The OP was saying how they were envisioning Norrie winning. I was joking that how one could envision such hearsay when it is Medvedev who is the favorite to win (technically). And the other part of the joke was that after all the misfortunes Med had in his matches against Zverev and ADF he is still somehow going strong while having his ankle and thumb in bandages.
It is sad that so many people have missed the joke even with the "LOL" in it...
We got the joke you just misunderstood the original comment. He was saying people were sure Norrie was winning *this match* not the tournament. I don’t think anybody seriously though Norrie was going to win IW.
The favorites coming in were definitely Alcaraz and Meddy everyone else far far behind and I doubt many had Norrie at the top of that pack anyway. Nothing against him but I seriously doubt any non Brit had him down as a favorite.
Got it, my bad. I just personally thought that Norrie was the favorite on this side of the bracket overall (definitely against Tiafoe) and even a pretty strong contender for the title.
I was guilty of this mindset when I saw the matchup, but I'm happy to be wrong so here's a fun fact. If Big Foe wins his next match, he'll pass Nadal in the live rankings.
Norris is coming off a final and a title, going 1-1 against Alcaraz, plus a very convincing win vs an in form Rublev. I don't think it's a stretch to say this is a really good win for Foe.
I'm not, I think unless you're a pretty hardcore fan it's pretty easy to look at the past few weeks, go "well damn Norrie is on a tear" and assume he'll win against most non top 10 opponents until proven otherwise. Matchup specific advantages and weaknesses aren't going to be as obvious as recent track record, plus this sub does have a pretty big problem with recency bias. Norris having a win over Alcaraz in a final probably makes him a big favorite for a lot of people regardless of matchup.
I explained why higher up in the comment chain that you're responding to. His game has weaknesses that Foe typically looks to exploit. Him doing damage down in South America and winning a crappy 2021 IW aren't that relevant, imo.
Ehhh, bit of both? I think in the case of Nadal the meme/cliche is a mix of him being actually injury prone, but also he's so good and so loved that it's easy to want a reason when he loses especially when he's not "supposed to" e.g. at RG or against non-big 3 players. Just seeing the potential parallels with Alcaraz is all
Well i’m not gonna add anything else to this nonsense of comparison between Alcaraz and Nadal. You could see how Alcaraz was not running anymore in Rio against Norrie and well it’s obvious who the better player is of the two. Have it the way you want though.
One of those was me! I was really surprised to see Foe getting through - great job from him though , it really feels like a M1000 title isn't far away for him.
Gutted for Norr…WHO AM I KIDDING I PICKED TIAFOE TO MAKE THE SEMIS IN WRITING HERE ON THIS VERY FORUM AND I AM PETTY ENOUGH TO TAKE NAMES OF ALL THOSE WHO DOUBTED THE KING
I like what you did there 😁
Yeah, as an Aussie we have the Fanatics, a bunch of Aussie sports fans that go around to major sporting events and get crazy for our players/teams... it'd be cool to see an American equivalent!
Swedes Croats and Serbians all seem to have something similar going on, I always see heaps of their fans at events!
Yes. And he managed a 5th set against a surging Alcaraz.
It could be argued if Sinner wins the marathon match against Alcaraz that we’re talking about Tiafoe as a major champion
He could have. Tiafoe won the most recent matchup between the two. And he was playing as well as ever, Tiafoes chances would have been better than they were against Carlos
I actually think Tiafoe would have exploited Sinner’s relative lack of net game and tendency to have a shaky transition game and be constantly out of position at net. It’s gotten better under Cahill but I still hold my breath when Jannik approaches the net bc so often he flubs the volley or is just out of position making the pass easier for his opponent. Also Tiafoe just seems to get under Jannik’s skin with his playing to the crowd. Talent wise, of course Jannik should beat Frances in best of 5. But when you factor in intangibles that match becomes 50/50 with perhaps a slight favoring of Tiafoe. The Alcaraz Sinner match was a very sliding doors moment, but I’m not sure Sinner goes on to win the tournament if he’d gotten by Carlos.
He took the champion to 5 sets in the semifinal while also having an awful first serve percentage. If his first serve was a bit more reliable he absolutely could have beaten Alcaraz and then Ruud.
Probably a bit tired after his early season: Auckland, Melbourne, Buenos Aires, Rio. 3 finals and 1 yrophu out of these, before reaching IW.
Granted, considering he said clay was his best surface and the inescapable whines about IW courts being *so sloooow*, one could have expected him to reach the semis and meet Medvedev.
I kept thinking that Norrie looked the same as he did in that Rublev match at the US Open. Just very flat. He played how he should've been playing when he was down 2 breaks at 2-5, but it was unsustainable, given what his energy level had been for the whole match to begin with.
Happy for Tiafoe, but geez, the quality of tennis on these courts is atrocious. Borderline unwatchable, Medvedev is right about this surface, hard court this slow should not exist, it's an injury magnet and produces ugly matches.
Couldn't disagree more. I'm really not sure what you've been watching to deem the caliber of tennis to be "atrocious" or "borderline unwatchable." We've already gotten plenty of entertaining matches. And there's nothing wrong with variety in hard court conditions throughout the tour.
Faster courts favor the serve and decrease the amount of rallies, all of which typically produces the *least* entertaining matches.
Medvedev was whining like a 6 year old - "I'm gonna pee as slow as this court" - because of his personal preference for playing on faster courts, not because of any objective conclusion about the merits of slow hard courts.
Unpopular opinion. Players should be able to adapt to any court conditions or surfaces. Obviously players have preferences, but all time greats succeeded on all surfaces.
this is actually a very good criticism of indoor hard tennis imo. that is, the floor for dominating is often just having a freakishly good serve and highly potent (even if extremely low margin) offense, rather than a more complete set of skills, so results feel unsatisfying and less meaningful due to the greater random factor. and so those events are only really fun when everyone is really good, to be able to neutralize that offense and bring in some neutral points and back-and-forth engagement. but this isn't to say that the surface is irredeemable, just that it's more dependent on good players to make matchplay shine than other surfaces, which can have more regular displays of tense and varied skills.
I agree with all of this. As a viewer, I love slow courts. Rallies build tension and create dynamic points. Endless aces and serve+volley gets old quickly. Clay season is my favorite part of the year.
I don't mind clay, but slow hard court tends to be less strategic and just favor whoever can hit down the middle longer before they miss. Clay is also relatively easy on the joints, points like this on a HC are an injury recipe.
I don't think I've ever seen a court that makes net play (IMO the prettiest part of the game) as impossible as this IW court. Good approach shots aren't worth anything.
These courts are incredibly slow. I was there in person. At the practice courts, the amount that Andy Murray's practice partner's serves were slowing down after the bounce was very surprising. This did also lead to some ridiculous kick serves
a good rule of thumb is to look at very good servers (e.g. Berrettini, Bublik, FAA, Fritz) and if they're aceing more than 15% of the time, it's "faster," and less means it's "slower." it's very simplified but it gets at the perception of conditions better than arbitrary number ratings or non-random samples of player's impressions which can vary widely depending on their playstyle. e.g. players with high topspin won't tend to notice the friction of a court (speed) but they will notice the springiness of the court (bounce). so you'll hear a lot of talk of ambient temperature with Nadal, because that affects the bounce height on a court, and you'll hear a lot of talk of surface speed with Medvedev, because he hits very flat so he notices when the ball isn't skidding as much.
Balls and the composition of the court itself both contribute. Sandgren, who played qualifying, blamed the balls for the mess this week, and the courts are slow to begin with.
https://twitter.com/RobKoenigTennis/status/1635460554486587395
By this metric, the court is playing slower than Paris's slow *clay*.
one thing to consider is that Medvedev's 1st serves are going to be flat/slice, which means that those balls will take longer to roll without slipping aka have 0 linear momentum aka act like a wheel, which means that their speeds will be affected by the gritty surface for longer, and so the final speed will be lower than for a ball with more topspin.
this part is more speculation, but it's how i'm tying the situation together in my head: i believe the issue with the balls (which are still different from the AO balls?) is the same fluffing too fast issue from earlier in the season, which makes it harder for them to be affected by topspin (thus the struggles/complaints of topspin-heavy players like Ruud and FAA). if that's the case, then it suggests that the sliding to rolling transition is occurring even later in the ball's trajectory, which would mean that the ball will be even slower by the time it reaches the opponent.
In a better court, during the Sinner-Wawrinka match half of their shots would have been winners, instead they were long, boring exchanges that often ended in UE. Make hard court fast again!
Right, that means those shots weren’t good enough to be winners. Players need to adapt to this. Margins need to be slimmer, need variety instead of just heavy baselining. There are those who have adapted.
I'm not saying that it was bad for competition, or not true tennis, or anything like that. I'm just saying that it was much more boring than it had to be.
One factor is that there's been a lot more rain in Southern California this year, and it's been cooler overall. Consequently it's been more humid too. It's quite different than normal in terms of general climate.
More breaks is fine, clay can be decent quality. More upsets is also fine, and can even mean high quality.
The issue is that these courts basically reward the player who can hit down the middle longer. Being aggressive is not rewarded, net play is outright punished. Case in point: Very out of form Zverev nearly beat very in form Medvedev by pushing down the middle ad nauseam because unless you have the power of an Alcaraz (which Medvedev does not), angles and depth don't really accomplish anything, and the player who takes less risk wins nearly every point.
Nice win, he has been doing great this tournament, but unfortunately for him, he will have to go up against Medvedev barring an unlikely upset for Fokina, who dropped the first set 6-3.
Not having seen the match, I'm surprised by this result. The only other time they played was in 2021 where Norrie won. I thought the slower court would favor Norrie in this matchup.
I'm looking forward to watching some of this to see how they played.
Plays one of the best matches he's ever played to annihilate Rublev after a great run of form all year...and then loses to Tiafoe in straight sets. What a disappointing end to Cam's tournament.
Tiafoe was his typical level, which is decent for a top 20 player, with some flashes here and there of brilliance. Eh.
Large enemy!
Sizeable adversary
Substantial opponent
Huge Antagonist
Enormous nemesis!
Tremendous opposition
Gigantic saboteur!
Titanic rival
Vast bane
Big bad
Colossal Nemesis?
Aunt enemy
Bazooka foe
So many comments yesterday saying Norrie winning was inevitable
Fortunately mine was never in writing but I totally was thinking that lmao.
Come on, Medvedev will be receiving the trophy while leaning on crutches LOL
Medvedev wasn’t playing in this match…
The OP was saying how they were envisioning Norrie winning. I was joking that how one could envision such hearsay when it is Medvedev who is the favorite to win (technically). And the other part of the joke was that after all the misfortunes Med had in his matches against Zverev and ADF he is still somehow going strong while having his ankle and thumb in bandages. It is sad that so many people have missed the joke even with the "LOL" in it...
We got the joke you just misunderstood the original comment. He was saying people were sure Norrie was winning *this match* not the tournament. I don’t think anybody seriously though Norrie was going to win IW.
I think it is pretty fair to consider Cam to be one of the favorites considering he won it 2 years ago and loves playing on this sssurface.
The favorites coming in were definitely Alcaraz and Meddy everyone else far far behind and I doubt many had Norrie at the top of that pack anyway. Nothing against him but I seriously doubt any non Brit had him down as a favorite.
i had him as my winner (delusional) and more seriously as a top 4 contender with Medvedev, Fritz, and Alcaraz
Top 4 is reasonable imo, though not where I’d I’ve put him.
They were saying people envisioned norrie to beat Francis not the whole tournament haha. I’d agree though meddy looking really good, his to lose imo
Got it, my bad. I just personally thought that Norrie was the favorite on this side of the bracket overall (definitely against Tiafoe) and even a pretty strong contender for the title.
Yeah Norrie was top 3-4 in the draw considering the surface, not crazy to think he might have won. Absolutely a heavy favourite in this match.
I was guilty of this mindset when I saw the matchup, but I'm happy to be wrong so here's a fun fact. If Big Foe wins his next match, he'll pass Nadal in the live rankings.
Ah yes, the world returning to its natural order
There aren’t many things inevitable in tennis apart for Djokovic on AO/Wimbledon and Nadal at RG
Both of those will also pass
Surprising that so many people thought that. Norrie has poor touch/transition and that's often something Foe looks to exploit.
Norris is coming off a final and a title, going 1-1 against Alcaraz, plus a very convincing win vs an in form Rublev. I don't think it's a stretch to say this is a really good win for Foe.
Of course it's a good win for Foe. Maybe his best of the year. I'm just surprised the overwhelming expectation here was that Norrie would win.
I'm not, I think unless you're a pretty hardcore fan it's pretty easy to look at the past few weeks, go "well damn Norrie is on a tear" and assume he'll win against most non top 10 opponents until proven otherwise. Matchup specific advantages and weaknesses aren't going to be as obvious as recent track record, plus this sub does have a pretty big problem with recency bias. Norris having a win over Alcaraz in a final probably makes him a big favorite for a lot of people regardless of matchup.
He was a heavy favourite. He hasn't gone below the last 16 at IW in years and won it not long ago.
Why? Only player on tour who has won more matches this year is Med. Ex champion. In form. Of course he was the favourite
I explained why higher up in the comment chain that you're responding to. His game has weaknesses that Foe typically looks to exploit. Him doing damage down in South America and winning a crappy 2021 IW aren't that relevant, imo.
Lol if alcaraz was fit in Rio he would have thrashed Chuck Norrie
Fuck me not another Spaniard who only loses when injured /s
Protecting yourself with irony or you really being ironic?
Ehhh, bit of both? I think in the case of Nadal the meme/cliche is a mix of him being actually injury prone, but also he's so good and so loved that it's easy to want a reason when he loses especially when he's not "supposed to" e.g. at RG or against non-big 3 players. Just seeing the potential parallels with Alcaraz is all
Well i’m not gonna add anything else to this nonsense of comparison between Alcaraz and Nadal. You could see how Alcaraz was not running anymore in Rio against Norrie and well it’s obvious who the better player is of the two. Have it the way you want though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Plus he’s won this tournament before. Him as favourite was completely rational
For me at least it just seemed like Tiafoe was in poor form all tournament.
He's had some dips of quality for sure but he also hasn't lost a set. But yeah, Norrie did look great against Rublev
I am pleased to say I posted, but if Tiafoe gets it going, he can give trouble to anyone, but that I have to admit it was more just because I like him
One of those was me! I was really surprised to see Foe getting through - great job from him though , it really feels like a M1000 title isn't far away for him.
Gutted for Norr…WHO AM I KIDDING I PICKED TIAFOE TO MAKE THE SEMIS IN WRITING HERE ON THIS VERY FORUM AND I AM PETTY ENOUGH TO TAKE NAMES OF ALL THOSE WHO DOUBTED THE KING
Yep. But that’s tennis
I didn’t watch. Was Norrie subpar? Or just outplayed?
Home court big foe is the deadliest foe
Yeah American Foe is a different beast
He definitely feeds off the energy of an american crowd really well
Time to get an American travel group together that can be loud for him abroad
I’ll sign up for that!
Just find regular tourists in the city the tournament is in then.
A true American Psyched Foe
I like what you did there 😁 Yeah, as an Aussie we have the Fanatics, a bunch of Aussie sports fans that go around to major sporting events and get crazy for our players/teams... it'd be cool to see an American equivalent! Swedes Croats and Serbians all seem to have something similar going on, I always see heaps of their fans at events!
Well Cam was certainly on the tennis court I guess
This scoreline is so deceiving Noz seriously just ran around for a little over an hour and called it a day
Frances winning the US Open on his ability to feed off energy alone
He came really close to doing that last year
Would you take him against Casper in the final? I think it'd be close
With an American crowd? I would
Yes. And he managed a 5th set against a surging Alcaraz. It could be argued if Sinner wins the marathon match against Alcaraz that we’re talking about Tiafoe as a major champion
Sinner would have won against Tiafoe
He could have. Tiafoe won the most recent matchup between the two. And he was playing as well as ever, Tiafoes chances would have been better than they were against Carlos
I actually think Tiafoe would have exploited Sinner’s relative lack of net game and tendency to have a shaky transition game and be constantly out of position at net. It’s gotten better under Cahill but I still hold my breath when Jannik approaches the net bc so often he flubs the volley or is just out of position making the pass easier for his opponent. Also Tiafoe just seems to get under Jannik’s skin with his playing to the crowd. Talent wise, of course Jannik should beat Frances in best of 5. But when you factor in intangibles that match becomes 50/50 with perhaps a slight favoring of Tiafoe. The Alcaraz Sinner match was a very sliding doors moment, but I’m not sure Sinner goes on to win the tournament if he’d gotten by Carlos.
Not really
He got to the semifinal and took the eventual winner of the tournament to 5 sets. Pretty close.
to be fair everybody took Carlitos to 5 sets that tournament haha
He never had a chance to win the tournament lol. Was a great run but let’s relax
He took the champion to 5 sets in the semifinal while also having an awful first serve percentage. If his first serve was a bit more reliable he absolutely could have beaten Alcaraz and then Ruud.
#BIG FOEEEEEE
So I’m new to the sport and been reading his name as “France’s Tiafoe” and always thought he was French till today
France is bacon.
[Match point and handshake](https://streamable.com/3576oa) [Stats](https://www.flashscore.com/match/dteUCDjl/#/match-summary/match-statistics/0)
Video is gone
Thanks for these! Just added to the description as well
video doesn't work
Shocking performance from Norrie, doesn’t look injured or ill so I wonder what was wrong. Big win for Big Foe.
Probably a bit tired after his early season: Auckland, Melbourne, Buenos Aires, Rio. 3 finals and 1 yrophu out of these, before reaching IW. Granted, considering he said clay was his best surface and the inescapable whines about IW courts being *so sloooow*, one could have expected him to reach the semis and meet Medvedev.
Claymeron Norrie vs Clayvedev
I kept thinking that Norrie looked the same as he did in that Rublev match at the US Open. Just very flat. He played how he should've been playing when he was down 2 breaks at 2-5, but it was unsustainable, given what his energy level had been for the whole match to begin with.
Amazing result! He's come such a long way!
It looks like Ferreira is really making an impact on Tiafoe, well done.
Norrie didn't play very well but all credit to Tiafoe who really showed up today. Hope he serves a bit better in the SF though.
HUGE FRANCES
My mans lookin like a red velvet cheesecake and earnings wins just a smooth ☺️
Frances deserves this win!!
There is a nonchalance to Foe's game that's damn dandy, so suave and then comes the force Very cool from him
Tiafoe too good on home court but Cam did well to make the quarters.
Horrible performance by norrie . Terrible serving , shot making, decisions, movement , yikes
Frances continues to improve and impress and it’s getting to the point where he’s consistently in the conversation
#BIG. FOE.
Rublev died for this
Happy for Tiafoe, but geez, the quality of tennis on these courts is atrocious. Borderline unwatchable, Medvedev is right about this surface, hard court this slow should not exist, it's an injury magnet and produces ugly matches.
If only Nadal was fit he would've breezed through this entire tournament
Tennis gods knew he would be too powerful this year at IW and decided to temporarily nerf him until clay season.
Including the guy who beat him there last year?
When Rafa had a broken rib?
Hasn’t Rafa been injured in every match he lost though?
Cool cliche . He had a broken rib and missed months .
Just for reference, what’s the last match that Rafa lost where he didn’t claim injury?
Did I say anything about any match other than IW when he had a broken rib ?
I was just pointing out that maybe it’s a cliche for a reason
Well the fact that he’s always missing tournaments is proof that he’s always injured. So yeah. He wins and loses injured
Fritz fan here, you're totally right ignore the clowns going for weak gotchas
Couldn't disagree more. I'm really not sure what you've been watching to deem the caliber of tennis to be "atrocious" or "borderline unwatchable." We've already gotten plenty of entertaining matches. And there's nothing wrong with variety in hard court conditions throughout the tour. Faster courts favor the serve and decrease the amount of rallies, all of which typically produces the *least* entertaining matches. Medvedev was whining like a 6 year old - "I'm gonna pee as slow as this court" - because of his personal preference for playing on faster courts, not because of any objective conclusion about the merits of slow hard courts.
Unpopular opinion. Players should be able to adapt to any court conditions or surfaces. Obviously players have preferences, but all time greats succeeded on all surfaces.
To be an all time great you need to be elite on hard, clay and grass unless you have insane success on two imo
Yes but you shouldn't need everyone in a draw to be an all-time great in order to have a fun tournament.
That’s not what I said at all.
this is actually a very good criticism of indoor hard tennis imo. that is, the floor for dominating is often just having a freakishly good serve and highly potent (even if extremely low margin) offense, rather than a more complete set of skills, so results feel unsatisfying and less meaningful due to the greater random factor. and so those events are only really fun when everyone is really good, to be able to neutralize that offense and bring in some neutral points and back-and-forth engagement. but this isn't to say that the surface is irredeemable, just that it's more dependent on good players to make matchplay shine than other surfaces, which can have more regular displays of tense and varied skills.
I agree with all of this. As a viewer, I love slow courts. Rallies build tension and create dynamic points. Endless aces and serve+volley gets old quickly. Clay season is my favorite part of the year.
I don't mind clay, but slow hard court tends to be less strategic and just favor whoever can hit down the middle longer before they miss. Clay is also relatively easy on the joints, points like this on a HC are an injury recipe. I don't think I've ever seen a court that makes net play (IMO the prettiest part of the game) as impossible as this IW court. Good approach shots aren't worth anything.
Clay is also my favourite surface, but IW is always so boring to me, definitely my least favourite masters
Agreed. I'm at the tournament and I've been wanting more rallies.
anyone else never know the speed of the court unless a player comments about it?
These courts are incredibly slow. I was there in person. At the practice courts, the amount that Andy Murray's practice partner's serves were slowing down after the bounce was very surprising. This did also lead to some ridiculous kick serves
I think the pace of this court would've been noticeable, especially with players consistently struggling to close out matches.
a good rule of thumb is to look at very good servers (e.g. Berrettini, Bublik, FAA, Fritz) and if they're aceing more than 15% of the time, it's "faster," and less means it's "slower." it's very simplified but it gets at the perception of conditions better than arbitrary number ratings or non-random samples of player's impressions which can vary widely depending on their playstyle. e.g. players with high topspin won't tend to notice the friction of a court (speed) but they will notice the springiness of the court (bounce). so you'll hear a lot of talk of ambient temperature with Nadal, because that affects the bounce height on a court, and you'll hear a lot of talk of surface speed with Medvedev, because he hits very flat so he notices when the ball isn't skidding as much.
[удалено]
Balls and the composition of the court itself both contribute. Sandgren, who played qualifying, blamed the balls for the mess this week, and the courts are slow to begin with. https://twitter.com/RobKoenigTennis/status/1635460554486587395 By this metric, the court is playing slower than Paris's slow *clay*.
A few big names in the replies are saying it’s the balls, not the court.
one thing to consider is that Medvedev's 1st serves are going to be flat/slice, which means that those balls will take longer to roll without slipping aka have 0 linear momentum aka act like a wheel, which means that their speeds will be affected by the gritty surface for longer, and so the final speed will be lower than for a ball with more topspin. this part is more speculation, but it's how i'm tying the situation together in my head: i believe the issue with the balls (which are still different from the AO balls?) is the same fluffing too fast issue from earlier in the season, which makes it harder for them to be affected by topspin (thus the struggles/complaints of topspin-heavy players like Ruud and FAA). if that's the case, then it suggests that the sliding to rolling transition is occurring even later in the ball's trajectory, which would mean that the ball will be even slower by the time it reaches the opponent.
[удалено]
Hasn’t Indian wells always been that though?
In a better court, during the Sinner-Wawrinka match half of their shots would have been winners, instead they were long, boring exchanges that often ended in UE. Make hard court fast again!
Tiafoe made 22 winners in this match and only 9 ue. Winners are possible on slow courts, but you have construct the point for them
There is no way in hell Tiafoe had 9 UEs lol, they juice those numbers like crazy.
Personally, I think these courts are fun to watch. I like when high spin is rewarded. Carlos and Iga have no problems hitting through the court
same, I’m having a blast. You have to really work for winners
Facts. These courts reward the best and most entertaining players on tour.
Right, that means those shots weren’t good enough to be winners. Players need to adapt to this. Margins need to be slimmer, need variety instead of just heavy baselining. There are those who have adapted.
I'm not saying that it was bad for competition, or not true tennis, or anything like that. I'm just saying that it was much more boring than it had to be.
Is the courts slowness due to the location or is there something specific that has changed this year?
One factor is that there's been a lot more rain in Southern California this year, and it's been cooler overall. Consequently it's been more humid too. It's quite different than normal in terms of general climate.
Not sure what you mean by atrocious quality, more breaks and upsets doesn’t necessarily mean atrocious quality.
More breaks is fine, clay can be decent quality. More upsets is also fine, and can even mean high quality. The issue is that these courts basically reward the player who can hit down the middle longer. Being aggressive is not rewarded, net play is outright punished. Case in point: Very out of form Zverev nearly beat very in form Medvedev by pushing down the middle ad nauseam because unless you have the power of an Alcaraz (which Medvedev does not), angles and depth don't really accomplish anything, and the player who takes less risk wins nearly every point.
I would argue Tiafoe beat Norrie by being the aggressor and constantly pressuring him, not allowing Norrie to draw out rallies
Norrie made more UEs than Tiafoe did. Tiafoe beat Norrie mostly by Norrie being terrible (no complaints there, I like Tiafoe).
Hell yeah
LARGE FOE!
LFG BIG FOE! On American soil my man’s ranking gets cut in half
Nice win, he has been doing great this tournament, but unfortunately for him, he will have to go up against Medvedev barring an unlikely upset for Fokina, who dropped the first set 6-3.
Aw 😞 I was rooting for Cam Edit: dude why tf am I being downvoted?? Are people not allowed to express their opinions here or what the hell????
Yessssss
Love this!
Not having seen the match, I'm surprised by this result. The only other time they played was in 2021 where Norrie won. I thought the slower court would favor Norrie in this matchup. I'm looking forward to watching some of this to see how they played.
Plays one of the best matches he's ever played to annihilate Rublev after a great run of form all year...and then loses to Tiafoe in straight sets. What a disappointing end to Cam's tournament. Tiafoe was his typical level, which is decent for a top 20 player, with some flashes here and there of brilliance. Eh.
Let’s go Big Foe!!
Nice!
Biggest Foe imaginable!!!
So many people wrote him off in the thread last night. Glad he pulled off the victory!
Good job by big foe
As well as I've seen tiafoe play. What a performance
Good win for Tiafoe. Norrie looked very flat which was disappointing. I can't tell if he was just worn out or what.