To the thieves who stole his stuff I hope they get their comeuppance. Other updates re the situation: Let in without his passport and Argentinian Embassy in process of issuing him another one. https://twitter.com/vamosdelpofans
I've got to agree, that doubles is a joy to watch and deserves more recognition. It is a tricky one though, as the top players don't play much doubles, and so there is always this sense that it's a side event. Then again, it's something that works really well for exhibitions, especially as we move towards the seniors tour. It feels less adversarial, but more fun.
Cheers for the article, good read. Also read that Muzza had been using Chelsea FC's facilities to do some rehab, which is interesting with him being a Gooner.
Yep. Makes sense that the Paris finalists will be playing on Tuesday.
Doubles matches at the WTF get underway a couple of hours before the singles matches, but I think the Beeb only have the rights for afternoon singles. Poor.
Gasquet will be 0 from 3 in his 3 group B matches.
Quite possibly...just hope he wins a set or two. There may be a three way tie in Group B with the other guys going 2-1, and then it would come down to sets/games won.
Anyone heading over to the O2 this week? I have tickets for Monday all-day and while all the matches this week should be interesting, couldn't help but feel a little disappointed to miss out on Nole and Fed. Ended up getting a ticket for the night session on Tuesday, should be good.
Rozzi, I think you'll potentially get Nole-DelPo on Thursday. I reckon that could be the final too tbh...
Cheers for the article, good read. Also read that Muzza had been using Chelsea FC's facilities to do some rehab, which is interesting with him being a Gooner.
The question is how long will Andy realistically know when to return to the tour and be back in his spetacular pre-operation form instantly.
Is 7 or 8 weeks post operation enough of a recovery time for him to know he'll at least romp to the 2014 Australian open semis easily?
Is Andy still taking advice from the doctor? Or is it a case of to hell with it re: the doctor.
David, there's a few pieces in today's papers and yesterday's Times. Andy sounds very cautious and isn't going to be rushing back. He's well into rehab, but hasn't hit any tennis balls yet - he thinks he might this week. He is aware that if he comes back too soon, he could re-injure himself.
It turns out, he was planning the surgery to be after the US Open from before Wimbledon. When he won, some of his team suggested he postpone it and make the most of his form, but as soon as he hit the hard-courts, he was back in severe pain, so knew something had to be done sooner than later. His practice sessions and playing style were designed around his problems, and he was spending all of his spare time in physio, and unable to play football or golf etc.
Probably the most interesting thing was that he said he realised there were shots he could no longer play because they were too painful, or he couldn't put the power into them. He'd been watching old videos of himself!
One one hand, it seems obvious that it's an unsustainable situation, but when you are still able to play at a reasonably high level, the temptation to keep going must be strong. The players almost all carry some kind of niggling injury, so there's is an acceptance of a certain amount of pain, while there can never be any guarantees from surgery. It can easily leave you worse off.
The suggestion seems that he's planning to head to Miami soon, after doing some light hitting this week, but it very much seems to be a "suck it and see" approach. Carefully testing what can be done and building up the intensity.
The question is how long will Andy realistically know when to return to the tour and be back in his spetacular pre-operation form instantly.
Is 7 or 8 weeks post operation enough of a recovery time for him to know he'll at least romp to the 2014 Australian open semis easily?
Is Andy still taking advice from the doctor? Or is it a case of to hell with it re: the doctor.
Last I read he was still being cautious about a return in time for the Aus Open.
I'm pretty sure he'd "do a Rafa" and wait until he's completely sure he's fully recovered, not just from the op but back to full training fitness and listening to the doctor and his fitness team
The Aus Open is one of the most brutal, weather wise so although I'll be gutted if he misses it, better a Slam missed than a career.
It's worrying how many have surgery and never regain their full form again, so I think he'll be uber sensitive not to return until he knows it's right.
To the thief/thieves who robbed delPo.....SCUMBAGS
I'm torn about watching todays final. I'm afraid little Daveed will get pulvarised by Nole. Secretly I'm hoping he can win this Masters for the second year on the trot. One Maters title seems low for a World No 3.
I've got to agree, that doubles is a joy to watch and deserves more recognition. It is a tricky one though, as the top players don't play much doubles, and so there is always this sense that it's a side event. Then again, it's something that works really well for exhibitions, especially as we move towards the seniors tour. It feels less adversarial, but more fun.
Interesting and thanks for posting.
The writer knows his stuff but raises the issue of doubles filling an IPL style need.
Why?
And why now?
What is the opportunity or gap in the market which such a positioning / promotional strategy will fill?
Would we be doing this to save the sport or perhaps just to help build it some more?
Or would we be doing it to get the Bryan brothers (nice guys who I met briefly while still a coach) recognised in airports?
In cricket, one-day formats have always been the fall back to create extra fan interest / revenue because fans don't have the time or motivation (and more recently money with a day at the test setting you back nearly £100) to go to 4 day or 5 day matches or quite simply, there's an attractive aspect to seeing a result in one day to the match you've been to watch.
The first was the Gillette Cup in 1963 but the discussions about such a format were first broached before that: 100 YEARS before that!
But in tennis, why the need for a short format or more especially, a new positioning utilising doubles?
If anything, does this short format idea and another suggestion for its' promotion, in some ways allude to the fact that in these equipment / fitness dominated days, the game at the top, especially in the Slams can require many hours of spectating slog to watch the slugfest marathons on the court, with the likes of Nadal and Djokovic trading groundstrokes for half a day?
And therefore, that there can be something for those who don't want to or can't commit to going through the 3/4/5 hour wringer of watching many top matches?
Of course, the perceived need for a short format in the sport is not new and since the 70's team tennis in various guises has been tried with some success but only ever breaching the periphery of the sport in fan interest.
On doubles, unless the media promote it more and with respect and seriousness as a valid format / part of the sport, it will never be anything other than something on the edge, after the fact or for warm-ups before the big, singles stuff begins.
As the writer points out, once the likes of Laver and my Tennis Fantasy doubles legends had gone (a generation that HAD to play it) and Johnny Mac moved into the commentary box, the top guys lead by Borg, then Lendl started the trend towards singles specialisation.
Of course, this left the way open for others further down the pecking order to take the top slots in the doubles. But the likes of the Bryan brothers will probably never be able to throw off the stigma that the harsh reality is that they, along with many other top doubles players in the last 25 years, have only reached that summit because they couldn't do it in singles.
When I last went to the World Doubles event at the Albert Hall back in the mid 80's, nearly all the players in the teams (Slozil/Smid, Guendhart/Tarotzy, Curren/Denton, Nystrom/Jarred,
Mac/Fleming, Amaya/ Pfister) were at least top 50 in singles and most of them, top 30.
Now in the top 10 pairs in the world is there a single player in the top 100? Probably not, but not surprisingly, of course, as they have all become doubles specialists and don't ever play singles.
It's a catch 22: in getting to the top of the doubles format, the players have had to give up playing the singles format which might have given them the notoriety for people to follow them in the doubles. But they don't have that, so sadly no-one watches.
And because of that, doubles will always be a second priority in the prestige and coverage stakes for fans and the TV networks.
Personally, as I've posted many times, I know that these players are top guys but to the general fan base and the extended segments of fans that get drawn into the sport for the Slams or maybe if the Tour comes to their town, these players are sadly, regarded as the journeymen and will not ever get recognised in the duty free shops of the world's airports.
I'm afraid that also, I am one who is not a fan of modern doubles as I believe the format has succumbed even more than singles to the modern power fuelled formula of the modern game.
It's wham, bam, thank you mam. Nuance and variety has been lost to the format as such aspects as transition, mid court and net play have been to singles.
Added to this, as the one poster remarks at the end of the article in the link, modern players perform the tedious rituals of hand touching and 5 second debates after / before each points, a practice I find also infuriating, especially as the same goals can be achieved with hand signals.
Back on my world tour of the Slams in 92/3, Gigi Fernandez and Natalie Zereva were the only pair doing it, 20 years on everyone does it. As a 37 year-old, I found it tedious, constantly interrupting the flow of the play, let alone now as a 57 year-old.
If the sport wants to both strengthen loyalty with existing fans and attract new ones, I wouldn't waste any time on new fangled positioning for a format which most fans aren't interested in because the top guys don't do it, I'd cut the match formats in Slams to best of 3 sets
If people throw up their arms in horror at the potential loss of the marathon slugfests, then you could either remove the TB for the 3rd set of introduce it at 12-12.
I make these suggestions with last years Queens Final between Murray and Cilic which was 3 sets, had ebb / flow and momentum and lasted between 2-3 hours - a satisfying experience as a fan.
For me, the incremental added value of another 2 sets and another 2 hours is negligible.
Anyone heading over to the O2 this week? I have tickets for Monday all-day and while all the matches this week should be interesting, couldn't help but feel a little disappointed to miss out on Nole and Fed. Ended up getting a ticket for the night session on Tuesday, should be good.
Rozzi, I think you'll potentially get Nole-DelPo on Thursday. I reckon that could be the final too tbh...
I'm heading to the O2 this week jesse. Not sure which day to go though to see the best matches. Whether to go early in the week or wait til later this week to see more compeitive matches as the players are fighting hard to stay in the competition. Decisions decisions........
DJOKOVIC! Yeah baby!
He seems to have his fire back. Hopefully he won't choke so much next year, though it's quite understandable considering his personal troubles in the last couple of years. That FO net point bothered him for too long...
The WTF draw is favourable for Rafa, but I still think Novak is the favourite
Rozzi, I think you'll potentially get Nole-DelPo on Thursday. I reckon that could be the final too tbh...
Thanks Jesse How do you figure it out? That wouldn't be my first or second choice of players to watch (based solely on who my favourites are), but I think it has the potential to be a great match.
Are the draws for the ATP finals matches released already or are they only released each day before play?
At the moment they have only released Monday and Tuesday. I believe each player plays once over each two-day period, so I presume Wednesday and Thursday's schedules will be released at the same time, presumably on Tuesday evening.
Thanks Jesse How do you figure it out? That wouldn't be my first or second choice of players to watch (based solely on who my favourites are), but I think it has the potential to be a great match.
At the moment they have only released Monday and Tuesday. I believe each player plays once over each two-day period, so I presume Wednesday and Thursday's schedules will be released at the same time, presumably on Tuesday evening.
OK thanks Rozzi. Do you know who's playing Tuesday afternoon?
I don't get this obsession with players "retiring gracefully". Federer's still top 10, and only he really knows if his slump this year was down to age that's only going to get much worse next year, or a temporary back problem, which can be resolved to let him play at a decent standard for a while. We're still enjoying play by Hewitt and he's dropped much further, so if he can handle it, Fed can cope with being in the lower half of the top ten. It's just a shame that some of his fans only want to see him play if he's definitely going to win lots.
It's not his fans who want him to retire?
To still be running Del Potro, Djokovic close shows he has every right to be carrying on.
It would be nice to see Ferrer win but It'll take a mighty effort.
Comments
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013/11/del-potro-robbed-cherished-rosary-stolen/49665/#.UnU9P_llWSo
Awful.
is this confirmed? do you have the draw for the whole week
Gasquet will be 0 from 3 in his 3 group B matches.
Not absolutely sure but I think it's:
Mon
Berdych v Wawrinka
Del Potro v Gasquet
Tues
Nadal v Ferrer
Djokovic v Federer
They haven't released any more info so far
That's what's showing on the schedule at the moment:
http://www.barclaysatpworldtourfinals.com/en/schedule
I'm looking forward to finding out who I'll be watching on Thursday night, can't wait
While signing an autograph. Bet it was a Tsonga fan
Deliciano's here for Judy, no?
Yep. Makes sense that the Paris finalists will be playing on Tuesday.
Doubles matches at the WTF get underway a couple of hours before the singles matches, but I think the Beeb only have the rights for afternoon singles. Poor.
Quite possibly...just hope he wins a set or two. There may be a three way tie in Group B with the other guys going 2-1, and then it would come down to sets/games won.
Rozzi, I think you'll potentially get Nole-DelPo on Thursday. I reckon that could be the final too tbh...
The question is how long will Andy realistically know when to return to the tour and be back in his spetacular pre-operation form instantly.
Is 7 or 8 weeks post operation enough of a recovery time for him to know he'll at least romp to the 2014 Australian open semis easily?
Is Andy still taking advice from the doctor? Or is it a case of to hell with it re: the doctor.
It turns out, he was planning the surgery to be after the US Open from before Wimbledon. When he won, some of his team suggested he postpone it and make the most of his form, but as soon as he hit the hard-courts, he was back in severe pain, so knew something had to be done sooner than later. His practice sessions and playing style were designed around his problems, and he was spending all of his spare time in physio, and unable to play football or golf etc.
Probably the most interesting thing was that he said he realised there were shots he could no longer play because they were too painful, or he couldn't put the power into them. He'd been watching old videos of himself!
One one hand, it seems obvious that it's an unsustainable situation, but when you are still able to play at a reasonably high level, the temptation to keep going must be strong. The players almost all carry some kind of niggling injury, so there's is an acceptance of a certain amount of pain, while there can never be any guarantees from surgery. It can easily leave you worse off.
The suggestion seems that he's planning to head to Miami soon, after doing some light hitting this week, but it very much seems to be a "suck it and see" approach. Carefully testing what can be done and building up the intensity.
Some links.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/nov/02/andy-murray-back-surgery-tennis
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/10422724/Andy-Murray-admits-his-Davis-Cup-heroics-were-fuelled-by-a-fear-of-critics-doubting-his-commitment.html
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/tennis/andy-murray-excited-at-making-a-pain-free-return-1-3171577
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2485653/Andy-Murray-hopes-better-18-months-surgery.html?ico=sport%5Eheadlines
Ha! That was my first thought too.
Last I read he was still being cautious about a return in time for the Aus Open.
I'm pretty sure he'd "do a Rafa" and wait until he's completely sure he's fully recovered, not just from the op but back to full training fitness and listening to the doctor and his fitness team
The Aus Open is one of the most brutal, weather wise so although I'll be gutted if he misses it, better a Slam missed than a career.
It's worrying how many have surgery and never regain their full form again, so I think he'll be uber sensitive not to return until he knows it's right.
To the thief/thieves who robbed delPo.....SCUMBAGS
I'm torn about watching todays final. I'm afraid little Daveed will get pulvarised by Nole.
Interesting and thanks for posting.
The writer knows his stuff but raises the issue of doubles filling an IPL style need.
Why?
And why now?
What is the opportunity or gap in the market which such a positioning / promotional strategy will fill?
Would we be doing this to save the sport or perhaps just to help build it some more?
Or would we be doing it to get the Bryan brothers (nice guys who I met briefly while still a coach) recognised in airports?
In cricket, one-day formats have always been the fall back to create extra fan interest / revenue because fans don't have the time or motivation (and more recently money with a day at the test setting you back nearly £100) to go to 4 day or 5 day matches or quite simply, there's an attractive aspect to seeing a result in one day to the match you've been to watch.
The first was the Gillette Cup in 1963 but the discussions about such a format were first broached before that: 100 YEARS before that!
But in tennis, why the need for a short format or more especially, a new positioning utilising doubles?
If anything, does this short format idea and another suggestion for its' promotion, in some ways allude to the fact that in these equipment / fitness dominated days, the game at the top, especially in the Slams can require many hours of spectating slog to watch the slugfest marathons on the court, with the likes of Nadal and Djokovic trading groundstrokes for half a day?
And therefore, that there can be something for those who don't want to or can't commit to going through the 3/4/5 hour wringer of watching many top matches?
Of course, the perceived need for a short format in the sport is not new and since the 70's team tennis in various guises has been tried with some success but only ever breaching the periphery of the sport in fan interest.
On doubles, unless the media promote it more and with respect and seriousness as a valid format / part of the sport, it will never be anything other than something on the edge, after the fact or for warm-ups before the big, singles stuff begins.
As the writer points out, once the likes of Laver and my Tennis Fantasy doubles legends had gone (a generation that HAD to play it) and Johnny Mac moved into the commentary box, the top guys lead by Borg, then Lendl started the trend towards singles specialisation.
Of course, this left the way open for others further down the pecking order to take the top slots in the doubles. But the likes of the Bryan brothers will probably never be able to throw off the stigma that the harsh reality is that they, along with many other top doubles players in the last 25 years, have only reached that summit because they couldn't do it in singles.
When I last went to the World Doubles event at the Albert Hall back in the mid 80's, nearly all the players in the teams (Slozil/Smid, Guendhart/Tarotzy, Curren/Denton, Nystrom/Jarred,
Mac/Fleming, Amaya/ Pfister) were at least top 50 in singles and most of them, top 30.
Now in the top 10 pairs in the world is there a single player in the top 100? Probably not, but not surprisingly, of course, as they have all become doubles specialists and don't ever play singles.
It's a catch 22: in getting to the top of the doubles format, the players have had to give up playing the singles format which might have given them the notoriety for people to follow them in the doubles. But they don't have that, so sadly no-one watches.
And because of that, doubles will always be a second priority in the prestige and coverage stakes for fans and the TV networks.
Personally, as I've posted many times, I know that these players are top guys but to the general fan base and the extended segments of fans that get drawn into the sport for the Slams or maybe if the Tour comes to their town, these players are sadly, regarded as the journeymen and will not ever get recognised in the duty free shops of the world's airports.
I'm afraid that also, I am one who is not a fan of modern doubles as I believe the format has succumbed even more than singles to the modern power fuelled formula of the modern game.
It's wham, bam, thank you mam. Nuance and variety has been lost to the format as such aspects as transition, mid court and net play have been to singles.
Added to this, as the one poster remarks at the end of the article in the link, modern players perform the tedious rituals of hand touching and 5 second debates after / before each points, a practice I find also infuriating, especially as the same goals can be achieved with hand signals.
Back on my world tour of the Slams in 92/3, Gigi Fernandez and Natalie Zereva were the only pair doing it, 20 years on everyone does it. As a 37 year-old, I found it tedious, constantly interrupting the flow of the play, let alone now as a 57 year-old.
If the sport wants to both strengthen loyalty with existing fans and attract new ones, I wouldn't waste any time on new fangled positioning for a format which most fans aren't interested in because the top guys don't do it, I'd cut the match formats in Slams to best of 3 sets
If people throw up their arms in horror at the potential loss of the marathon slugfests, then you could either remove the TB for the 3rd set of introduce it at 12-12.
I make these suggestions with last years Queens Final between Murray and Cilic which was 3 sets, had ebb / flow and momentum and lasted between 2-3 hours - a satisfying experience as a fan.
For me, the incremental added value of another 2 sets and another 2 hours is negligible.
Have a nice Sunday everyone.
I'm heading to the O2 this week jesse. Not sure which day to go though to see the best matches. Whether to go early in the week or wait til later this week to see more compeitive matches as the players are fighting hard to stay in the competition. Decisions decisions........
What scum :mad::mad:
For the first time ever, I want him to win, He is playing so well today.
He seems to have his fire back. Hopefully he won't choke so much next year, though it's quite understandable considering his personal troubles in the last couple of years. That FO net point bothered him for too long...
The WTF draw is favourable for Rafa, but I still think Novak is the favourite
Can Andy hang on to 3/4 for the Aus Open?
Thanks Jesse
At the moment they have only released Monday and Tuesday. I believe each player plays once over each two-day period, so I presume Wednesday and Thursday's schedules will be released at the same time, presumably on Tuesday evening.
OK thanks Rozzi. Do you know who's playing Tuesday afternoon?
It's not his fans who want him to retire?
To still be running Del Potro, Djokovic close shows he has every right to be carrying on.
It would be nice to see Ferrer win but It'll take a mighty effort.