The Draw is out.

http://www.atptennis.com/en/common/TrackIt...008/414/mds.pdf

Ferrer and Tsonga are in the Fed's quarter, if that means anything. Ferrer is a better clay court player, though, who knows what's going on with JWT right now? Canas is in there too, but his two wins against the Fed last year appear to be a blip at this point. The Fed could get Gasquet in the semi (yeah, right) but Davydenko in that semi would be a lot more likely and more interesting.

Nadal's quarter looks tough, with Murray, Moya (still a threat on clay, IMO), Stepanek, and Roddick (if this week proves not to be a blip).

Quitovic seems to have the easiest draw as far as proven clay court talent goes. If this week wasn't a blip for Blake, he might be a problem, but I'd like to see Fish do something on clay too. If he were to take out Acasuso and then Blake, a later matchup with Quitovic could prove interesting. Can you imagine....? Three Americans having won some good clay court matches going into the FO? Easy, guys, one of you might actually make it to the 3rd or 4th round in Paris, if you're not careful.

It's amazing how many bouts of Djokovitis there were in the later rounds of Rome, and these tournaments are now 3 sets instead of 5 as they used to be. And what else is interesting is that of all the people that quit, Quitovic wasn't one of them.

I thought Nadal's Quarter looked good for him. Murray hasn't been to a clay court final, let alone have a title. Moya hasn't had that spark since losing the epic semi to Nadal in Chennai. And since Roddick and Stepanek both retired in Rome, there are questions about them going into this. Adding to the advantage for the ranked players here is the fact that this Quarter has 4 of the 7 Qualifier spots, sending some of the dangerous floaters into other parts of the draw.

Federer. Well, good thing is he's won this 4 times. And he did win Estoril & make it to the Monte Carlo Final. But the bad thing is that so many of his clay court matches this year have been a LOT of work. His Quarter looks OK - but some guys here can worry him again if he plays as he did to Stepanek in Rome. Ferrer is in this section too, and gets a fellow Spaniard in his first one - but Almagro and his wrist might not even make it to the match with Feliciano. So the two highest seeds in this section have had mirror clay seasons to date: good results up to Rome, where they both underperformed. Which makes handicapping this Quarter interesting.

The Davydenko Quarter in the top half can make for a LOT of long matches for Kolya. Monaco, Mathieu, Wawrinka, and Bolelli are in this Quarter. One he'll most likely NOT have to worry about is Reeeshard Out-of-Gas-quet. The interesting 1st Round match is a second consecutive meeting between Ljubicic & Darcis, who just played a 1st Rounder in Rome. Talk about "luck of the draw"!!

Quitovic & Blake highlight the other Quarter, and here's an interesting tidbit: should they meet in the Quarters, it would be their first ever meeting! Blake has been known to want to play Quitovic, although most likely on something other then clay. I think Robredo is playing as well as he ever has these days, and the slower nature of the court here works to his advantage. Kohlschreiber is here too, and you never know when a guy like that can catch fire. The crowd will be on his side, for sure. There are 2 guys that could go far in this section with their best stuff: Tipsarevic & Berdych.

I don't think Nadal's quarter is too threatening either. I'm not sure why Murray isn't more of a factor on clay, though. He trained in Spain for several years and his game looks like it ought to work well enough on clay.

Federer/Ferrer could be quite interesting as could Djokovic/Robredo.

Assuming Tipsarevic makes it past his 1R match against a German WC, he'll play James Blake in the 2nd round. I don't know if I've ever seen so much pulchritude on a single tennis court!! They've never played before, and it'll be interesting to see if James's seemingly newfound claycourt prowess holds up. I don't see anybody in that quarter who can seriously trouble Novak, unless Karlovic serves him off the court (ya never know). While I wish Almagro a speedy recovery, players usually don't bounce back from a wrist injury quickly. Assuming Rafa recovers from that hoogly blister (which thankfully is a quick bounce-back-from injury), there's even less competition in his quarter. I'm looking forward to another Rafa/Novak claycourt matchup. I still gotta pick Rafa, but it'll be interesting to see how much Novak has improved since their last match on terre battue.

It doesn't look like there's any serious trouble for Roger in his quarter either, but that's what I would have said about his Rome draw too. Tsonga plays another Frenchman (Mahut) in the 1st Round - oh no, the return of the two old biddies who damn near force that last slice of cheesecake on the other. The last quarter is the "if only" section, as in if only Davydenko and Gasquet could play up to their potential. I can't make any picks about this half because the three biggies (Fed, Davy, and Gasquet Case) are too unpredictable.

Just noticed Roddick has pulled out of Hamburg, so the draw has been re-shuffled a little. Berdych has now moved from the Quitovic Quarter to the Nadal Quarter. Almagro has moved from the Top Half of the draw to the Bottom Half, moving into the Quitovic Quarter. Feliciano Lopez now gets a Qualifier instead of Almagro, who's still officially in the tournament, as is Stepanek.

The following is from TENNIS.com tennis news headlines:

Nadal says he won't be surprised if he's passed in the rankings by Djokovic sometime over the next couple of months."The logical thing is that he goes past me here in Hamburg, or at Roland Garros or Wimbledon," said Nadal. "If I'm number three, I'm number three. When it happens I just have to accept it and fight to get the position back."

Nadal is the longest-serving No. 2 in men's tennis, having held the position since first reaching it on July 25, 2005.

Djokovic goes into Hamburg needing to earn 225 ranking points more than Nadal to take over the second spot in the world rankings. The two are scheduled to meet in the semifinals - should the meeting take place, the winner would emerge as the second-ranked player in the world. After winning Rome, Djokovic said he wanted to finish the year as No. 1

I watched a bit of the Murray/Tursunov match to see some of these nutty Murray drop shots and to check out the sexy Russian. Much to my dismay, almost all the nutty drop shots came from Tursunov! Even though Dmitri left Russia for Sacramento CA at 14, it seems he was tragically unable to escape Russian Head Trauma. Or maybe it's the case of a hardcourter just not knowing what to do on a claycourt, so he tries silly sh*t like those ridiculous drop shots.

Tsonga won his 1R match against Mahut, despite getting bageled in the 1st set. JW actually looked pretty impressive in the 3rd. Is that his first red clay win on the ATP Tour? Safin actually looked like Grand Slam Champ Marat instead of Embarrassing String of 1R Losses Marat while winning his match against Cilic. He kinda plays himself in the next round, Berdych, another tall, very powerful yet frighteningly inconsistent not to mention none-too-smart player. Except for Davydenko and Gasquet, the other top 8 seeds don't start until tomorrow.

Rafa's rather calm acceptance of a likely drop to #3 isn't surprising. He's gotta know deep down that this combo of winning everything on clay and doing good but not great on other surfaces was not a sustainable formula for the #1 ranking. You can get to #1, like Muster and Ferrero, but it's hard to stay there unless you start racking up big wins on the other surfaces. Someone on the Tennis Mag site brought up a good point about Novak and the week after a Master Series win. After Canada last summer, he lost his opener in Cincinnati. That could be written off to too much celebrating, but then he did the same thing in Miami after winning Indian Wells. Clearly winning a MS title saps Novak's mental and emotional energy such that he's a disaster the next week. I doubt he'll lose in the 1R here, if for no other reason than he didn't expend much energy to win Rome. But if Novak has his sights set on numero uno, he's gotta cut out this win a MS/lose the opening round BS.

Rafa's view of rankings reflects the fact that he accepts things in a realistic and humane and mature fashion.

The rankings race is really a carrot on a stick held in front of players and fans. The players change their schedules for maximum points, the fans who especially care about who is #1 #2 and #3 chart it and argue about it. And then sometimes the powers that be swoop in and f**k a top player over by scheduling tournaments he has to defend back to back to back to back without a single week between them. For things like college basketball, and US TV coverage that didn't happen, and US players that didn't progress as far on their home courts.

I'd be more sympathetic toward Nadal's predicament if he had for once been strong in the late summer US hard court stretch. On hard courts, he simply hasn't built upon the promise he showed earlier in his career. On a fundamental level I don't really care because he's my favorite men's player no matter what he's ranked. I always like underdogs. It will be a shame if Nadal never sees the #1 ranking in his career. But if so, them's the breaks. I will venture an early guess though that Djokovic's time at #1 will be far less bulletproof than Federer's.

In fact, Nadal actually has been relatively 'great' on non-clay surfaces, if two Wimbledon finals count for anything and about as many if not more hard court Masters titles/finals than anyone except Federer and maybe Nalbandian count for anything. Where he hasn't been that great is the North American hard courts overall, and the hard court slams in particular. The crowds in Miami and Indian Wells like or love Rafa, but NY has never warmed to him. Moreover, he simply hasn't been aggressive or consistent enough, and he's increasingly been worn down by his spring/summer feats by the time those tournaments swing around.

A couple months ago I was saying that Fed and Djokovic would switch places with Rafa likely ending the year #2. It's still looking that way. The surprise is that Federer's hold on #1/#3 is starting to seem a lot less sure.

Not winning Rome was a bad thing for Nadal because the courts and atmosphere there suit him more than Hamburg. Since he played his loss to Ferrero to completion with blisters, I hope he isn't putting Masters/Hamburg in front of Roland Garros in the big picture. Federer's draw doesn't look too bad now, especially with Andreev already out. Djokovic's quarter is even weaker, with the few clay specialists history; I can't see Robredo troubling Djokovic even if he gets past Karlovic, who is Tommy's nightmare opponent. Nadal has some strong clay players in his section and some strong players (like Murray) who aren't so good on clay. But if he's healthy he'll be advancing to the semis.

In a normal period of tennis history, I suspect Rafa would have been #1 for most of the last two years. He's won a ton of masters titles--as many as Sampras already--and his results in the majors are comparable to those of many year end #1's in the last 15 years. It's just that Federer's been so dominant. I agree with you that while I do think the Djoker will finish this year at #1, I very much doubt he'll be as dominant as Federer.

We're likely headed into a period where the #1 Ranking will start changing hands on a regular basis. Let's remember: Sampras often says his being #1 for six straight years is his proudest accomplishment. But he ended those years in that position. During the period of those years, 1993-1998 there were 7 other guys that landed in the #1 spot at various times after Sampras first landed there: Courier (getting it back); Agassi; Muster; Rios; Kafelnikov; Moya; and Rafter. That's what makes Federer's stranglehold on #1 so amazing - once he took it, no one's been close since.

Neither Nadal or Quitovic has the game or the physical constitution to stay at #1 for anywhere near the number of consecutive weeks Federer has. And there's no guarantee either of these two will supplant Federer at #1 at any point this year. After Wimbledon, the rest of the year is about whether it'll be Federer or Quitovic who ends up keeping the bulk of their points they have at stake, because Nadal has much less than either of them to defend after Wimbledon. One of the things about Federer that's been so awesome is how he defends his points year after year after year. It's stunning, and speaks to the importance of the mental aspect of tennis being THE most important capacity for players. To paraphrase Chris Evert: forehands, backhands, serves..lots of people do those well, but what's upstairs matters most when you have to deal with pressure. Defending is all about pressure, and that will be Quitovic's biggest test. On the hard court swing starting in Canada, he has 2,150 Points at stake through Paris. Federer has 2,850 through the same period. Nadal has 775.

Stay tuned.

JC, I see what you're saying about Nadal these past few years. But the thing that sticks with me is that until this year's Australian, he'd never made it past a hard court slam quarterfinal. That problem would be rare in a #1 player.

Nadal's hard court slam results have never matched his Masters hard court results. I wouldn't expect him to be the #1 hard court player, but especially based on his Masters hard court results, he should have done better at the hard court slams than he has so far in his career. There's been a flaw in his coaching and basic approach in that regard.

No offense to James Blake, who is a top 5 hard courter, but taking so many years to figure out how to play Blake speaks to the slowness of any progress Nadal has made on the surface.

Djokovic, who was struggling to get to rounds of 16s in 2005 when Nadal won Montreal, has made it to one hard court slam final and won another one. That's two more than Nadal. The fact that those were the last two slams shows Nadal 's recent Aussie semi run is -- at the moment at least -- too little too late. Novak has developed his hard court game. Though it does remain to be seen how he holds up at RG and Wimbledon.

One other thing about rankings, which really don't interest me much, really! Since the ATP is downgrading Hamburg in 2009 while keeping the same # of hard court masters, that change works in Djokovic's favor next year.

So will the #1 ranking really be changing hands or will #2 and #3 be swapped more frequently between Nadal and Quitovic....err I mean Djokovic. See you got me sayin it now.

Is this Mats Wilander interviewing Nadal? It sure looks like him. He was an interesting guy.

Now, I know they're moving Hamburg to the fall. But I thought Madrid was moving to the spring as a clay court event and retaining it's Masters Series - oh, sorry - "1000" status (cringing to say, aint it??)? Can't say for sure but I thought that's what the plan was. Which makes all the clay guys very thankful.

That is Wilander, but not sure when that photo was taken. Just got the latest issue of Tennis Magazine and it's got a nice feature on comparing whether Rafa & Justine are in the same dominant league as Borg & Evert on clay. Wilander had two quotes on Nadal that are incredible to believe. Lots of people said beyond his athleticism, Nadal's competetive intelligence is largely responsible for his success in Paris even though others have gotten used to his spins & speed - and Wilander sums that up this way: "He'll survive in most matches on clay because he's just smarter than any other player".

The scarier quote he gave was this when asked about Nadal's chances to 4-peat in Paris, saying Nadal still "slowly improving, which is the best way (to improve)". Nadal "still improving" on clay?? If Wilander's right, pity the guys that have to come up against Nadal then.

I just have to give props to the doubles duo of James Blake and his "best friend" Mardy Fish for their ouster of the #4 seeds Bhupathi and Knowles in the doubles today in a rather routine 6-2, 6-3 victory. Nice win guys.

My bad. I should know better than to trust message board threads. (Not this board, by the way.)

Did anyone see the Kohlschreiber heartbreaker today? Kohli was up a set and about to go up a break. Robredo hit a ball that was called out....Robredo challenged.....the umpire went to look at mark and called it good, but it was def out. Kohli pointed to mark and questioned his call, and umpire said you are right...I misread the mark....the ball was out....game and break to Phillip. Robredo threw a hissy....called the tourney director....who actually reversed the chair umpire.....not because the ball was in, but because the original overrule needed to stand. Robredo then insisted he should win the point as opposed to replaying the point even though he knew the friggin ball was out - and Kohli was there for the ball but didnt swing because of the call. RIDICULOUS! Robredo went on to win the match, and Kohli was dominating him up until that point. I feel so bad for him....a real injustice in Hamburg. Scratch that....Monica's stabbing and Gunther going free was a real injustice in Hamburg. So not a real injustice today, but it was sooooo uncool. And Robredo who I normally like was a little bitch. Scratch that.....a whiny, little, punk-ass bitch who forever lost me as a fan today. Kohli won me over even more as he handled himself with perhaps too much class.

I haven't seen the Robredo/Kohlschrieber match yet (too many hours backlogged on the tivo!!), but the controversy brings up another point. Why aren't the claycourt Masters Series and Roland Garros played under the same conditions and rules as the other 6 MS, the MC, and 3 Slams? In other words, if you have Hawkeye with three challenges per set plus an extra one in the tiebreak in all the other tournaments, why should clay be the exception? I know, clay leaves a mark, but sometimes there's some confusion about which mark is the correct one, as was painfully demonstrated today. Also, shouldn't there be the same 3+1 limit to the number of times a player can ask the chair umpire to look at a mark? After the umpire huffs and puffs back up into the chair, I don't hear any announcement about the player having X number of challenges left, so I assume it's basically unlimited. Maybe others are amused by the sight of a middle-aged, pudgy umpire climbing down from the chair over and over again throughout a match, but it doesn't do much for me. Besides, since Hawkeye is a lot quicker than the umpire waddling over to find and check the mark, it's less disruptive to the match. I understand the Hawkeye system is pretty expensive, so if the smaller events don't have it, no big deal. But there should be consistency throughout all the MS and GS tournaments.

I only caught the latter half of the Kohlschreiber-Robredo match but noticed that the commentators were criticizing the chair umpire, which is rare. I hadn't realized that Robredo pitched a fit, though. He's not my fave Spanish player by a long shot but I've never seen him pull those kind of shenanigans. To do it on Kohlschreiber's home turf takes some gall.

I'm going to guess early that Djokovic will beat Nadal if they face off in Hamburg. The prediction is based on today's results and what little I saw at the start of the Nadal match. Nadal can't boss opponents around as easily on the slow Hamburg clay, and he's more vulnerable to forehand attacks. Djokovic has excellent defensive skills and a strong forehand.

Last year at this time Nadal had tremendous trouble getting by Lleyton Hewitt in order to get to his losing final against Federer. If he and Djokovic get to a semifinal, Djokovic currently has everything Hewitt had game-wise and then some. I'll be rooting for Nadal, but with nowhere near the optimism I had at the start of the clay season. Roland Garros will be another story, though. Even if he'll be more vulnerable there than in years past.

Looks like Federer's and Tsonga's first date won't be on clay. If he has an easier time with Murray than with Starace, Nadal might have a date with Moya soon. If Djokovic keeps up today's form, he shouldn't be troubled before the semi. After all yesterday's drama, punky Tommy went down to Karlovic, who he never has an answer for, even on clay. Seppi is playing noticeably well.

On the subject of dates, did anyone notice the camera catch Fernando Verdasco watching Federer's first round match? Maybe Verdasco was optimistically scouting Federer as a possible opponent a few rounds ahead. More likely his watching had something to do with the fact that they've also been practicing together. I guess their practice sessions aren't that surprising, since Federer likes hitting with lefties during clay season. But since Federer and Verdasco are the tour's biggest fashion plates, I had to point it out. Maybe they're discussing designers between rallies.

It's official, and I'm going to say it. Don't hate me bridgeportjake...I think JW Tsonga is overrated. He had a phenomenal AO, no doubt about it, and it was impressive, but for me, it was just a hot two weeks and nothing more. I do not see him as the next great thing on tour, and I will be suprised if he ever wins a slam or makes it back to a slam final. I know he is relatively new to the tour, and perhaps he will have a later in career surge, but I just don't see him overcoming some of his, what appear to be, chronic injuries and his questionable mental attitude. There, I've said it. I feel better.

The thing that suprises me about Verdasco and Roger practicing is that everyone knows Roger hits with lefties in preparation for Nadal. I'm suprised Verdasco is willing to work with Roger against a fellow Spaniard. They seem like a nice tight group of boys.

Hmmm, I dont think Tsonga is overrated at all. BUT I dont hear that many people talking him up as the best player out there either. It's pretty clear there are 3 players who are head and shoulders above the rest. I also think you just dont see him following up his results just yet because his game is more suited for fast courts, and he had some decent hard court results after Oz but I dont expect much from him during the clay court season. I think you have to consider him a pretty big threat at Wimbledon, and I expect him to do well there.

I think the sky is the limit really when you think that he has seen such impressive results so soon after shedding some baby fat. I think he will get even more fit, and you will see that his Oz final appearance was far from flukey.

As far as challenges/Hawkeye/waddling chair umpires, I think as fairness goes Hawkeye should be used for all calls instantly. BUT I do think the challenges build tension, and the fans at live events really seem to love it....even if they are just casual fans and not us die-hards. So why not keep that drama and excitement? I also dont have a problem with unlimited chair umpire checks....usually the players not named Robredo are pretty fair about the whole thing anyway. I love when players will see the mark and call their opponent's ball good to save the umpire a trip.

Not sure if it was televised, but did anyone see Safin-Berdych? Seems like Marat may be on the way back....key word is may. I sure hope Moya takes him out next round, but overall I would love to see Marat re-join the tennis elite where he belongs. The sport needs players and personalities like him.

I totally agree, goodguy. Tommy was a little brat. (And a third set tie-break loss to Ivo Servovic today serves him right!) And Kohli was great, especially in his post-match, when he said that the call (a break point against Robredo!) didn't change the outcome. It certainly did! But he was classy to say that.

The thing that got me so annoyed was that everyone knew the ball was really out. And it was just because the chair umpire said, "I think it touched" at first that Tommy got to replay the point.

I thought the umpire handled it well. The fault, to me, lies with the referee who said that the umpire couldn't change his call on Kohlschreiber's appeal. So ridiculous. Shouldn't the outcome just be the correct one no matter how it was arrived at??

They totally should use shot spot at these clay court events. It's no fun for the fans to watch the players and umpires review a little mark on the court. And it would make silly disputes like this one disappear.

Robredo, in all his pretty spanish glory, was a total brat. The ball was friggin out! The chair ump was kind of a wimp in that he seemed far more worried about covering his *ss with the ATP/Tour ref...the ball was OUT!

Kohl had really been playing well and looked to be on his way to a win...Robredo pulled out all the stops.

Roger was hot today...dominating from point one...I like jarko but roger totally stomped him...

Uh oh, I get worried when we agree.

At least we disagree on the chair umpire thing. I like to see the players interact with the umpire - even if it is about a silly little mark. More importantly, I trust the mark more than ShotSpot.

Let's all rally around Phillip for all his future matches. Did anyone see the post (on another site) about how and why Phillip became someone's favorite player? I wont do it justice by describing the post, but it was how Kohli played through sickness and the fans motivated him through the match....and he showed his gratitude. I tried to google, but I couldnt find it. If anyone knows where to find that, can you please share? It was really a very special post.

Pfeh. Not like he needs it, but could Fed's draw have been any softer? Nieminen, Soderling, Verdasco, and now either Kiefer or Seppi in the semis. Not a single seed among them, let alone a Top 10 player. And Djoko gets the fearsome No 78 Montañes as a quarterfinal opponent. Meanwhile Nadal will pretty much get every single opponent he's seeded to face: Murray, Moya, Djokovic and Federer, all Top 15 and the last two Top 3. If he even makes it that far. Personally I think Murray will take him out tonight. The stars have really aligned against him lately and I wonder if Nadal can win a French Open without Justine this time.

Fed's issue is that he owns so many guys in his generation that it's often tough for him to find someone around his age that he hasn't been able to beat down on any surface. Form what he's got left, he pretty much oughta pencil his name into Sunday's Final. Quitovic should be embarrassed if he loses to Montanes. I watched the matches today and Tipsarevic played horribly. Almost too horribly. Imagine: he loses a 3-Set squeaker to Gonzo in Rome; ekes out a 3-setter against Blake here; and manages to get a mere 3 games from #78 in the world Montanes, who was playing so far behind the baseline he was practically beside the ball kids. And that was the hard thing to believe: playing way back there you'd figure Tipsarevic would use the drop shot all day long. Nope. Nada. Hmm. Maybe he just didn't wanna have to play his beloved pal Quitovic in the Quarters.

As dodgy as Nadal looked against Starace I thought today would be a scrap. Wrong. He played today like he did winning in Monte Carlo & Barcelona. His movement's back, and all his shots were just pummeling Murray. He's way over the Moya-as-Mentor thing, should get by that comfortably. And Saturday's Semi with Quitovic looks like a blood-bath. Whoever wins that one comes out of the tournament as the World #2.

Both Kiefer and Seppi are playing very solid tennis. Neither will take out the Fed but nevertheless...And Verdasco's playing very well....

Nadal gave Murray a smackdown though Murray absolutely had his chances including a big break opportunity in that first set that he missed...

Novak and Nadal is quite the anticipated matchup....Nadal's countryman/mentor Moya doesn't have much of a chance against the young one but ya never know....

So Colin Farrell couldn't quite make it all the way back against Seppi, who should have closed it out in the 2nd Set. Not that it matters - Seppi's got virtually no prayer against Federer tomorrow. Federer only hopes the other Semi is long & brutal.

The Blodbath Battle for World #2 is the other one. To date, Quitovic has yet to take a set from Nadal on clay, so the match, on paper, is on Rafa's racquet. Its' a must see.

You guys want some entertaining & interesting viewing? The ATP Website just put up a video called The Perfect Player, interviewing several players in Hamburg about which of today's active players is has the best shot or attribute in a bunch of catgories: Serve, Forehand, Backhand, Stamina..etc. Some of the answers are obvious, others surprising. But this was the biggest surprise to me: in all the respective catogries, not once is the name "Djokovic" mentinoed by the players as having the best anything. Oh..wait, I take that back. In the category of mental toughness, he was offered as one of that best possessores of that quality - offered up by.....Quitovic himself !!!

Imagine that. Here's a guy that's won a Major & 2 Masters Series this year, and yet none of his peers ranks any of his shots or attributes as something he does better than anyone else. Blog freaks may offer their insights ad infinitum. But when fellow players don't even bother to mention your name in a host of categories, there might be no louder or more definitive statement about you.

That was a great video, thanks for the heads-up. A number of things were very eye-opening for me. I am surprised how much respect Roger seems to have for Roddick despite dominating him over the years. Similarly with Rafa toward Roger, but I think that's less surprising.

I was also pleasantly surprised to see how many times Ferrer was listed, mostly for return and stamina. Nalbandian was listed for almost every category as well - it makes you wonder about his effort and training and what he could have achieved even though he still has some time to back up his talent.

On the flip side, it shows how impressive it is that DJOKOVIC has had the unbelievable success he has achieved already without having the best this or the best that. The one word that comes to mind when I think of Novak is well, hot.....but the one word that I think of for his game is SOLID. And I think he prefers his Grand Slam (and future Grand Slams) over the players saying Gonzo has the best forehand or Ivo has the best serve.

I'm surprised they didnt cover Movement as a category. Federer, Nadal, Ferrer?

Well, I wish my favorite player had Djokovic's serve. Kinda. On hard courts especially Nadal has to fight so much more because his serve isn't a weapon. And Djokovic's forehand has been more reliable as a weapon than Federer's or Nadal's so far this year.

Admittedly, Djokovic's game is more about all around solidity than specific unique dynamics, and in that sense differs from Nadal's and especially Federer's. I've seen it suggested elsewhere that Novak's "personality" or impressions are compensation for the relative lack of personality in his game. That's a stretch. I think he's done the impressions etc. because he's a goofball or clown and a showboat at heart.

Seeing Nadal dismantle Murray and reading about Nadal taking apart Moya has me second-guessing my prediction that Djokovic would beat Nadal here in Hamburg. Nadal's scoreline against Starace suggested he was still weak, but the actual match was quite excellent and Starace's extremely successful gambit -- the drop shot -- isn't one of Novak's best by a long shot. Though maybe he's improved it. I'm curious to see if he takes a page from Starace tomorrow. No doubt that Djokovic has much more aggressive potential (and with a similar game) than Hewitt brought to last year's Hamburg semi, where he almost toppled Nadal. But he doesn't have Hewitt's stamina.

Djokovic would likely have to get the job done quick, two sets, to beat Nadal. And Nadal isn't playing like he's willing to go out like that. (Looking like is another matter -- he has had to call for the trainer.) Because of the scheduling, Djokovic has a lot more rest before their showdown, so he does have that going for him. But now I guess I'm leaning toward Rafa.

If Seppi hadn't had a monumental choke and had to work three times harder and longer to put away Kiefer, I would wager that he could give Federer at least a tiny headache tomorrow. Up until he choked today, he was amazingly error-free at this tournament, and that's something Roger hasn't been. But Seppi is so pedestrian in comparison to Federer. And Federer is going to be a lot fresher tomorrow.

What I think the players were saying regarding the lack of any Quitovic mention is that they know he won all 3 of his titles this year against guys that weren't seeded (Tsonga, Fish, Wawrinka), and all of those unseeded guys had more than a few chances in those matches (Tsonga won the first set; Fish broke him twice in the 2nd forcing a 3rd; and Stan won the first set in Rome). The players would never say it out loud, but a number of guys probably feel like they could have won any of those too, especially if they have winning records against those same three guys. One of those blogs at Tennis Magazine had an ATP employee poster saying that in the tour locker room today it's still only Federer that gets them quaking if they have to play him, and no one else. Such is the effect on your rivals of 12 Grand Slam Titles

That said, Quitovic will be out for blood tomorrow. He needs to beef up his stats vs. Top 10 guys, which are either even or below .500, with the exception of Gasquet & Wawrinka. The more he does that, the more his fellow tour guys will start getting more afraid of facing him. I'm not sure they're all that scared of him as of today.

This'll be kind of a catch-up post, so be advised, I'll be rambling all over the place ...

It's interesting to me that two of the three big Swedes, Borg and Wilander, are such huge Nadal fans. Borg is dead-sure that Rafa will achieve the number one ranking and win Wimbledon one day. And you read what Wilander, one of the smartest players in the history of the game, had to say about Rafa on clay. It'd be so interesting to know who the legends' favorite players are. For example, Novak seems to be Martina Navratilova's favorite ATPer, but I have no idea why. Rod Laver still follows the game pretty closely, and I'm dying to know who he's a fan of and why.

I was really happy to see Colin Farrell Keifer (never noticed the resemblance, but dead-on, whoever spotted it) do so well. The biggest bummer about his loss to Seppi is no more shirts tossed into the crowd. The dude definitely looks GOOD without a shirt, probably better than CF at this point.

The thing that cracked me up the most about the one game they showed of the Tipsarevic/Montanes match is that Montanes was standing so far back to receive that he was out of the screen. Don't know if I've ever seen that before. Janko might have an issue with conditioning. As a relatively flat hitter without overwhelming power, his style of play requires very precise footwork over lots of extended rallies - which obviously takes a lot out of a player. In Monte Carlo, Janko played a tough 3-setter against Lapentti, then in the next round lost the 1st set to Ferrer by a respectable 6-4 but played on fumes in the 2nd, losing 6-0. Since they only showed the last game of the match, it's tough to tell, but it looked like Tipsy was gassed from his 3-setter against Blake. If Janko wants to hang with the big boys, he has to improve his stamina. Ferrer plays a similar style but can play 5-setter after 5-setter - one of the reasons he's ranked #5 and Janko's #33.

This might sound crazy, but work with me here ... I think Novak's game is how Chris Evert plays in her most farfetched daydreams. Big serve and comfortable at the net (that's the farfetched daydream part) combined with Chris's percentage game on steroids. Novak doesn't hit with the breathtaking beauty of Roger's forehand (and occasionally his backhand), nor does he hit with Rafa's brutal, monstrous topspin and pace. Asad Raza, a guest contributor to Bodo's TennisWorld, puts it better than I ever could:
No, Novak's game isn't brilliant or even great, although his results so far this year are - with a Slam and 2 Masters Series, he's surpassed Roger and Rafa combined (Monte Carlo, Barcelona, and Estoril). But it is efficient, IMO beautifully efficient (yes, I was a huge Chrissie fan). And in my most farfetched daydreams, Novak hires Chris to mentor him on smart usage of the drop shot.

With Seppi's weak 2nd serve, he'll be lunch meat for Roger tomorrow. Not exactly an arduous road to the final for Roger, but there are no "style points" in the ATP rankings. BFF, oops, I mean voicemale, you make a good point about Novak wanting to prove himself. I thought if one looked at Novak's record vs. the top ten since his breakout, 2007 Miami, it would be a lot more favorable. After all, can't imagine players get a huge surge of confidence from their wins over Novak when he was ranked 80-something. But even post-2007 Miami, Novak's record vs. the top 10 is a barely over .500 13-12:
Federer: 2-2
Nadal: 3-4
Davydenko: 0-1
Ferrer: 2-2
Roddick: 1-1
Nalbandian: 1-1
Blake: 0-0
Gasquet: 1-1
Wawrinka: 3-0
That said, I simply can not pick Novak over Rafa tomorrow. I hope Novak will make it interesting, he's certainly improved a lot since their last match @ 2007 RG, but I'd have to see a lot more Rafa losses before picking against him on clay. Also, a Novak win would mean a switch in the rankings. We're all used to seeing Rafa #2 at Roland Garros, but it just wouldn't be right for him to be seeded third. By the way, that ATP employee poster has to be missing something. Come on, you can't tell me that the players don't quake when facing Rafa on clay.

Final note: sorry, I realize this post is already longer than the Book of Genesis (maybe Exodus and Deuteronomy too), but UrbanSuede, how do you type the "n" with the tilde? Do you need a Spanish keyboard, or can you do it on a "teclado americano"?

I guess maybe it's because Novak is the new star that he gets so much flak - withdrawals happen weekly so I think way too much is made of that. Rafa and Fed have been around a lot longer and are incredibly well proven superstar champions. Watching Rafa and Novak right now on TV - it's clear to me that Novak belongs in that top three and that these guys are a stroke above the other players right now. Novak has everything going for him - incredibly groundstrokes, a great drive and determination, youth and speed...he's for real regardless who likes or dislikes him. This guy will win slams and I think will be the man who displaces Roger one day...not that I want Roger replaced at #1....and Novak's easy on the eyes...

Djokovic has gotten flak because he has consistently retired when losing to his two biggest rivals.

He doesn't get enough credit for his weapons because his game is so all-around efficient. I kind of am creeped out by the idea of a different older player building the master player shot by shot with Novak. That's sort of been his path, but the foundation was there a long time ago.

It's not convincing to say that Djokovic's Australian win doesn't impress his ATP peers because it came over Tsonga in the final. That same Tsonga had just straight-setted Nadal in the semi. And Djokovic had gotten to the final by being the first player to beat Federer in a hard court slam in years, and in straight sets to boot.

I've seen Nadal play more aggressively and convincingly against Djokovic on clay than he is today. He's let Djokovic dictate far too much from my perspective. It could be the slowness of the Hamburg courts and the long campaign before a week off. Last year in Italy and at the French Rafa really was the more aggressive player, but today he's been rather moony.

Federer has to like his chances going into the final with a lot of easy wins. It'll be 5 in a rwo for him if he pulls it off tomorrow. His dad is watching the other semi -- he's a real absent-minded professor type.

You mean he looks like an absent minded professor? Have you heard him talk? I'm curious to know what he's really like? Fed's parents appear strong, classy people who raised him well.

So far, this is the best match of the year to me. Rafa and Novak are playing at an incredibly high level. One set all..going into the third. That the #2 ranking is at stake is more than obvious.

Novak's AO win was a fantastic effort.

I can only remember Fed ever playing Rafa this tough on clay. It's an amazing match so far.

Hey Two - have you noticed that it looks like the fog is rolling in? I thought it was going to be another hot one here today...


Here's a well written piece from a guy on sportingo regarding Novak:



"Novak Djokovic is hungry for success. Having already become the fastest growing star on the ATP tour, the young Serbian is ready to go even further and claim the world No.1 spot from Roger Federer.

Some tennis fans have hinted that they feel Djokovic retires from many tournaments especially when falling behind in games - but is this really true? Do people really believe he gives up if he is losing and feigns and injury on court? Surely this is not the sign of a true champion and I for one do not want or never will believe this theory.

I hardly think that retiring from two tournaments in the past two years is of any concern for the young Serb. At Wimbledon last year it was obvious he was not well and had problems. Having won the first set 6-3, Djokovic quickly deteriorated in the next two and eventually to the crowd's dismay retired when trailing 4-1 in the third set to Rafael Nadal.

If Djokovic had been fit then I am sure he would have played on and I doubt he would ever feign an injury just because he is losing a match. That is not his mentality - he is hungry for success. If he loses a match he is always gracious in defeat and knows that he has either played a bad game or lost to the better player on the day. He is a genuine tennis player and loves the sport he is so good at.

Novak simply hasn't got it in him to feign illnesses and if it wasn't serious then I am sure he would continue to battle on. There is no point in carrying on matches though if you have no chance of winning because of an injury or ailment - and Djokovic knows that.

Last week, the crowd were again disappointed that Djokovic retired against Federer in Monte Carlo when trailing 6-3, 3-2. He complained of dizziness on the court. The Serbian star is not scared of Federer and being a set down against the world No.1 would be no reason for him to feign injury or illness. However, if he really was feeling dizzy then of course he should have stopped - which player wouldn't?

One match is not worth risking his health for and I am sure Djokovic will be back as bright as ever in Rome for the Italian Masters. If he hadn't retired, I am sure he would have had every chance to comeback in the match - as he has done on many occasions before.

If he was to feign an injury in every tournament he fell behind in, then the Serbian would be nowhere near his current world No.3 position. Tennis is all about see-saw matches and Djokovic has no reason to feign injury.

Let's get back to the tennis and avoid all this off-court negativity. The season is long and players have to do what is best for themselves - not always think about the fans looking on"

Well, I was counting Nadal out this week but he's really delivered the goods. What a barn-burner of a match against Djoko. The scoreline (7-5, 2-6, 6-2) does neither player justice, since the second set didn't feel like a blowout and neither did the third. Hell, the final game alone went to deuce around ten times, with several break points for Djoko along the way, and Rafa needed a fifth match point to finally close it out.

I think it's the right result all the way around. It's too soon for Nadal to be supplanted as the No 2, but Djoko also is really making his presence felt by having come so close. Also, taking a set off Nadal on clay for the first time will have echoes in Paris I'm sure. But for now it's yet another Federer-Nadal final on clay, and considering the three-hour semi into dusk, Federer will surely win just by rolling out of bed, kind of like last year. So we will have the year's Masters events so far going to each one of the Top 4, appropriately.

Rudy, I get the tilde by holding down Alt and hitting 164 on the numeric keypad and releasing (num lock should be enabled). Hooray for alt characters.

An incredible match with one big stat that says why Rafa won: he saved 15 of 19 break points. Novak had so many break points but Rafa saved them time and time again. The rallies were incredible, best I've seen this year.

One has to favor Fed tomorrow not only because he owns this tournament but Rafa will certainly be spent after today's marathon. If the draw is similar in Paris, again Fed may end up being the favorite. Right now, neither player wants to face Novak in the semi's. Last year Rafa beat Novak in straight sets in the semi's at the FO.

Part of Nadal's uncanny talent is just that: saving Break Points. Remember last year's French Final when he saved 16 of 17 that day? Not to mention rescuing matches that are almost lost, like he's done to Tsonga, Blake, Ferrer & Federer this year. I understand what he means now when he says Fight For Every Point: he's only peripherally aware of the score; at the forefront in his mind is only the point at hand, and what shots he'll try to give himself to play during that point. And that's it.

He knows he's got enormous staying power, and he also knows his foes are gonna stay away from extended rallies with him form the back court. So they come out firing, trying to build an insurmountable lead from the start and end the match quickly (the first set today took over 1 hour to complete). And when they try that, Nadal knows the more energy they expend doing that, the more it plays into his hands - especially on clay. On clay, your serve won't save you because clay tennis is a marathon, not a sprint. Nadal lures them into his grind almost unwittingly to them, and that's what happened today. A match like this is won with your tennis playing intellect - not so much with shots. Nadal played the big points better & smarter. That's why he won.

Who'd have thought going into this that Nadal would have more aces ?? Nadal had three, and here's the shocker: Quitovic had none! Three hours and 3 sets of match and he managed not 1 single ace, according to stats they showed afterward. And yet he served at a fairly good (for clay) 65% clip. It'll be interesting to see how he recovers mentally. He had 2 Break Points to go up 4-0 in the first set. That's the kind of stuff that can haunt you for a while, especially since he could have emerged from this match as the new World #2. It was good to see him fight through this match all the way to the finish. But you have to wonder what his prospects are at The French. He was patently running low on energy in the 3rd Set, and he had to work very hard to take his first set from Nadal on clay today. It doesn't bode very well for him to have to take 3 sets from Nadal anytime soon at Roland Garros. Not to mention the others that could draw him into long matches should he meet up with any of them, such as Ferrer or Nalbandian.

Not ready to concede tomorrow's title to Federer just yet. Nadal's week off from losing in Rome only helps him, and he had so much energy jumping around after the match today that he probably could have played another set or two if he had to. And last year in Rome he had that grueling Semi with Davydenko, then came out the next day and dusted Gonzo 6-2 6-2 in the Final. What will work against him tomorrow, and it hurt him some today too, is the climate. The cool damp rain returned, so no high bounces from sun-baked clay. The ball will be heavy instead. I still give Nadal a slight edge. A "W" like this one today does your confidence a world of good.

You got me curious about other player's records against the current Top 10 Players. Some interesting results....

Roddick 23-27 (albeit he is 2-15 vs Federer)
Gasquet 7-25
Davydenko 8-33

I was also pleasantly surprised to see my boy Ferru with a respectable 22-26 record (22-18 when you take out Federer).

I understand that you only looked at recent results for Djokovic, but I still thought I would share. Clearly with Roger and Rafa dominating the past few years, it's tough for any player to have a decent overall record vs Top 10 Players. And now even tougher with 3 players dominating.

And voicemail, I seriously doubt the players think Novak's success is because of easy draws. You dont win a Grand Slam and 4 Master Series Shields in just over a year (and various GS and MS Finals and Semis) simply from getting lucky draws. No one's that lucky.....well, maybe Yevgeny Kafelnikov.

I was at a tournament today and had to wait 3 hours for my match, so i got to watch the Nadal/ND match replay on TC. Very exciting. HOWEVER, I do not understand how Nadal can be so dominant on clay when he runs around his backhand at every opportunity. If that wing is so much weaker, why not just play it and come in? ND tried a bit. He could have won the match if he a played a few more key points in the last set better. And that serve! If he would stop and prepare his serve after all the ball bouncing, instead of going right into the serve, he might have better control of it. Nadal won a lot of points with that lefty serve spinning away to ND's backhand, and forcing a weak return.
My back seat driving....

Wow ... I mean ... WOW!! Did I say "WOW"??

The quality of play today was astonishing. Novak was great, and Rafa was simply fantastic. I'm guessing that's the best Novak has ever played in a loss. The only criticism is he could have served better, but that's really quibbling in light of how well he played otherwise. His groundstrokes were amazing, and his conviction at the net was admirable. Even after getting passed quite a few times, Novak kept coming in, and surprisingly enough looked decently confident up there. While "a close 6-2 set" is a rather obvious oxymoron, gotta say, the 2nd and 3rd were the tightest 6-2 sets I've ever seen. Lots of deuces in the last 4 games of Set 2, and Novak had gobs of break point chances at the beginning and in the last game of Set 3. Three factors made the difference today, from least to most important: 1) margin of error, 2) anticipation, and 3) mental focus.

Novak knew that he had to hit a winner or force an error sooner rather than later because if he didn't, Rafa surely would. Both guys were hitting incredibly hard - normal for Rafa, a bit out of Novak's usual conservative comfort zone - but Rafa made far fewer unforced errors because of his greater margin of error. Rafa: 31 Ws, 23 UEs; Novak: 31 Ws, 43 UEs. Novak's somewhat high UE total is a bit deceptive, however, because he was forced to go for so much, with a fair number of balls hitting the tape or landing just out. But close only counts in horseshoes and bocce.

Rafa's terrific sense of anticipation and Novak's lack thereof made an even bigger difference. No matter how hard and how well-placed Novak's shots were, Rafa retrieved so many difficult or seemingly impossible shots because of his superb sense of anticipation. Both guys move extremely well, but Novak's poor sense of anticipation hurt him today.

And the most important, mental focus. For the first three games, Novak looked like another player, Cyborg Novak - no facial expressions, no distractions, just purely focused on the play. With break point opps to go up 4-love and 2 breaks, it's like Novak suddenly became human again and started thinking about what he was doing: "OMG, I might beat Rafa on clay, which means I'd be ranked #2 for the first time, which means I'd be seeded 2nd at Roland Garros, which means ... " Normal Novak returned, the one who wears his emotions on his sleeve, gets frustrated, angry, distracted, jubilant, nervous, and everything else. But Rafa was a completely different story. Exactly right, he focuses on the point at hand, and nothing else. No worrying about losing his #2 ranking, being seeded 3rd at RG, whether that meant having to face both Roger and Novak to win the title, blah, blah blah. Nope, none of that BS, which is why he won the mental battle today. Not much separated these two physically - Rafa's edge was mental.

If Rafa bounces back 100%, or even 90%, tomorrow, he's definitely the favorite. He certainly will go into the final razor sharp match-wise whereas Roger, because of his easy draw, not so much. Until someone proves otherwise, and despite two losses in his last hundred-some matches no one has yet, Rafa is still the King of Clay. He is head and shoulders above the rest of the field at Roland Garros [please oh please, Rafa, win the final tomorrow, so I don't look like an idiot saying this ]. Barring catastrophe, the road to Roland Garros greatness goes through Rafa, which means Novak can win RG only if Rafa suffers some freak loss and fails to live up to his seeding. Today's play proved that Novak is capable of beating Rafa in a best-of-3 on terre battue. He's not favored, but he is capable. But with his questionable stamina, his chances in a best-of-5 are slim to none. Please, no jokes about Slim just leaving town.

I know there are plans to build a roof on center court at Wimbledon and I have heard that there has been some talk of building a roof on Arthur Ashe stadium for the US Open.

I am sure time and money are the issues that are delaying both, but in the meantime, why don't they build some type of roof that is similar to the umbrella/canopy type retractable roof that is on the center court in Hamburg?

Of course there may be many problems with this type of roof, including archaic technology and leaks, but it seems to me that it woud be a perfect fix until a more reliable roof is built.

Maybe it would actually be more expensive in the long run than the more modern roof plans at Wimbledon and the US Open?

Nadal's backhand is far from being "so much weaker". More accurately: his forehand is just so much better. His backhand is a terrific shot in itself because he defends much better from that side. Many guys point out that since Nadal is naturally right-handed he gets a lot of weight behind his backhand when he hits it. Yesterday Djokovic found out that coming in on Nadal's backhand is uber-risky because Nadal can get the vicious dip from that side, just like the forehand. Same thing Federer discovered in Monte Carlo. Both Federer & Djokovic had almost useless percentages in the fore court when they played Nadal this year.

By the way: does anybody know who the bald guy was in the Djokovic box sitting next to Marian Vajda?? The more I saw him the more gay he looked to me I wanted to think he's Vajda's boyfriend

Roger dominates the first set until Rafa takes a very timely..and long injury timeout and comes back as bouncy as can be to even the set at 5-5. Hmmmmm....

What was the supposed injury? Needed more bananas??

Anyone notice the spot of Roger's face? In the online - up close - interview, I noticed RF talks with only his big bottom lip. His top lip hardly moved. Just funny stuff....I am routing for him, just because Rafa is too dominant on clay.

It was a strange one, tealsea. Rafa was down 5-1, Roger was rolling, and bam, Rafa's hamstring was oh so painful...he got rubbed on, which was entertaining to watch and then bam, he was running faster and harder than he had been, won the set 7-5 as Roger appeared shocked game after game. The second set was another toughie with Roger going up 4-1, then faltering again, Rafa just getting back ball after ball...finally the tiebreak became a Roger affair...and now we're in the third. Roger is very frustrated and angry...and he doesn't look so healthy to me, his face is blotchy, his eyes look tired...I really think there are still physical repercussions from the virus. Nothing else keeps a huge red bump/blotch on your face this many weeks but an ongoing health challenge. I don't think we know anywhere near the whole story.

Did you happen to notice that Nadal broke back for 5-2 _before_ the timeout? And that Fed still got to another set point after the timeout? Or that Nadal also closed a double break deficit in Monte Carlo to take the second set 7-5?

Anyhow, Nadal returned the favour in that tiebreaker. Some real head-slapping misses there.

Much like Steffi Graf, Nadal moves so well on clay that he can cheat way over to his backhand side. If you're hitting to his backhand, either you're trying for a huge angle or he'll have plenty of time to set up. And given time to set up, his passing shots are lethal, even if he's 10 feet behind the baseline.