Australian Open 2018 Days 11-14 semi-finals and finals

So here we are, rapidly approaching the business end of this year's Australian Open - Kerber and Federer on paper the favourites to win but this has been a tournament of surprises and maybe there's a couple of twists to come:

Women's semi-finals:

Halep v Kerber
Mertens v Wozniacki

Mens' semi-finals:

Cilic v Edmund
Federer v Chung

Mens' doubles semi-finals:

Mclachlan/Struff v Marach/Pavic
Cabal/Farah v Bryan/Bryan

In the women's semis I'm expecting a tight 3 setter between Halep and Kerber - both have been playing some great stuff and whilst I'm rooting for the Romanian to finally win a slam I think Kerber when on form on this surface is just too strong. For the Mertens v Wozniacki match I'm going for Mertens to win. Despite her good run this tournament I'm not convinced with Wozniacki, whilst the young Belgian has been in irresistible form.

I didn't think Edmund would beat Dimitrov but he was most impressive in the quarter-finals and is clearly playing with a lot of confidence. Nadal's injury meanwhile overshadowed Cilic's performance in the quarter-finals and the Croat has played some tricky opponents earlier on. The way both Cilic and Edmund are serving I'm expecting a couple of tie-breaks in this one. I'm going for Cilic in 4 tough sets - I just think whilst he's had a fantastic tournament and improved considerably over last year, Edmund's never played in such an important match and I think Cilic's experience will take him through - happy to be proven wrong though!

Federer looked so clinical in 2nd and 3rd sets against Berdych and like a well oiled machine everything seems to be running smoothly and clicking into place for Fed at the moment. Chung's game could prove problematic for Federer, but I'm expecting Chung's level to dip slightly as the match goes on, and I'm going for Federer in 4 sets after an early scare.

Judging by the BBC text commentary the Halep vs Kerber match is turning into one of the greatest female tennis battles of all time. Except I am not watching it too scared that these players are screamers. I see that Wawrinka has made the final and I know she is not a screamer - so good luck to her.

Cilic takes first set 6-2

Edmund taking medical timeout, so this could be relatively straightforward for Marin

Cilic leads 6-2 7-6 (7-4)

Edmund being soundly beaten by a superior and fitter player. No shame in that, and he's had an excellent tournament; something to build on for 2018.

Edmund needs to keep fighting (assuming he is not hampered by a worsening injury). He took the second set to a tie break. It is in such matches where he will learn and gain the most experience for future tournaments and match-ups.

Marin Cilic aged 29, reaches his third grand slam final of his career. Is he the man to step up in the absence of the big guns to win a few more slams (his tally is one)?

All over. Edmund fought hard, but seemed to wilt a bit at the end. First time he's ever gone deep at a slam, and had some very tough matches along the way, so perhaps not surprising that he looked a little jaded out there. Cilic has looked in pretty good form throughout the tournament, and was very solid today. However the last time Cilic played Fed in a slam final it was very painful viewing, with Cilic completely imploding. Has he recovered from the mental scars of that? Obviously Fed still has to get past Chung first.

Edmund can take a lot of pride from a superb tournament. Yes, his draw opened up nicely, but wins vs Anderson and Dimitrov are impressive, and coming through some tough conditions in other matches too. Hopefully onwards and upwards for him now.

Valiant effort by Edmund but the odds were always stacked against him in coming up against a much more experienced, battle-hardened player ..... a Slam winner who seems to be in extremely good form.

The defeat will hurt a lot right now but he can look back on a tourney in which his impressive run exceeded all expectations, and which will give him the confidence and belief to push on to good things. He has shown us all that he now belongs with the big boys. Well done Kyle

Mad for Chelsea wrote:All over. Edmund fought hard, but seemed to wilt a bit at the end. First time he's ever gone deep at a slam, and had some very tough matches along the way, so perhaps not surprising that he looked a little jaded out there. Cilic has looked in pretty good form throughout the tournament, and was very solid today. However the last time Cilic played Fed in a slam final it was very painful viewing, with Cilic completely imploding. Has he recovered from the mental scars of that? Obviously Fed still has to get past Chung first.

Edmund can take a lot of pride from a superb tournament. Yes, his draw opened up nicely, but wins vs Anderson and Dimitrov are impressive, and coming through some tough conditions in other matches too. Hopefully onwards and upwards for him now.

Could easily have lost in the first round, so getting past Anderson was an outstanding performance. Yes, his opposition in R3 and R4 could have been tougher, but it's not his fault if seeded players don't come through to the level of their seeding. An excellent result, career best by a distance, to get past Dimirtrov in the QF and then a respectable performance in his first slam SF, even if he maybe ran out of steam a bit.

Certainly plenty of encouragement and a terrific boost to his ranking. You'd have to expect Kyle to get some more points out of the Miami / IW MS events, and it would be good to see him now push on and start reaching finals and winning the odd 250 event, helped that he is likely to be a high seed for some of these.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:All over. Edmund fought hard, but seemed to wilt a bit at the end. First time he's ever gone deep at a slam, and had some very tough matches along the way, so perhaps not surprising that he looked a little jaded out there. Cilic has looked in pretty good form throughout the tournament, and was very solid today. However the last time Cilic played Fed in a slam final it was very painful viewing, with Cilic completely imploding. Has he recovered from the mental scars of that? Obviously Fed still has to get past Chung first.

Edmund can take a lot of pride from a superb tournament. Yes, his draw opened up nicely, but wins vs Anderson and Dimitrov are impressive, and coming through some tough conditions in other matches too. Hopefully onwards and upwards for him now.

Bit in bold - I thought that Cilic was physically injured. I seem to recall that his movement was poor and Federer sympathising with him afterwards for clearly not being in good physical shape.

Rankings wise, Edmund is currently set to jump to 26th. He'll be 27th if Chung beats Federer, but Nishikori lost in Delray Beach, 27th is the worst he'll be.

Hopefully as you say he can pick up a few more points through the HC swing and also the clay Masters, to be seeded for the FO. His game should transfer well to clay.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Rankings wise, Edmund is currently set to jump to 26th. He'll be 27th if Chung beats Federer, but Nishikori lost in Delray Beach, 27th is the worst he'll be.

Hopefully as you say he can pick up a few more points through the HC swing and also the clay Masters, to be seeded for the FO. His game should transfer well to clay.

Bit in bold: good to hear that Kei Nishikori is back playing competitive tennis (here at challenger level). Let's hope this is the beginning of a full recovery from him, so that he will be another consideration when it comes to future slams.
https://www.atpworldtour.com/en/news/nishikori-newport-beach-2018-challenger-comeback

Regarding the Cilic v Federer Wimbledon final, the Croatian was hampered by some v painful blisters in that match, which would explain his below par performance in that match, particularly the serving.

A better indication of Cilic's level against Federer was in 2016 Wimbledon quarter-finals, when he pushed him to 5 sets. Whilst Federer has a commanding 8-1 head-to-head record against Cilic, it is worth noting the one victory for the Croatian was in a slam on hardcourts (US Open semi-final 2014).

All of this may look a tad premature as Federer has to get past Chung first, but if it is a Federer v Cilic final I think it will be v different to how the Wimbledon final panned out.

Edmund was feeding Cilic's strike zone, which is very unlikely, if Federer does make it to F.

Good run for Edmund. Consistency is now what he needs.

It just felt that it was a step too far this time for Edmund but he can take so much from this run.

Cilic is a slam winner, a seasoned pro and he had his game face on today and looked like he was in no mood to be denied. Edmund wasn't quite at that level but his loss was no disgrace. The challenge for Edmund is to build on this slam semi and start going deep consistently in slams and winning lesser tournaments to become even more battle-hardened, confident and solidify his ranking. The challenge for Cilic if he is to face Federer is for him to be mentally strong and serve big and not be intimidated.

CaledonianCraig wrote:The challenge for Cilic if he is to face Federer is for him to be mentally strong and serve big and not be intimidated.

And it is indeed a significant challenge.

Interesting that there was some speculation that the women's event was wide open and that you could make a case for pretty much anyone winning it.
  Yet, although there have been upsets, the event will see the top two battling it out in the final - with the number one position also at stake. 
  My personal pick - Kerber - didn't quite make it, but it was still a very positive tournament for her. Some GS winners have triumphed after warding off MPs in an earlier round, but if Halep wins on Saturday she he'll have saved MPs in two separate matches. Fairly rare, I should think.
   Does anyone give Chung much of a chance against Fed?

sirfredperry wrote:
   Does anyone give Chung much of a chance against Fed?

Not me. Roger doesn't do losses against nobodies in slam semis.

sirfredperry wrote:...   Does anyone give Chung much of a chance against Fed?

I think he has a much better chance than Berdych. When Chung first appeared on the scene in 2015 progressing down into the 50s ranking I thought he was likely a future grand slam champ, but then he seemed to stop progressing, hit a plateau and faded. I am not sure what the problem was - maybe suddenly winning a lot of money, or sudden fame and expectation in his home country, or maybe just the gruelling day to day nature of the sport got to him. Whatever it was hopefully he is over it and will now go on another rapid progress up the rankings to break the top 30, top 20 and who knows. I think he can reach the top but I am no expert.

NNB. May be I'm being complacent about Fed, but surely Berdych, who was playing well and had beaten Fed twice at a GS, had a better chance than a 21-year-old playing his first GS semi. 
   Of course, I'm now liable to look foolish with my prediction. It's just that, with the draw opening up for Fed, I feared the Swiss might come a cropper against Tomas. Perhaps irrationally, I don't seem to have the same concerns about his meeting with Chung.

Berdych is a known quantity to Federer,  Federer knows how to beat him as long as the body is working properly.  Chung is an unknown quantity to Federer, there is no head to head.  Chung seems to have the playing style of a Djokovic so could take Federer down, as long as he is able to run and run.  Latest betting odds are about 1/7 for a Federer win and about 5/1 for a Chung win.  I think it is a lot closer than that.  I hope Federer wins (I would like to see him lasting a few more years if possible) and I think he should be able to win, but I am more uncertain with this than I was with Federer over Berdych.  This is just my opinion as it stands at the moment, to be added to the opinions others have.

It is going to be a sad day when Federer is overtaken by the younger generation - because that is when we will have to say goodbye to his "genius" forever.

No name Bertie wrote:Berdych is a known quantity to Federer,  Federer knows how to beat him as long as the body is working properly.  Chung is an unknown quantity to Federer, there is no head to head.  Chung seems to have the playing style of a Djokovic so could take Federer down, as long as he is able to run and run.  Latest betting odds are about 1/7 for a Federer win and about 5/1 for a Chung win.  I think it is a lot closer than that.  I hope Federer wins (I would like to see him lasting a few more years if possible) and I think he should be able to win, but I am more uncertain with this than I was with Federer over Berdych.  This is just my opinion as it stands at the moment, to be added to the opinions others have.

Well, it's to be hoped for the fans' sake that Chung can make a match of it. One thing's certain. He'll try his heart out.

There's no way Chung can win. That would be like Phil Taylor losing the World Darts final to....oh, hang on.

No name Bertie wrote:

sirfredperry wrote:...   Does anyone give Chung much of a chance against Fed?

I think he has a much better chance than Berdych.  When Chung first appeared on the scene in 2015 progressing down into the 50s ranking I thought he was likely a future grand slam champ, but then he seemed to stop progressing, hit a plateau and faded.  I am not sure what the problem was - maybe suddenly winning a lot of money, or sudden fame and expectation in his home country, or maybe just the gruelling day to day nature of the sport got to him.  Whatever it was hopefully he is over it and will now go on another rapid progress up the rankings to break the top 30, top 20 and who knows.  I think he can reach the top but I am no expert.  

I think there is much in what you say here.

We all know that on paper (well ..... on court actually !) Federer is the outstanding favourite against a relative rookie who has never before played in a Slam SF - let alone one where the crowd will be overwhelmingly in vocal support of a modern day tennis legend.

But you have to ask just how much longer will Federer be able to withstand everything thrown at him, the endless attempts by all Slam contestants (especially the very hungry, new kids on the block) to take him down. He’ll turn 37 later in the year. Do we keep making him favourite when he’s 38 .... ? 39 .... ? .....40 ...??  
There has to come a point, surely, when, for Federer to win these matches at the business end of Slams (or even earlier rounds) is considered an upset, rather than the other way round.


The odds obviously reflect the most likely outcome but the whole point of sport is its unpredictability. With that in mind, I today placed three sneaky ‘anti-bets’ (Chung to win his SF / Chung to take title / Cilic to take title) which could well mean easy money for the bookies ...... but you never know. Even if one of them comes off I won’t have much to collect ..... just adds a little extra interest when watching .......

It’s only a game folks ........

lags72 wrote:  ... The odds obviously reflect the most likely outcome but the whole point of sport is its unpredictability. With that in mind, I today placed three sneaky ‘anti-bets’ (Chung to win his SF / Chung to take title / Cilic to take title) which could well mean easy money for the bookies ...... but you never know. Even if one of them comes off I won’t have much to collect ..... just adds a little extra interest when watching .......

It’s only a game folks ........

Would it have been better to place two bets rather than three: a) Chung to beat Federer with the winnings going on Chung to beat Cilic.  b) Cilic to take title.  With "rollover" bets there is an opportunity to make bigger gains with a smaller outlay.

I like the idea of anti-bets, your heart says Federer but you bet against him, so if he loses you gain financially and if he wins you gain "psychologically".

I tend not to bet, but I have heard of so-called systems that place thousands of internet bets based on clever algorithms that supposedly work that create net winnings.

@ No name Bertie - you could be right as regards better potential outcomes.

In all honesty I didn’t put a whole lot of thought - or indeed a lot of cash - into my (combined) wagers ! That said, I do think Chung has a significant chance of riding the waves and going all the way. He has caught the crowd’s imagination in a way that few ‘unknowns’ ever do.  And I absolutely believe that Cilic - on this current hot form -can add an AO title to his USO.

I will be quite happy with either outcome for both the mens' and womens' finals. Halep v Wozniacki will result in a 1st time slam winner whatever the result and has the added ingredient of world no. 1 on the line.

In the mens' a Federer win is seen as the most likely outcome but would be pretty special given his age - back-to-back Aussie Open wins in his mid 30s and yet another slam ahead of Nadal would be historically significant. A Chung win would be huge for Asian tennis and particularly South Korea, and would also represent a real changing of the guard.

A Cilic win may not on the face of it be quite as momentous as the other 2 scenarios but would be significant for the Croat's legacy, moving him past 1 slam winners like Johansson, Ferrero and Del Potro and moving him into a position to potentially surpass Murray and Wawrinka's 3 slams each. It would cement his place in a new 'top 4', where provided he avoids injury, he would be seen as amongst the top favourites to win 3 out of the 4 slams and an outsider for the other.

Since his 2014 US Open triumph he's not really added to his legacy, and the Wimbledon 2017 final is a bit of a blemish on his career, despite the mitigating circumstances. Since the US Open 2014 Cilic has been no more than a 'dark horse' pick for slams and could step up to the next level with a win here.

So, plenty of significance for whoever wins - lets hope the quality of tennis can live up to this too!

Rosewall at 37+ yo, is the oldest at a slam, but Federer just overtook Rosewall as the oldest at AO. He will probably overhaul Rosewall's age records.

Just watched the BBC highlights show and was v annoyed they showed nothing of the Halep v Kerber match. Went onto YouTube and saw some highlights - well recommended, absolutely brilliant match, so many intense rallies, particularly sets 2 and 3 - one in particular in 2nd set at 5-3 where Kerber wins an epic rally - point of the tournament! This match was a great mix of attacking and defensive tennis from both players - great advert for the game, and well worth watching in particular for those who don't watch so much womens' tennis.

Having saved 2 match points in this match in this match and a couple in that other marathon, I'm rooting for Halep on Saturday.

Mr I. Yes, there were some incredible rallies in the Halep-Kerber epic. Alas, the shrieking was also of an epic nature.
   One thing I would have liked to have seen more of was the wrong-footing shot. Both women were clearly going to run down everything, so the shot "behind" the opponent was likely to be a big weapon.
   Halep really should have won the French last year, so may be a bit more anxious than Caroline in the final. Could go either way.

Oh dear we Eurosport viewers are plagued, yet again, with Wilander ‘commentary ‘ (or should I say, waffle ..... since there is very rarely anything of interest to be learnt from him on the finer points of the game).

I think the only question of note to be asked here is if whether Chung will win more than ten games?

Think that’s harsh CC, given how well he played in getting here.

But not long before we find out. And it sure hasn’t started too well for him.

Is it that bad? Chung making too many UEs? Sorry can’t watch but did put some € on a fed straight set win...

I think it’s very much a case of Chung being nervous. Which is a shame, because Federer’s serve is misfiring a lot - which would normally offer some serious hope to an opponent. But Fed’s ground strokes have been pretty solid ; and that, combined with UE’s from Chung, is making the difference.

Ok, so now the serve is getting back to normal too ......ominous.

Chung does need some halep. The inexperience at such stages is beginning to show. Come on Chung, put up a fight.

There’s no doubt at all that he has the movement and the shots. So if he can just settle his nerves .........

lags72 wrote:Think that’s harsh CC, given how well he played in getting here.

But not long before we find out. And it sure hasn’t started too well for him.

I have seen Federer destroy far more illustrious oppents in slam semis. This is a mere pup in his first slam run of any note and he is in a semi. Lamb to the slaughter springs to mind. Harsh but accurate I will say. Chung will have better days - just not today.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Chung will have better days - just not today.

But today will leave a scar in the psyche. . Just hope, it makes Chung a better player for the future.

Federer v Monaco at USO springs to mind.

laverfan wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Chung will have better days - just not today.

But today will leave a scar in the psyche. . Just hope, it makes Chung a better player for the future.

Federer v Monaco at USO springs to mind.

That depends on the individual though. Others have had scars and bounced back - look at Murray. He lost his first five slam finals but kept believing.

Well I must concede it does look an accurate assessment CC.

Early in the match Wilander came up with the gem that Chung should take heart from the fact that Federer is not invincible, as proven by the fact that Nadal and Djokovic have beaten him here in Melbourne a number of times. He just somehow omitted to add that Chung is not Nadal ...or Djokovic .......

Still feel Chung has a very promising future ahead of him in this sport.

Oh dear. Retirements are always so disappointing.

The Men’s game is in a state right now. Hoping Cilic beats Roger.

Federer through to the Australian Open Final and it is almost akin to a practice session prior to the final against Cilic. Prediction for the final? Federer to win in straights or four at the absolute most.

For Chung he will have better days but like Edmund yesterday it was just asking far too much from them. Their acheivements were already way beyond their comprehension at the start of the tournament. Their task now is to build on these huge acheivements and start to churn out consistent results and long runs in tournaments.

After a pretty entertaining tournament so far, the mens' semi-finals have been somewhat anti-climatic (in contrast with the epic Halep v Kerber semi-final) with both Edmund and Chung's exploits catching up with them.

Here's hoping the Cilic v Federer final is a decent one. I really don't see either player winning in straight sets - as I've mentioned earlier I think the match will be more similar to the Wimbledon 2016 5 set quarter-final than last year's straight sets rout in Wimbledon final when Cilic was hampered by blisters.

Chung didn't retire because he had nerves.  The BBC commentary team are saying he had blisters on the balls of his feet which caused pain which limited his movement.  It seems it was the gruelling nature of tournament tennis that got to him.  Either a physical limitation or a playing style limitation (that put too much physical strain on the body).  This is tournament tennis - you have to ensure that you are able to win in the earlier rounds whilst preserving the body for the later rounds.  This is what hampered Kyle Edmund against Cilic - he was carrying various strains.   This is also what hampered Cilic in the final of Wimbledon 2017.  So few outside of the big guns have experienced getting towards the end of grand slam tournaments that they are probably finding this out for the first time.

Just John wrote:The Men’s game is in a state right now. Hoping Cilic beats Roger.

Cilic certainly has the game to beat Federer. But he himself is part of the old guard - he’ll be 30 this year. What I really would have liked is for one of the young guys to have won this AO. But it’s not happening whilst old man Federer is holding them off.

The signs are gradually looking better, and new blood will surely start to make its impact over the next couple of seasons.

For the women's final I want Wozniacki to win for two reasons. Primarily she is not a screamer - if women's tennis was filled with non-screamers like her I would still be watching the women's game. Halep is a screamer. Secondly she seems like a nice person and has received an awful lot of stick of being a "paper" No 1 Ranker in the past. She is a very good tennis player but didn't seem to quite have the tools to win a grand slam tournament.