Rafa's A game more often than not.

On clay though, this edge becomes small. It will only take a little inhibition or poor execution from Novak and Rafa will be in the driving seat.

Conversely, if Rafa is below his best, it may turn into a comfortable Novak victory.

I don't think either player will have the option of being below their best but still managing to force the win.

Personally I believe if Rafa has the advantage at all it is because it is over five sets.
Rafa is notoriously a slow starter and may well struggle in the first set of any match whether it be clay or not. But once he gathers momentum the five sets works in Rafa´s favour and this is where I think he has more chance than Novak. There are not many players that can stay with him if it goes the whole way.. and Novak will have to be in fine fettle.