Roger Federer survived a scare in his opener and will continue his Miami campaign against Filip Krajinovic on Monday. Reilly Opelka has already made a nice run this fortnight and will face Daniil Medvedev in the third round.
(4) Roger Federer vs. Filip Krajinovic
Federer and Stan Wawrinka figured to complete the head-to-head Sunshine Double in Indian Wells and Miami, but Krajinovic had other ideas and staged a comeback win over Wawrinka on Saturday. Thus it will be Federer vs. Krajinovic for the third time in their careers during third-round Miami Open action on Monday. The Swiss leads the head-to-head series 2-0, having prevailed 6-2, 6-1 at the 2018 Indian Wells Masters and 6-2, 4-6, 6-4 this past fall on the indoor hard courts of Basel.
Krajinovic endured an injury-plagued 2018 season but he will back inside the top 100 following this event (currently No. 103). The 27-year-old Serb preceded his 5-7, 6-2, 7-6(5) upset of Wawrinka by beating Pierre-Hugues Herbert 6-4, 6-4. Federer survived his second-round match against Radu Albot 4-6, 7-5, 6-3 on Saturday evening. Difficult openers are often just what the doctor ordered for 37-year-old, who played well enough against Albot and will likely raise his level now that he has one effort under his belt inside this new stadium.
Pick: Federer in 2
[polldaddy poll=10274480]
Reilly Opelka vs. (13) Daniil Medvedev
Opelka, who is 6’11”, went up against 5’7” Diego Schwartzman on Saturday and the result was predictable entertainment. But the match progressed in unexpected fashion, with five breaks of serve–and not a single ace being hit by Opelka–taking place in the first set. The 58th-ranked American seized an early lead and ended up holding off Schwartzman, who was spurred on by an energized Argentine crowd, 6-4, 3-6, 6-4. Thus continued an outstanding start to 2019 for Opelka, who captured his first career title in New York while beating John Isner for a second time this season in the process.
Next up for the 21-year-old is a second career contest against Medvedev, who won their only previous encounter 6-7(8), 6-3, 7-6(6) at the 2017 Washington, D.C. tournament. Both players have made huge strides since then, but it is Medvedev who has really taken off and now finds himself near the top of the sport. The 15th-ranked Russian won three titles last year, added a fourth to his career this season, and boasts a 16-5 record for his 2019 campaign. He cruised through his Miami opener via a 6-2, 6-1 decision against Adrian Mannarino. A red-hot Medvedev generally handles pace without much trouble and he will likely befuddle Opelka with too much consistency and variety.
Pick: Medvedev in 2
[polldaddy poll=10274481]
WWW?
fed & medvedev in 2
Federer and Medvedev in 3.
FedMed in straight.
Krajinovic and Opelka both to win a set
Krajinovic and Opelka both to win at least a set.
No way will Krajinovic take a set off Federer.
correct
Fed really upped his game today and once again the main difference was on the serve and ROS. Krajinovic really couldn’t do much of anything against Fed’s serve, but was almost constantly under pressure on his own. This despite the fact (as I saw it) that he was just as good from the baseline.
Just goes to show the outsize importance of serve and ROS to tennis and also relevant to the discussion about talent. In the modern game, I think it’s fair to say that an undersized player (Ferrer, Goffin, Shortman) cannot be a great champion, e.g., winning several slams. All those guys, imo, are good at constructing point (even if I wouldn’t say that Goffin is mentally tough). But they simply lack power, particularly on serve, to win enough easy points to be the best.
So, natural athletic ability, in modern tennis, is partly a function of size, increasingly so. I don’t think anyone would call Isner or Karlovic especially talented, relative to the top 20 or even 50. But their hugeness means that if they’re serve is on song, they are very difficult to beat.
Fed doesn’t have the size advantage, of course; his serve is great mainly due to his placement. Being able to serve like Fed is a rare talent indeed.
What about Sampras, Sampras is the same height as Fed but his serve is even more lethal; so he’s very talented as well; don’t think Kyrgios is more talented than Sampras!
Ferrer is small size but he has a very good ROS, imo just after the trio of Rafa, Djoko and Murray, so he’s also very talented (if not he won’t be TOP five for so Long!).
Djoko has the best talent imo as he’s great in both serve and return, great from both wings and has the least weaknesses among these guys and that’s why he’s the toughest guy to beat!
Kyrgios shouldn’t be mentioned in the same sentence as Sampras or Federer, two of the all time greats.
Luckystar, here is the answer to who is the best returner.
I refer you to:
https://www.atptour.com/en/stats
Sampras not as talented because he was only very good on fast surfaces. Feds serve is as good considering he plays on slower surfaces .
Djoko isn’t very talented at the net .I still think the most naturally talented were McEnroe and Federer .
That’s only your opinion, I don’t see why Fed is more naturally talented than say Djoko. How do you know Fed didn’t train hard to be good at the net, after all he started out during the S&V era?
Sampras serve is more lethal than Fed’s, so I don’t think he would do worse than Fed on slower surfaces of today.
I think you’re just biased in favour of Fed.
The results don’t lie,esp the clay ones
Jim is right, Sampras didn’t do well on clay because he’s not a good mover on clay, nothing to do with his serve. Sampras is American, not growing up in Europe playing on clay from young. He’s excellent on the fast courts, esp the fast grass of Wimbledon.
Federer is still more talented though,than Sampras or Djokovic,he’s got more variety .
Nah, having more varieties but weaker in other areas doesn’t make one more talented than the other. Also, varieties can be trained, you can’t deny that Djoko has improved in his varieties, though he isn’t as good as Fed or Rafa or Murray.
I dispute that, Sampras is immensely talented and dominated men’s tennis for s decade. He wasn’t a great clay courted because of his technique which had nothing to do with his ability. He grew up on grass and hardcourts.
Fed isn’t as talented as Djoko on the ROS. See, there are things Djoko is > than Fed.
Djoko is well balanced and lethal from both wings, something not even Fed or Rafa could do. His best level > best level of Fed or Rafa (except on clay), and he bagels or breadsticks his opponents more often than Fed or Rafa ever does. The guy could reach some insane level, something I feel more to do with his innate talent than just hard work.
Djoko is a bit weak mentally. He’s worked hard on that – give him credit – but he still doesn’t weather adversity the way Fed and Rafa do. Not necessarily in a match but when he gets injured or doesn’t have his best game.
Speaking of talent – I wrote earlier that no one ever referred to Rafa as “talented”? I was wrong! TennisTV put up a throwback Thursday showing Rafa just after he beat Fed at Mimai at age 17, with the commie wondering “what the future holds for this hugely *talented* young man from Mallorca”.
Rafa’s talent was recognised even before he beat Fed for the first time. There was a short doc or film about him as a promising sixteen year old. Rafa was ranked in the TOP one hundred when he’s only 16 yo. He, together with Borg, were the only two teenagers who had won 16 titles (including slams and Masters) during their teens. If he’s not talented, how would he be able to win all those titles, beating the no.1 player and the top ten players?
Rafa was way more offensive back then, he’s more an offensive baseliner than a counterpuncher to start with; but Toni had turned him into a great counterpuncher.
Yeah,I’m aware of that,Djoko being better than Fed in some areas.He’s even better than Nadal from the back of court .
At least we agree that this tournament is disappointing without a few top players at their best.
But there’s still a difference between having more talent and being the better player
Having more talent and working hard yet not the better player, what logic is that??
You said that,I didn’t.
As been said many times now, talent isn’t enough
Nah, you got that wrong; I was referring to a player whom you said got more talent, and at the same time working hard, so no logic to say he’s not the better player (than someone who worked as hard but not as talented). Re: the case of Fed (whom you think is the more talented) who works hard vs Djoko (whom you think not as talented as Fed) who works hard.
Novak is naturally better than Fed on ROS; that’s all. Novak didn’t start to beat Fed consistently until the latter was past his prime. Djokovic’s greatest strength has always been his consistency.
Like Nadal, Novak is a better all-round athlete than Fed, but Fed is the greater natural tennis talent.
Nah, Djoko back in 2007 to 2010 was already able to beat Fed – at Montreal 2007, AO2008, Miami and Rome 2009, and USO2010 when Fed was in his prime and was the TOP two player, whilst Djoko was just starting to reach his prime. It’s not like he’s hopeless against Fed!
As I said, Djoko’s best level is higher than both Fed’s and Rafa’s (except Rafa on clay), don’t see why he’s not as talented if not more talented than Fed (and Rafa).
Fed only better than Djoko in his varieties, and Rafa better than Djoko perhaps tactically, but Djoko has not much weaknesses whether it’s FH or BH, serve or return, footwork and foot speed; perhaps his overhead smashes is his main weakness. He’s now very good at the net except those smashes.
Please define ‘natural tennis talent’
I meant Fed never had the luxury as a server of playing mosty on fast surfaces like Sampras did .
I never mentioned who worked harder,was referring simply to natural talent .
As Joe said a huge server can beat more talented players and so could be said to be better.
It’s subjective but IMO Federer and McEnroe are the two most naturally talented .
Please define ‘naturally talented’.
How exact a definition do you want ? There was a thread on this recently ,you might find one interpretation in there. It isn’t just about tennis or sport , nor is it an exact science .
I gave McEnroe example as having natural talent because he won a tournament having never picked up a racquet before .McEnroe is jealous of Federer because people say he’s more talented.Both of them can win on clay attacking the net, that’s not easy.
You seem determined to disprove every statement in support of Federer being even slightly better than your favourites!
Nope, because you Fed fans keep saying how ‘most naturally talented’ Fed is but you people can’t even define what that is!
As I said earlier on, the big four plus maybe a few more players are all talented in their own ways, to say Fed is the most naturally talented tennis player is simply not true, unproven.
We agree they are all very talented in different ways . If you cant get your head around what natural means , just watch them play.Esp that video on the other thread. Who cares about proving it ? Its poetry in motion , its creative genius ,something that cant be learned or taught.
A bit like trying to define what Bohemian Rhapsody was about, people tried analysing it and failed.
I see, but there’s no lacking of natural talent (creativity) among the other three of the big four. I’ve seen some ridiculous points played by them too.
Yes, so have I ,but Fed’s style lends itself to that type of shot esp. on the fast courts where he has less time to play them.He’s just more effortless and natural .
How do you conclude that Fed is more naturally talented than Sampras? On what basis?
Also, how’s Fed most talented like McEnroe? Don’t tell me Fed didn’t train or practice but like John Mac, he managed to win a tournament? And how’s he more ‘naturally talented’ than say Rafa or Djoko for examples? Again what’s your definition of ‘natural talent’ to begin with?
Obviously, we’re not on the same wavelength. I thought we’ve moved on from comparing Fed to Sampras, to comparing Fed vs Djoko?
Nah, beating more talented players occasionally doesn’t make one the better player; we’re not talking about say Isner beating Fed and being called the better player, for example, when obviously he isn’t.
Yeah, but to say that he’s the most talented together with John MacEnroe when Fed is/was playing in an era where the courts aren’t as quick as those in decades past, how could we say for sure that Fed would be better than those greats who actually played and won on quick surfaces?
In fact on slower surfaces, Fed would have more time to play his ‘creative’ shots, unlike on quick surfaces where the reaction time would be even shorter.
But it’s not that simple,in the old days the game was slower because of the wooden racquets even though the courts were generally faster.
If they were all playing with wooden racquets it would be easier to see where the natural talent was.
No, in the 1990s, they didn’t play with wooden rackets, so we saw those booming unreturnable serves; if I’m not wrong they S&V too so players then weren’t short of net skills and deft touches.
Had the big four all grown up to play in the 1990s, I’m sure they would S&V too. Rafa and Murray come with deft touches too despite not playing in the S&V eras. Fed had the advantage over them when he did play during the S&V era when he first started out.
As I said, the courts aren’t as quick now compared to the 1990s, so players can afford more time to play their shots and so play from the baseline primarily. Fed during his peak years did stay more at the baseline than rushing the net; he only ventured to the net when he had chances to do so; he called himself an aggressive baseliner.
It’s only after 2009 that he started moving more to the net, engaging first Annacone to help him do so, followed by Edberg. I think it was after Fed started playing his net rushing game, moving into the court often, that people said that Fed played an all court game.
When we’re talking about the greatest natural tennis talent, I guess we’re talking about a player who would have been great in any era ,cutting across standards of equipment and training , playing styles etc. of the time. Who would fit that bill best, I wonder?
Yeah,I’m aware of that,Djoko being better than Fed in some areas.He’s even better than Nadal from the back of court .
At least we agree that this tournament is disappointing without a few top players at their best.
Nadal fans always lose a bit of interest when Rafa isn’t in the mix; that’s understandable. But Novak was there, in good form and well rested. He just got beat by a guy who played outstanding on the day. I say that’s a good thing for tennis. Putting aside my Fed favoritism, I’d say the best final for tennis would be FAA-Shapo or Tiafoe. No big names required.
Djoko not in good form, it’s so obvious! It’s just like at IW; he’s making uncharacteristic errors. The difference between him and Fed here was that Fed survived, probably after playing more than ten matches and so he’s match sharp, whilst Djoko only played four or five matches since the AO, so he wasn’t able to turn things around.
Other than the few youngsters, and maybe Ferrer fighting hard, the rest of the TOP ten really disappoint – Sasha, Thiem, Kei, Djoko. Guys like Khachanov, Cilic, and Kyrgios too.
The quality of tennis is what matters , doesn’t depend on any particular player ,but consistency throughout the year matters too , which is what the top players have.
The best returner according to the ATP Fedex Index is Rafa.
https://www.atptour.com/en/stats
There is a table here of the bagels handed out by players for every year from 2004.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Bagel_Award
“The Golden Bagel Award was an award established in 2004 and awarded until 2013 that honored the professional male tennis player who has handed out more bagels, than any other player on the circuit.[1][2] Roger Federer holds the all-time record for most bagels in a single season with 18 going into the Tennis Masters Cup, and a total of 19 in 2006.”
Well, if you count from 2004-2013, then obviously Fed has the advantage as Djoko wasn’t even at the atp tour yet in 2004! (In 2004 alone, Fed had given out 12 bagels).
However, if you start from 2005-2013, then Djoko had given out slightly more bagels! And, for the six years from 2011-2016, Djoko had given out 60 bagels and 154 breadsticks (vs Fed’s 54 bagels and 113 breadsticks during his peak from 2004-2009); that’s how scarily good Djoko is/was!
Fed’s 2006 no doubt topped at 19 bagels but Djoko had given out more bagels per season is most the other seasons(and more breadsticks too).
We shouldn’t split hairs. We have to take it spread over their respective careers. People tend to want to count only from 2011 for Novak. To do that we should only count the best years of everyone.
Even across their respective careers, Djoko could bagel his rivals as much as Fed did, despite starting out some six years later, believe it or not!
And, guess who tops the list among the big three in handing out bagels? It’s Rafa, though I’ve to say, Rafa had started at least two years ahead of Djoko (2003 vs 2005)so Djoko could still catch up with Rafa in the next two years.
Rafa is/was so dominant on clay that he was giving out bagels and breadsticks often on clay.