2019 US Open

[I6MTW]

Indian Sumit Nagal qualifies for his first main draw of a GS. 

Who does he face in the first round?

A player called Roger Federer.

Indian no 1 Prajnesh Gunneswaran play Medvedev in the first round.

 

As for who's the favourite to win, Djokovic of course is the favourite to defend his title.

[Real McCoy]

Nagal is the next Nadal. He will beat Fedex then beat Djokovic. Gunneswaran will gun down Medvedev. Finals between Nagal and Gunn. Mark my words

[I6MTW]

1 hour ago, Real McCoy said:

Nagal is the next Nadal. He will beat Fedex then beat Djokovic. Gunneswaran will gun down Medvedev. Finals between Nagal and Gunn. Mark my words

Lol, they're both in the same side of the draw. SF max.

[Gollum]

Well played Nagal, taking 1st set 

Looks like SW19 choke has broken Fed's spirit. 

[Gollum]

Proud of Nagal, he has no serve so lots of scope to improve there.

[Gollum]

Caught only the final 20 minutes of the Fegal match...sadly that SW19 final defeat has scarred me. Don't think I will be able to enjoy tennis the way I used to, simply going through the motions, no passion. 

[I6MTW]

4 hours ago, Gollum said:

Caught only the final 20 minutes of the Fegal match...sadly that SW19 final defeat has scarred me. Don't think I will be able to enjoy tennis the way I used to, simply going through the motions, no passion. 

What if Federer were to win the US Open beating Djokovic and Nadal back to back?

[I6MTW]

4 hours ago, Gollum said:

Proud of Nagal, he has no serve so lots of scope to improve there.

Nagal did well, but not that impressive considering Federer's level of play in the first set . After Federer settled in, there was only one way it was going. Nagal did pretty well in the 4th set, almost breaking Federer's serve to level 5-5. Might've even gone to a 5th set had he converted and gained the momentum. 

But, considering Nagal is only 22, he can still improve. His Serve and fitness would have to improve to be at a top 50 level. I can definitely see him being top 100 not too far into the future.

[Gollum]

2 hours ago, I6MTW said:

What if Federer were to win the US Open beating Djokovic and Nadal back to back?

That might be a remedy but unlikely to happen, highly unlikely. 

[I6MTW]

2 hours ago, Gollum said:

That might be a remedy but unlikely to happen, highly unlikely. 

Well he has a much better chance at beating Nadal in the final, if they were to meet. He has to go thru Djokovic in the SF(if he even makes it thru Stan and Medvedev), it all comes down to the SF between them if they both reach there. If Fed plays as well as he did in Wimbledon, plus with the added ruthlessness and revenge mindset he could beat Nole. 

[Gollum]

1 hour ago, I6MTW said:

Well he has a much better chance at beating Nadal in the final, if they were to meet. He has to go thru Djokovic in the SF(if he even makes it thru Stan and Medvedev), it all comes down to the SF between them if they both reach there. If Fed plays as well as he did in Wimbledon, plus with the added ruthlessness and revenge mindset he could beat Nole. 

Haven't watched much but AA seems to be a high bouncing surface, more so than previous years. Nadal can not be written off if my observation is correct, especially against the Swiss. My money is still on an early exit for Fed 

[Cricketics]

I hope everyone liked what they saw of Sumit Nagal yesterday.  Albeit short,  he plays with great heart and has a brilliant forehand. He has a bright future if he stays around the right people. He is a fighter and had been down a set each timei n his qualifying games before his lead up to the game against Federer. He did not have many  answers to Federer during. those middle sets but when Federer was about to cruise to victory in the end, he just reminded everyone how he made it to. the US Open. Even though he won the first set, Sumit showed his best tennis in the last set yesterday with those long rallies, well he is a clay court specialist too so that kind of answers why he is involved in rallies.

 

He played like top 75 player yesterday.  I think this time around next year his ranking would be in top 100. 

 

 

[I6MTW]

1 hour ago, Cricketics said:

I hope everyone liked what they saw of Sumit Nagal yesterday.  Albeit short,  he plays with great heart and has a brilliant forehand. He has a bright future if he stays around the right people. He is a fighter and had been down a set each timei n his qualifying games before his lead up to the game against Federer. He did not have many  answers to Federer during. those middle sets but when Federer was about to cruise to victory in the end, he just reminded everyone how he made it to. the US Open. Even though he won the first set, Sumit showed his best tennis in the last set yesterday with those long rallies, well he is a clay court specialist too so that kind of answers why he is involved in rallies.

 

He played like top 75 player yesterday.  I think this time around next year his ranking would be in top 100. 

 

 

Sumit Nagal is a clay courter. He has a great moonballing FH. His movement is also good. It's only his Serve which is lacking cuz of the height, serving is always a disadvantage for short players(I can understand because I'm also short around 5'5 ). He lacks killer weapons to make it to the top. He's 22 so he may improve and peak in the mid 20s. He can be a top 50 player at best, but I do see him breaking the top 100 soon. 

[I6MTW]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Haven't watched much but AA seems to be a high bouncing surface, more so than previous years. Nadal can not be written off if my observation is correct, especially against the Swiss. My money is still on an early exit for Fed 

From what I heard and saw, the surface seems to be faster than last year. Maybe the lower temperatures are making it seem slower than it actually is. But it seems faster than last year. 

[Cricketics]

41 minutes ago, I6MTW said:

Sumit Nagal is a clay courter. He has a great moonballing FH. His movement is also good. It's only his Serve which is lacking cuz of the height, serving is always a disadvantage for short players(I can understand because I'm also short around 5'5 ). He lacks killer weapons to make it to the top. He's 22 so he may improve and peak in the mid 20s. He can be a top 50 player at best, but I do see him breaking the top 100 soon. 

Regarding height, he needs to take cue out of Diego Schwartzman or Nishikori. Both of them are short but have the tendency to play long rallies too, something similar to what Sumit displayed yesterday. I agree server is something he needs to work on and might remain his challenging aspect of the game through out his career. 

[Gollum]

Thiem, Tsitsipas, Khachanov, Bautista-Agut, Querrey, Tsonga, Edmund, Berdych OUT. Nadal's draw looks so easy now....lucky mofo. 

[I6MTW]

7 hours ago, Gollum said:

Thiem, Tsitsipas, Khachanov, Bautista-Agut, Querrey, Tsonga, Edmund, Berdych OUT. Nadal's draw looks so easy now....lucky mofo. 

Only players who are half decent threats to Nadal are Cilic, Isner, Shapovolav, Zverev, Kyrgios, and Monfils.

[I6MTW]

Looks like Federer is done, he might still win a few matches here and there every tournament but his level is gone. Not even top 50 anymore. He's not getting any younger as well. Once his age finally kicks in. He'll no longer be able to win matches using his B and C level games. The loss at Wimbledon destroyed him. So anything after that will always be a hole in his career. Fed's career is now divided into two parts , pre W 2019 and post W 2019.

[Real McCoy]

14 hours ago, I6MTW said:

Looks like Federer is done, he might still win a few matches here and there every tournament but his level is gone. Not even top 50 anymore. He's not getting any younger as well. Once his age finally kicks in. He'll no longer be able to win matches using his B and C level games. The loss at Wimbledon destroyed him. So anything after that will always be a hole in his career. Fed's career is now divided into two parts , pre W 2019 and post W 2019.

Federer was done long time ago. Him reaching the final in 2019 itself is a big thing. He is not done mentally but physically. People keep forgetting that he is 38. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are still on because the competition is weak. Many say that 2000-10 was a weak era. But right now its the lowest. Federer was challenged by a younger Nadal who was challenged by Djokovic. Sampras was the great player before Federer. He retired at 30. Becker and Edberg retired at 30. So anything after 2011, Federer was not in his prime. Nadal and Djoker are not in their prime also but not as old as Federer. If the youngsters coming up were able to challenge the big 3, we would have a new set of players.

 

Look at the youngsters right now - Thiem, Kyrgios, Tsitsipas, Zverev, Medvedev. They are not even in the category of Hewitt who was considered a placeholder for a much better player which Federer turned out to be. Hewitt has a good record against Sampras who was the great champion in the 90s. In the 90s, they used to say your reflexes slow down after 30. So most people retired after 30. Federer's game right now reminds us of the declining quality of tennis. Nadal and Djoker can keep it up but only for so long. After them, tennis will be done. Many kids throuhgout the world these days play videogames not outdoor sports. I used to play cricket in the streets, parks, school grounds, even inside the house. I don't see it too much these days.

 

If you say his game has changed since wimbledon, he was playing horrible tennis in wimbledon and french open also. It was covered up because he reached the finals and SF respectively. I'm expecting him to be knocked out in the early rounds itself. Last year he was knocked out by Millman who was easily beaten by Nadal this year. Fed needs to quit. Sooner the better

[I6MTW]

2 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

Federer was done long time ago. Him reaching the final in 2019 itself is a big thing. He is not done mentally but physically. People keep forgetting that he is 38. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are still on because the competition is weak. Many say that 2000-10 was a weak era. But right now its the lowest. Federer was challenged by a younger Nadal who was challenged by Djokovic. Sampras was the great player before Federer. He retired at 30. Becker and Edberg retired at 30. So anything after 2011, Federer was not in his prime. Nadal and Djoker are not in their prime also but not as old as Federer. If the youngsters coming up were able to challenge the big 3, we would have a new set of players.

 

Look at the youngsters right now - Thiem, Kyrgios, Tsitsipas, Zverev, Medvedev. They are not even in the category of Hewitt who was considered a placeholder for a much better player which Federer turned out to be. Hewitt has a good record against Sampras who was the great champion in the 90s. In the 90s, they used to say your reflexes slow down after 30. So most people retired after 30. Federer's game right now reminds us of the declining quality of tennis. Nadal and Djoker can keep it up but only for so long. After them, tennis will be done. Many kids throuhgout the world these days play videogames not outdoor sports. I used to play cricket in the streets, parks, school grounds, even inside the house. I don't see it too much these days.

 

If you say his game has changed since wimbledon, he was playing horrible tennis in wimbledon and french open also. It was covered up because he reached the finals and SF respectively. I'm expecting him to be knocked out in the early rounds itself. Last year he was knocked out by Millman who was easily beaten by Nadal this year. Fed needs to quit. Sooner the better

Federer won't quit until his records are safe from Nadal and Djokovic. Though, after the Wim loss, he might be mentally done, in that case he might retire soon. Federer at 38 though, is still the only player capable of going toe to toe with Nadal and Djokovic(two of the best players still today.). Even in his declined game , he still stands a better chance of beating them than the Next Gen and Lost Gen players.

Edited August 29, 2019 by I6MTW