They do play slower than they used to, and I think Novelty Bobble is right about the ball. There’s some more homogeneity between the surfaces these days.
They changed the grass at Wimbledon a few years ago - from a blend to 100% ryegrass. Apparently this is harder wearing and slower and has allowed baseliners to have greater success than your classic serve volleyer.
Info is on Wiki - Wiki, for once, is not wrong - they did a thing on the grass on the BBC during a rain delay a few years ago (back when we had rain delays - unbelievably, I’ve seen an article in the press here complaining that the advent of the roof means we no longer get to watch classic Wimbledon matches from yesteryear during rainy periods!)
Lots of golf’s royalty at Wimbledon this year. newly crowned US Open champ Rory McIlroy has been in the royal box, along with Jack Nicklaus, Greg Norman, Gary Player, and Ernie Els. I am a little surprised that Norman was there this week considering his ex (Chris Evert) is doing commentary this week.
Djokovic just won set number 1 in a tiebreaker.
The Rafter-Goran final on a Monday was the last time the grass was the old grass.
Djkovic cruised in set two. Tsonga seemed dispirited. In the first set Tsonga held the early lead and I thought he might just blast his way through like he did against Federer, but Djokovic slowed him down and broke as Tsonga was serving for the set.
And that’s one of the most amazing points I’ve ever seen. Both guys made diving volleys, first Tsonga, the Djokovic. Tsonga nearly made a second one, and it just went long. One point later, it’s triple break point for Djokovic, so this is pretty much the match on the line here. EDIT: And the gets the break on his first try.
Thanks for that article Marley. I have always thought it was counter-intuitive that grass was a faster court than hard court. Reasoning, blades of grass has more surface area than hard court. and more surface area, means more friction.
Djoker won set 2 easily and up a break in the 3rd set. Looks like Novak will be the new number 1, even he loses to Rafa on Sunday morning. Tennis rankings are seriously flawed if a player can lose the top ranking even if he wins the current tournament.
Holy crap, another ridiculous point where both guys hit the turf. 4-3, Djokovic.
That was Mahaloth.
If you want a system where you can’t lose the #1 ranking unless you lose, you want college football or basketball - sports governed by insular and frequently illogical polls that are based mostly on people’s impressions and not so much on hard data. The ATP rankings aren’t based on one tournament, they’re based on results from the last year. Why is it unreasonable for Djokovic to overtake Nadal in a 52-week ranking system if he’s been the best player in the world at least for all of 2011? I don’t mean to be confrontational about it, but Djokovic made the U.S. Open final last year (and lost to Nadal), won the Australian (Nadal lost in the quarters), lost in the semis in Paris (Nadal won), and it looks like he’ll be in the finals at Wimbledon. Along the way he won 44 matches in a row, including some big tournaments - and beat Nadal four times. From where I sit it’s not unreasonable to rank him in front of Nadal.
And now Tsonga earns a break, so it’s 4-4! I think Djokovic knows how dangerous it is to give this guy a second chance.
Then Novak should have already been #1. A Player should not become #1 from losing to the currently ranked #1 player.
IMO, Tennis rankings need to adopt some sort of spoilage (attrition) system where most recent results count more than results from 9 months ago. If Rafa wins, he gains no points in the rankings because last year results are still currently worth 100% of what they were worth 51 weeks ago. However if 2010 Wimbledon points are worth 50% of original value then Rafa is not defending the entire 1200 points, just 600 of them. He would have some upward mobility.
This match has been extremely entertaining. Lots of grass stains on knees and shirts. Tiebreaker in the 3rd set.
Match point to Djokovic at 6-5 in the third-set tiebreak, but they’re on serve. Djokovic has dropped serve twice while trying to close out the match.
He’s not becoming #1 from losing to the current #1. This is what I was complaining about before- your idea about giving more weight to recent events has merit, but saying ‘he’s becoming #1 from losing to the current #1’ puts too much emphasis on the latest result. These are full-year rankings and they’re supposed to tell you who has been the best over an extended period of time. Overriding that because it feels wrong that he could overtake Nadal even if he loses to Nadal is not logical.
Djokovic will not become #1 “from losing” to Nadal. It’s true that he would be #1 even if he loses to Nadal, but we don’t know that Nadal will make the final or that he will beat Djokovic if he makes it. The reason Djokovic is on the verge of becoming the top player is that he won 40-odd matches in a row to start this year. He has already won seven titles this season. One of them was the Australian Open, and four others were Masters events, which are the biggest ones after the Slams and the year-end tournament. Nadal has three titles this year. He won the French, he won one Masters event, and one smaller tournament. He lost to Djokovic in the finals of four other Masters events. Djokovic has been the best player, by a lot, in 2011. He was the second best player in 2010. It’s now the middle of 2011, so it’s not like this is crazy.
And the tiebreak goes to Tsonga 11-9. ESPN says that since 2006, all but two of the men’s semis have been over in straight sets. I guess that mostly just says Federer and Nadal are really good on grass.
Djokovic broke to start the set and is serving for a 3-0 lead. If Djokovic does pull himself together and win this thing, he will be the first player other than Federer or Nadal to reach #1 since Feb. 1, 2004 - the last day Andy Roddick was on top. That’s seven years and five months with only two guys sharing the #1 ranking; 285 weeks for Federer and 103 for Nadal. It’s completely nuts. In the old days, a typical stay at the top might be a couple of months, and a few weeks was not unheard of.
I realize novak basically will have got his #1 ranking from his earlier play. That is why I am saying that Novak should have already been the top ranked player. The math is just now catching up and the ranking is a trailing indicator. to get the rankings more current it should have more weight on the most recent results. Golf rankings have their issues, but I do like that most recent results count more. The fact that Rafa has all his rankings points at risk from last year is ridiculous. Those point should be have been losing some significance. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain in the rankings.
and looking at from the other side, if Rafa does win, he will have 3 of the 4 biggest trophies in the game and not be #1 and QF in the 4th major. In golf, if a player had three of the 4 majors and wasn’t ranked number 1, there would be massive outrage.
Djokovic will be the #1 player in the world after this tournament. Amazing.
Djokovic finally serves it out on his third try, and takes the fourth set 6-3.
If that were the case, Djokovic would already be number one. So from that standpoint it’s kind of academic, and the fact that he might get the top ranking while losing to Nadal is sort of a coincidence. The thing that influences the rankings is how much you improve (or go down, or stay the same) from year to year. Djokovic has gone up a lot, and Nadal has gone down a little.
That’s not true. You don’t risk your points. The points expire no matter what you do; the questions is what you replace them with. Djokovic has improved his results at all four majors over the last year (he did several rounds better in Australia) and won a bunch of other significant events. Nadal has not improved his results, partly because at the ones he won, he could not improve. You can’t go up from #1 - although of course you can put distance between yourself and your competitors. At the end of 2010, Nadal had essentially the same number of points he has right now, and Djokovic had almost exactly half as many points as Nadal. Now Djokovic is a little bit ahead.
And Djokovic would have one win, two finals and a semifinal. There are more than four tournaments in the season, and Djokovic has beaten Nadal the last four times they’ve played. It’s not a fluke that he’s #1.
The points “expire” all at once and IMO, that is a problem. I think they should start to slowly expire (10% per month after 6 free months?) and the balance on the 13th month. It wouldn’t be that big of change.
the Fringe Tennis fan is not going to analyze the rankings, all they are going to see a #1 Nadal winning Wimbledon and losing the #1 spot in the rankings (if Rafa indeed goes onto win). And unless you dig deep, that is not going to make any sense to the casual fan.
Anything is possible, but I could never dream up a realistic scenario where the #1 golfer wins one of the four major championship and loses the #1 ranking.
I don’t think they’re going to care - and if they do, reminding them that Djokovic has lost two matches all year (presuming he loses to Nadal in the final) would probably do the trick. People complain about the women’s rankings because every time the top player loses, the press throws up its hands and starts another story about how Ms. #1 hasn’t earned her ranking.
IMO, the casual fan does care about the rankings, much more so than the hard core fan. The casual fan cares about 4 tournaments, and who is the best players in the rankings. They don’t care who won the Qatar Invitational.
If it is Novak vs Rafa on Sunday morning, the announcers will say countless times that Novak will overtake Rafa in the rankings, even if he loses. It is not going to make sense to them. My parents, professors, and bosses always told me that perception is very important, and this doesn’t pass the smell test IMO.
the Novak/Tsonga match was very entertaining. Novak played very well. Congratz to him and his new number 1 ranking. Accrued more points in 18 tournaments than Nadal has done in 22 events. He is a very deserving #1 ranked player. I hope he goes on to win on Sunday no matter who he plays.