91Èȱ¬

i hope murray wins the event ,but i think fed will winit

group A -murray bt ferrer,djokovic bt berdych,berdych bt murray,djokovic bt ferrer, murray bt djokovic,ferrer bt berdych

murray and novak go through with nole in 1st place

group B- federer bt tsonga,nadal bt fish,fed bt fish,tsonga bt nadal,nadal bt fed,tsonga bt fish

i think fed and tsonga as nadal will have davis cup on his mind

come on murray please just get out of the group,please and good luck

John - am I right in thinking most players see this as the 5th most important tournament of the year?

But thinking about it, it's only 5 3-set matches...

And how important are the results to the top players? You refer to Nadal's loss to Mayer, but I would wager if that had been a Slam (no disrespect to Mayer), he would have won it.

Has it simply been overhyped in recent years??

Bj, there's potentially more points available here (1500 if a player wins the tournament and all his round robin stage matches).

Re: #2
In terms of points, it is the 5th most important match of the year. Grand slam winners receive 2000 ATP points, winners of the Tour Finals get 1500, whereas the next best tournaments can only offer 1000. More points means higher rankings and seedings and therefore much easier routes through tournaments next year.

In terms of matches, the top 4 players are usually given a first round bye in other tournaments, so they only play 6 matches in total anyway. In the Tour Finals, all 5 matches are against other top-8 players, whereas in other tournaments, you would not meet another top-8 player until the final three rounds.

The finals cannot compete with the prestige of Grand slams, but then, they're not meant to. The tournament is a showcase of the year's best players to offer high calibre tennis throughout, which, if previous years matches are anything to go by, it does pretty well.

@3 & 4 - Good point about the ranking points on offer, but in terms of actual prestige, is it not - as mentioned - simply a 'showcase', and players attend mainly for the ranking points, unlike the GS's?

(Is it a mandatory tourny?)

Not sure whether its mandatory, but the $5M prize money split between the 8 players means its worth turning up for. I can remember people who have withdrawn in previous years because of injury, but can't recall anyone who just didn't fancy it. The ATP web-site says that as numbers 9 & 10 Tipsarevic and Almagro will travel to London as first and second alternates, so they have covered the risk of withdrawals due to injury (or anything else). Sensible precaution when the majority of the players have had some injury issues over the last few weeks.

As I've got tickets for Tuesday I'm disappointed they haven't announced the full schedule - do they not decide the order of play for the second and third round robin matches until the first ones have been played?

Murray hasn't got a chance of winning.

Will get knocked out of the group stages, or at best the next round.

He's the only player to never win a GS Final set, he's played in 3 or so finals. Like i've always said, he's talented, but there is a MASSIVE difference in class, skill and talent in Nadal, Novak and Federer..

I think we have an upset on the cards this year. It has been a seriously long seaosn for alot of these players and believe Tsonga is gong to cause an upset. He's been playing some of his best tennis this year and beaten a few of the big dogs.

#6 - I am in a similar position. I brought tickets for Wednesday night Months ago and with 3 days till then event starts I still don't know who I'm going to be watching. Does anyone know when the full order of play will be released. Why do they need to play the first rounds before releasing the full order? Strange one!

Reccy - you say Murray will probably get knocked out in the group stages, then say there's a big step between himself and RF, RN and ND.

Well, since only one of them is in his group, why would he not get past the group?

Wait...you're going to say Berdych is a threat, aren't you?
Well, maybe (considering he always seems to give Murray a hard time) but indoors, in front of a home crowd...he'll fold like Soderling (another one people thought could match up to Murray in the top 4 before falling away like they always do) did last year.

Djoko is carrying an injury and Nadal is more focussed on the Davis Cup final...so I think this tournament is pretty much wide open, and in three-set 'knockout' matches on this kind of court Murray (who finds this surface and format favourable) has as good a chance as anyone. Expect some 'shock' results in both the groups though.

Or Federer will walk it.

@ #7, you're clearly not paying attention. Muzza is ranked AHEAD of Federer, so his recent results don't look so great. Meanwhile both Nadal and Djokovic are coming into this tournament with questions over form and/or fitness.

That said, Berdych and Tsonga look like good outside bets to me as well. The only players I am prepared to say will NOT win the tournament are Ferrer and Fish.

Reccy - Of course he has a chance, he's in the tournament. Roddick, for example, has zero chance as he's not playing.

This is actually a tournament that Andy has more chance of winning than the Grand Slams in my opinion. His record in best of 5 set matches against the top 3 is poor, but in best of 3 matches he has much better records, particularly against Federer. As mentioned with Nadal and Djoko both not 100% there for varying reasons I think the possibility of a Murray - Fed final is there. That woudl be a cracker.

And to no 6 - I think they always hold out on the order of play for the 3rd round of matches so they can put on someone who has lost twice already, and still technically has a small chance of qualifying. As opposed to if they go on last with no chance and it's a dead rubber.

Reccy - i think your wrong, murray has the game and the ability to win slams,
he only lacks confidence.

RE #6 and #8

I've been to the Friday afternoon session every year (and will be next week too) and you will not find out who you are watching until the morning before from what I can remember. They do this deliberately (I think) to make the tournament more competitive and to bump the more prestige matches to the night shift. For instance, in 2009 I ended up seeing Djokovic v Nadal as they lost both of their matches beforehand so Soderling v Davydenko was bumped up to the night match. I think last year they worked the 2nd matches out based on who won the first ones to ensure 2 players didn't get knocked out before the final games, which would then have dead rubber matches. So if Federer and Nadal win their opening matches, i'd wager they'll play each other on the Tuesday.

I can't wait for Friday and predict i'll be watching Djokovic v Ferrer (though I want to see Murray as I haven't seen him live yet). Just stuck a fiver on Nadal at 5/1 to win the tournament though.

#6

I suspect the other reason for delayed announcements is to encourage speculative ticket purchases - I'm sure Ferrer vs Berdych would be very watchable but it wouldn't shift many advance bookings.

Murray (Age 24) 3 GS Finals - Not won a set in ANY. A bloody SET!

Federer (Age 30) - 16 GS Titles & 7 GS Finals. H2H AM Won 8-6
Nadal (Age 25) - 10 GS Titles & 4 GS Finals. H2H AM Won 4-6
Djokovic (Age 24) - 4 GS Titles & 2 GS Finals. H2H AM Won 5-13

Murray cannot produce the nouse needed to perform on the big stage, and if Nadal is more worried/concentrating on the Davis Cup than on this tournament then it goes to show that this isn't anything major. even the head to head records state he flops on the biggest stage (losing twice to Federer in GS Finals, without winning a set).

Murray will be remember for being slightly better than Tim Henman but never won a GS, he could win 1000 Minor tournaments, he'll be remembered for being a flop on the grand scheme of things.

My one wish is that we get some matches of the calibre of Nadal v Murray last year.
I was working, and was unable to watch it all before it was ruined for me by the 91Èȱ¬ itself.

Fortunately, I have already booked those days off :)

Reccy - why are you going on about Grand Slams? This isn't one, and in any case I forgot meaningful tennis was only played 8 weeks in a year. *rollseyes*

Why would (as you insinuated in your first post) Murray's failure in the latter stages of GS's translate to failure here against the same opponents, in a tournament with an entirely different format (one which Murray feels a lot more at home with)?

This article is about the World Tour Finals, nothing else.

Hard Court head to heads as follows for Murray
Federer 8-6
Djok 4-4
Nadal 5-6
So overall he leads against the top 3
Not bad for someone who can't perform on the big stage

@ 17.

He hasnt won one of them either has he :) - Just proves my point.

Reccy - you should go back to the football boards before you embarass yourself further...

Murray is a far superior player to Henman. Anyone who doesn't know that only probably watches tennis about twice a year or is an anti-Scottish Englishman.

Good to see you didn't even mention the responses to your ridiculous post earlier, namely that this is best of 3 set tennis. You point out he won't win because he can't win on the big stage but then say this tournament "isn't anything major". Nice one.

Murray could win this tournament (not saying he will, but has has the ability). And you should get over yourself and stop having a go at Britain's best male tennis player in most of our lives.

@ 19.

Neither has Nadal. Your point?

(My point being that Murray, based on his recent 3-set hardcourt form, including beating both Djokovic and Nadal - the format and surface of this tournament - stands a decent chance of going far here).

And Djokovic has only won his GS titles recently - 3 in this last year. It's a very fine line between winning and losing and Murray only needs something to go his way to cross that line. Once he does he will have so much more self belief and will KNOW that he belongs there - but I suspect all the knockers will still attack him.

All hail Murray, best thing since Tim Henman... hahaha...

Interesting to look at at head to heads for all 4 against each other on hard courts
Djok 23 - 20
Murray 17 - 16
Fed 21 - 21
Nadal 15 - 19
Which just shows it is wide open

Purely hypothetical, and maybe a bit of a pointless qn:

If the top 4 players were not able to play due to a 3-year ban for not letting anyone else into the semis of a GS, who would win the most in that period?

I'm actually a little surprised that ranking points are on offer, given that it's only open to the top 8. Surely this gives them an unfair advantage and an opportunity to pull away from the chasing pack?

I thought it'd be more like the Masters in snooker, which is also only open to the top players, but doesn't offer ranking points. That seems fairer, as in any other event a lower ranked player could have a great tournament and pick up points.

Nice work
Would love to go see the action live but I'll have to make do with the 91Èȱ¬ coverage (decent as it is).
I have Murray to win this and break his GS duck at the Australian Open, possibly adding another GS next year... He certainly does well enough to deserve our support.
Does anyone have the odds available for winning this tournament?

Hi Jonathan,

As per some other posts PLEASE let us know, if you know, what the schedule is past Monday or when this information might become available. Would really like to attend - and particularly Murray vs Djokovic if possible - so the lack of information pertaining to what group matches are being played and when is really frustrating.

Cheers

# 25

Great question. Well, it wouldn't be Ferrer, I know that much. Not in all the slams anyway. I'd like to think someone like Tsonga would step up and be a major force, especially at Wimbledon. I could see Ferrer doing well at Rolland Garros though, and Soderling would be pushing him on clay. I'd love to see Del Potro come back and do well too.

@ Reccy

There is actually very little difference between Murray and Federer/Nadal/Djokovic in terms of class, skill and talent, and myriad stats, facts and parallels to prove this. I won't bother extrapolating because it's pretty obvious you don't know much about tennis, but thanks for taking the time to indulge in some Brit-bashing (Scot-bashing?). When Murray takes down the first of several slams you'll be in my thoughts.

Blimey Reccy, you are beyond thick and obviously are not a follower of tennis.

Comparing Murray to Henman is ridiculous, Murray is the better player and has achieved far more than Henmen. The fact he's got three more grand slam finals over him is a great achievement in itself - especially in the era of Federer and Nadal. Yes, Murray has failed to win the final or a set but that doesn't mean he can't.

Another point to make is Henman only won one Masters title (Paris) while Murray not only has won 8 but has successfully defended a title twice (Roger's Cup & Shanghai). Not to mention the painfully obvious fact that Henman could only make World Number 4, while Murray became World Number 2 at one stage and is currently third.

He has the ability to win this tournament - his form alone since winning the Queen's Club is enough to go on as he's only lost four times since then, he's had a very impressive season and just like last year - he'll make it through to the semi finals and if he has Nadal, I believe he'll win. Nadal is obviously struggling with injury as is Djokovic. The bookies haven't made Murray the second favourite for no reason!

Try and show some damn support for once!

RE: The Order of Play. My Take on the situation is a follows.

The don't want to get to Thursday and Friday with some players out the competition already.

I reckon the 2 winners from the first round of matches will play each other the the 2nd round. Meaning they will also play on Tuesday or Wednesday evening as thats the main event slot. So lets say Novak vs Murray.

This will then mean one player will have 2 wins by the third round where 2 or even 3 players will most likly have 1 win and 1 loss or o wins and 2 loss.

This means the final round of games up to 3 players from the 4 could still get the 2nd spot in the group while one will be already the out right winner!

I don't know if that makes sence and it could be serious wishful thinking due to the fact I have a wednesday evening ticket and praying for Novak v Murray or Nadal vs Feds!

If anyone could help, who has been to previous years it would be much appreciated!

Thanks

The most talented player is Federer. He has the greatest variety of shots at his disposal - one reason he is rarely injured, and at 30, is still fit. He certainly has a chance. Murray's problem is not talent but his head. He will get over it with experience, but when? Nadal will be dangerous if he gets through to the Semis as he would have got over his long lay-off disadvantage. Tsonga is full of beans, and with him anything can happen. Ferrer has nuisance value -top players can beat him but not without leaving a lot of energy behind. Not nice to have him in your group.
Djoko is the best of the year, but how much juice has he still got left?
Berdych is like Tsonga. You never know what he might come up with. Fish at this stage appears the least dangerous.
Match to watch out for: Murray - Djoko. Djoko had better be very fit, else he will lose. Murray's head would only bother him if he gets to the final!

I've got loads of mates like Reccy, love to bash Murray but then when you ask them about tennis they don't know anything and in most cases don't even watch it!

Look at the quality of the players getting the Slam finals when Henman was around and compare it to the last 5 years. Enough said.

I went to the 02 to see my first live tennis last year. Caught the Murray v Federer pool game. It wasn't that difficult to book a couple of days ahead once you knew who was listed, though organisers probably do leave announcing order of play late in the hope that some people will work off the 'anything is better than nothing' principle. Match itself was a bit one-sided. Murray lost in 70 minutes.

But the atmosphere was worth going for, even without tickets. There's a big screen to show the matches, some decent enough bars, standard (but over-priced) restaurants as well as tennis-type things to do - including watching players practice and dish out autographs.

I've got tickets for the final this year and would love to see Murray beat Djoko in three sets. But it's a pretty open tournament - my least likely to succeed are Fish, Ferrer and Berdych.

The matches are going to be interesting. Murray will do well, however, Federer will win it.

Fish, Tsonga, Berdych and Ferrer aren't going to win it.
Neither is Nadal.
Provided Nole's shoulder holds, it will be a Federer Djokovic final.

Reccy, what a horrendous spectacle of tennis this will be, eh?

It will have two guys have never even been to a grand slam final, two who have been to a solitary GSF each (only one of which ever won a set), Murray, and then we have the three who are "putting fannies in seats" a great Grand Slam winner once said.

Let's face it, there is no way you know who those other two guys are who have played in a GSF each without the world wide web at your fingertips. Can you imagine the abuse they are getting right now in blogs in their respective countries?

The other two must return home through Customs with bags over their heads!

#37, I think you write off Tsonga at your peril - seems to be on very good form and on his (occasional) day he can be unbeatable. I think Djoko's shoulder must be a very big if against his chances. The bookies' odds indicate Federer winning the final against Murray, and I suspect that will be close to where we are next Sunday.

To those asking why they can't release the OOP for the rest of the week; the winners of the first matches play each other next (ass do the losers, obviously). So it is impossible to say who will be playing who on Tuesday until Sunday's matches are finished.

It's quite a smart approach when you think about it as it means there can't be a dead rubber in he 3rd group match i.e. you avoid the situation where both players in a match have no chance of progressing to the semis

Murray must be pleased : Berdych, Djokovic and Ferrer.

You must be pleased if you miss Rog and Raf which sadly Jo and Mardy didnt but Jo isnt to be sniffed at, he's beaten Nadal and beat Federer in a thriller at Wimbledon in the summer so Tsonga isnt a bad bet at all, I would hope Murray wins it but if he doesnt, I would back Tsonga.

A Murray/Federer final would be a dream but it is impossible to call how this will pan out - Nadal & Djok seem to shake off injuries when it counts, so they cannot be written off.

It's been a gruelling tennis year the top 4 players have driven each on to produce some fantastic tennis but after Roland Garros it all seemed to start taking its toll on them.

Definitely a year to remember - let's hope they can replicate this vintage in 2012

Lets clear one thing up straight away, Murray is far superior to to Tim Henman but is some way short of the class that Federer, Nadal and and Djock can produce.
He can't defend as well as Nadal and Djock but can't attack as well as Federer.
The key thing that lets Murray down in his game is his forehand. Ok, its got him to No3 in the world but when you look at the grand slam finals/semi finals he has lost, generally its the lack of a potent attacking forehand that is his missing from his game. Great serve, best backhand in the game, but forehand some way short of where it should be. Sorry Murray, this is going to be Federer's tournement.

Jonathon, can you advise us where the tournament schedule is posted? IE -- who plays who in the round robin phase and on which days.
Thanks

There is no "Top 4 players" there is Fed, Nadal, Djokovic........................ and then Murray. He is not on the same perch as them and it becomes increasingly unlikely that he ever will. Time is not on his side.

Fed is the absolute favourite for this tournament. Any other winner would be an upset.

@18

HC Titles ranking for you

1. Roger Federer 47
2. Andre Agassi 46
3. Jimmy Connors 44
4. Pete Sampras 36
5. Ivan Lendl 31
6. Stefan Edberg 23
7. John McEnroe 22
8. Michael Chang 21
9. Novak Djokovic 20

#45, I think Nadal might have thought Murray was on the same perch as him when he only got 4 points in the last set in Tokyo! The head to head numbers in #24 don't support your view either.

Interesting indication of priorities of 91Èȱ¬ sports coverage - why does the top of this blog say

Post Category: Football

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Scotland's No1 can leather the backside aff aw the players in this tournament on his day. And, as we aw ken, he has more good days than bad!

The Scottish superstar will blooter the Fed in the final. Wee Nads and Joker will been turning up purely for the dough.

You heard it here first..........

Murray cannot step it up when it matters, hes very one dimentional and is static, proven when under pressure in the "main" games. IE GS.

He may well win alot of minor tournements and sometimes his tennis is exciting and entertaining. Love watching tennis and do believe he has talent to be where he is today. Just like many others say, Nadal, Federer and Novak on 5 steps ahead of the rest of the field. Murray may well be a master at Hard Courts and 3 setters, his talents and game cannot get into 6th gear when needed to exert what needed like the mentioned above.

Reccy,

I reckon you really live up to your self penned description, as you come across as a right pap!

Your jealousy and hatred of Scotland's No1 is loud and clear. We feel your pain!!

Anyone wanting to follow the schedule, I do this every year and the ATP website direct is best, i've got this link saved to my favourites: -



As I said, you won't find out who you are watching until the morning AFTER they have played their previous games. As i'm going on Friday, I expect to find out what match i'm seeing on Thursday morning.

51.
At 09:38 17th Nov 2011, Shahoor Sur wrote:

Hatred is such a strong word, and i dont "hate" Murray at all, even someone of moderate intelligence as yourself would agree (or one would hope) that to "hate" someone without meeting them or actaully them doing anything to justify that statement would be unjustifed and injust.

What you faield to realise is that, ive actually complimented Andy, is has got talent, hes a top tennis player, but like ive explained, hes not got the 6th gear like the BIG 3. (Which is Novak, Nadal and Federer). Andy preforms well on the small stage granted, just doesnt have the kick, drive, ...... (add your own if you so wish) to produce what the big guns can.

Take care, thank you for your comment. xxx

I think in the shorter format of best of 3 sets. You could really rank Murray as number 1 in the world.

He can beat everyone over 3 sets as he has shown for the last couple of years, he beats Federer regularly in this format.

I think he can win his group undefeated. He is playing some great stuff recently (take away berdych in paris). Nobody in his group will scare him.

Would not suprise me if he dropped only 1 set in a tite encounter against Djokovic.

Murray for the title. Beating Djokovic in the final also after smothering Fed in the semi's.

I am a fan of Leander, Mahesh, Rohan and Aisam-ul-Haq Qureshi. Out here in our part of the world, these Asian stars are fondly referred to as The "Indian Express" and The "Indo-Pak Express". Many among us are looking forward to see them face each other in the Doubles Finals. Can they provide us with this little joy from far away London ? They have to play their best against the very best in the world.

Wishing the world's top singles and doubles tennis specialists success in their craft at the Barclays ATP World Tour Finals.


Dr. Cajetan Coelho

I would really like to see a Brit do well. If Murray wants to do it, I feel he will need to find a coach who can instil the "all round" game he needs and that he needs to emulate someone like Pete Sampras who I believe was probably the finest all rounder of the modern game (after the wooden racket era). I know people mention Federer but Sampras had more competition in his time with the likes of Agassi and many others. Nadal and Djock are relatively recent.

Having watched Murray play he tries to often to slog it out with baseliners who have better consistency than he does and usually are fully functional on both wings. You can see him during these games becoming quite dejected as I think he knows that with baselining, Fed, Djock and Nadal are the best around and waiting for an off day to win is not taking the bull by the horns so to speak.

I would like to see Murray aim to end points quicker with tactical play using his service weapon but also mixing in perhaps some "serve and volley" to cope with baseliners. Murray has a great serve, WHEN IT WORKS but so did Rusedski.

I believe Murray can do it in time. British players seem to mature later for some reason and if he can find the right coach to work on his clear weaknesses and he works hard on it then he could make Grand Slam finals and WIN them. If he carries on as is, then he will not, as it will take Fed, Nadal and Djock to be out of a tournment and the latter two will be around as long as Murray as they are all around the same age.

I can see him probably making the semis. Any further depends of whether Nadal and Djock are present and fit.

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

I would really like Federer to win. If not I would like anyone to win other that Andy Murray. I really hope he loses all his matches

Reccy: you dunt talk no good either...

For the record (from the winner of a solitary set in his solitary grand slam final):
"After the US Open, this was a goal for a lot of players. For us players, it is like the fifth Grand Slam. So to qualify here is important."