26
Opinion: Rosol Changed The Game
27 Comments · Posted by Scoop Malinowski in Articles, Scoop
I believe the Rosol-Nadal match last year has changed tennis. In case you might have forgot, Lukasz Rosol came out of obscurity and astonishingly slayed Rafael Nadal in five sets with a magical display of power tennis at 2012 Wimbledon, second round.
Now it seems, many many more of the Rocky Balboa underdogs, the low ranked players believe they actually can duplicate what Rosol did last year to Rafa. They believe now. If the mind can conceive it the body can achieve it.
Nishikori beat Fed this year. Darcis just beat Rafa on Monday. Zeballos beat Rafa earlier this year in a final. Michelle Larcher De Brito has beaten Maria. Sloane Stephens upset Serena in Melbourne. And now Sergei Stakhovsky has sent Fed packing in the second round.
The elite ATP hierarchy is changing and evolving I believe Lukasz Rosol deserves the credit for this fresh, exciting, unpredictable new pattern which will bring a different dimension for the sport.
No tags
Dan Markowitz · June 26, 2013 at 10:41 pm
It’s really only at Wimbledon, Scoop. Kei beating Fed in Madrid is not such a big upset anymore because Fed is not a Top 3 player on clay anymore or even maybe Top 5. So these upsets are only coming at Wimbledon and I like it. It’s so much more fun to see a Stakhovsky play his attacking style or a Dustin Brown. I don’t love watching Gulbis play; he seems pretty straight forward to me. Not a lot of different shots, but I love the F. Lopez’s or Llodra’s still in the event.
Andrew Miller · June 26, 2013 at 11:24 pm
Maybe Scoop is right – certainly the U.S. players’ rankings are improving (despite the general under-performance of Isner and Querrey – they did great to get into the top 21, and since then have been slumping). Even James Blake has a shot in round two of equaling his best ever Wimbledon, at the age of 33.
Mitch · June 26, 2013 at 11:31 pm
There were big upsets before Rosol, though not at the slam level. Matches like the Stakhovsky, Rosol, and Darcis are some of the most exciting to watch, but they make the rest of the tournament less interesting. Would you rather watch a Benoit Paire Nicholas Almagro quarter final or Fed Nadal? I guess this tournament is a reminder that anyone can lose on any day, but are you really going to be invested in the Murray semifinal when he plays someone from a lower weight class?
Dan Markowitz · June 27, 2013 at 2:11 am
Yes, if it’s an exciting player. I like Stakhovsky’s game and I’d watch him play Murray. I think everyone was interested in Darcis, and I’d watch Dustin Brown over Federer, Nadal, Tsonga all put together. Gulbis is another player who’d I’d watch regardless of who he played.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 6:37 am
I agree, Scoop. For the vast majority of the field beating Fed or Nadal was like breaking the 4 minute mile. Rosol gave others hope in that if they played the best tennis of their lives they could pull off the upset.
I like this “24 hour” rule Fed talked about in his post-match interview and again he stated he’s going to play many more years.
Andrew Miller · June 27, 2013 at 8:34 am
Federer said what Scoop said (that players likely believing they can beat the best, now moreso than in past years) – but Murray said what’s the big deal (no one wins forever) and that improvement (whether for Haas or Darcis) remains the name of the game.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 8:54 am
Yes I would reather watch Paire vs. Almagro in a QF than Fed or Nadal Mitch. The winner would be in the SF, it would be a career changer for them. It would be so exciting for both of them.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 8:58 am
Fed was winning forever ) He has been immune to the big upset in majors for so many years though he did have to fight off the Fallas and Tips and Simons and Haas in memorable five setters. FInally he got knocked off by Stakhovsky, but don’t forget it was a close match with tiebreaks. Not such a bad loss at all for Fed. The difference is belief now, these guys like Stakhovsky believe. And maybe Fed’s belief and invincibility is not what it once was.
Dan Markowitz · June 27, 2013 at 9:10 am
What’s the “24-hour rule?” Who’s making big upsets except against Fed and Nadal. Fed has clearly had it. His days of making slam finals are over. If that was the old Fed, Sergiy is gone in straight sets. I don’t see Djoko or Murray or even Ferrer flaming out. Tsonga going down to Gulbis is not a big upset. So where are these big upsets? Lleyton Hewitt?
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 9:28 am
Scoop, it’s funny you should say that because when I watched the highlights I thought to myself no way the Fed that took out Sampras when he was 19 would have lost this match. Fed played out of his mind that day which is exactly what Stakhovsky did yesterday.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 9:38 am
Tomic just did his thing all over Blake.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 9:40 am
If Seppi meets Nishikori my upset pick is Seppi.
I believe Nishikori is a “light” version of Seppi. Very similar games and Seppi’s backhand & game is underrated. We’ll see.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 9:45 am
Delpo looked groggy at the Boodles Exo but he was getting his grass game together and showed flashes of his Champion game. He’s such an X factor.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 10:19 am
Nishikori is better than Seppi Steve, higher ranking and more titles. Seppi may be worth a wager though.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 10:37 am
I disagree.
JJ can beat Almagro too but that doesn’t feel like an upset.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 10:40 am
Nishikori is like Murray in that a nation invested heavily in him. Tennis is not a big deal in Italy yet Seppi’s true talent shines through you just have to open your eyes.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 11:08 am
Super Jerzy beating Almagro would be an upset according to the rankings.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 11:13 am
Seppi reminds me of a poor man’s version of Karol Kucera, good quality ATP pro, good results, good ranking but no threat to win a major.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 12:27 pm
Scoop, I’m a little surprised you haven’t picked Tomic to beat Gasquet seeing how you believe Tomic will be a future #1.
Will be a very interesting match, I think. Should be more competitive than their last meeting.
Scoop Malinowski · June 27, 2013 at 12:47 pm
It’s about a 50-50 match. At this time I’ve lost faith in Tomic after his off court adversities but if he can regroup, mature, get his act together, yes I think he can still be no. 1 someday. He’s a special player with a lot of upside Steve.
Steve · June 27, 2013 at 1:42 pm
I think he is a special talent now and I think having Dad at a distance is a great for his game. However, there will have to be a lot of bad knees in the top 10 for him to be #1.
Steve · June 28, 2013 at 12:25 pm
So JJ got the W over Almagro. I expect Seppi to do the same tomorrow.
Scoop Malinowski · June 28, 2013 at 12:37 pm
That was not just a “W” that was a beatdown of Almagro. A Tyson-esque knockout. Nishikori is going to crush Seppi methinks.
Steve · June 28, 2013 at 1:36 pm
Proof sometimes ranking doesn’t matter when you consider all factors. This is how I got this upset pick correct.
If they both play their best Seppi will win.
Steve · June 28, 2013 at 2:16 pm
Scoop, I’d like to hear the reasons why you think Nishikori will “crush” Seppi?
I noticed the talented Nishikori starts to feel injured when he plays long rallies. I imagine many long rallies tomorrow without many errors for Kei to feast on. His backhand just slightly better than Seppi’s (if it’s better at all) and I believe Seppi is fitter and edges him out on strategy.
Mitch · June 28, 2013 at 2:56 pm
Nishikori is a big favorite as far as the oddsmakers are concerned. He moves more naturally than Seppi on grass and has a smart offensive game.
Scoop Malinowski · June 28, 2013 at 8:20 pm
I think Kei is the better player than Sep, smarter, quicker, better mover, craftier, more weapons, more guile Steve. We’ll see.