How much longer for Nadal and Murray?

[Nearly Sane]

With Nadal playing tomorrow for the first time this year, given the injuries, there's always the possibility that it will be the last time.

Murray's injury not needing surgery means there's a chance he might have a farewell at Wimbledon now but even that is questionable.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/68820823


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/68822113

[Nearly Sane]

Nadal wins

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/68826952

[Nearly Sane]

And Nadal loses. I can see he might be attracted to play past the French Open but it would seem appropriate if he retired there, given his record.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/68837705

[Nearly Sane]

Not confirmed if Nadal will play at the French but


'Rafael Nadal at Roland-Garros:

14 titles.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWLWWWWWWW.

112-3 W/L.

97.3% win rate.

Unbeaten in finals.

14 wins vs Federer and Djokovic.

5-peated between 2010 and 2014.

Only ever taken to the fifth set 3 times, out of total 115 matches.

Won it 4x without dropping a set (2008, 2010, 2017, 2020).

Won 38 sets in a row between 2016 and 2018.

Won it while dropping just 35 games throughout (2017).

Longest time between first and most recent Grand Slam title for any player ever, at 17 years.

Won his first at 19 (2005), his 14th at 36 (2022)'

[Nearly Sane]

Nadal v Zverev, and Murray v Wawrinka at the French.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cgee0e00qw7o

[Nearly Sane]

And maybe Djokovic might not be far behind

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cn00g2x3peyo

[Nearly Sane]

And both Murray and Nadal out.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c1wwzw2pnygo

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c722ez0r3pzo

[Nearly Sane]

And maybe Djokovic might not be far behind

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/cn00g2x3peyo

Djokovic withdraws through injury. Still hasn't won a tournament this year, and will lose his number 1 ranking to Sinner at the end of the French. I think the one thing he will target now is the Olympics, and I can see him retiring after that win or lose.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c7221343y0lo

[Nearly Sane]

Murray retires from match at Queens. Must be doubtful for Wimbledon. No Nadal there, and very likely no Djokovic.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tennis/breakiing-andy-murray-retires-queens-33066157

[Nearly Sane]

Murray retires from match at Queens. Must be doubtful for Wimbledon. No Nadal there, and very likely no Djokovic.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/tennis/breakiing-andy-murray-retires-queens-33066157

And a procedure on his back? Wimbledon looks unlikely. Even Olympics seems a strain.

[Nearly Sane]

Murray pulls out of singles at Wimbledon


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c1we7xjjvq8o

[Nearly Sane]

Though as well as the doubles, he will be in SteveH's Mick Stubbles. The pairing drawn to play Murray/Raducanu in the first round are going to be thrust onto Centre/Number 1 Court.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c3gwej8p625o

[ProfessorDavey]

Murray pulls out of singles at Wimbledon


https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/articles/c1we7xjjvq8o

And decides to compete in mixed doubles with Raducanu. All seems a bit weird to me - if this is a serious competition how can you decide who your partner is going to be a couple of days before the competition begins!!

[Nearly Sane]

And decides to compete in mixed doubles with Raducanu. All seems a bit weird to me - if this is a serious competition how can you decide who your partner is going to be a couple of days before the competition begins!!

Mixed doubles is played so infrequently that it's just the way stuff works.

[ProfessorDavey]

Mixed doubles is played so infrequently that it's just the way stuff works.

Really?

I thought all Grand Slam tournaments included mixed doubles competitions, so surely you'd expect pairings to get together with the expectation of playing at tournaments throughout the year and possibly remaining doubles partners over several years. Unless it is treated as a bit of a joke.

Oh and I love the 'precision' of your explanation - that it's just the way stuff works

[Nearly Sane]

Really?

I thought all Grand Slam tournaments included mixed doubles competitions, so surely you'd expect pairings to get together with the expectation of playing at tournaments throughout the year and possibly remaining doubles partners over several years. Unless it is treated as a bit of a joke.

Oh and I love the 'precision' of your explanation - that it's just the way stuff works

Yeah, so that's four times a year. Thank you for illustrating the point.

[Nearly Sane]

So it will be Arevalo and Zhang, who look a good pairing to me, up against Murray and Raducanu


https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/draws/mixed-doubles

[ProfessorDavey]

Yeah, so that's four times a year. Thank you for illustrating the point.

Not really.

These are the four biggest and most prestigious tournaments of the year. So surely all the more reason (if you are taking them seriously) that you'd want a stable partnership rather than making a decision who you are going to play with as a partner on the second day of the tournament.

[Nearly Sane]

Not really.

These are the four biggest and most prestigious tournaments of the year. So surely all the more reason (if you are taking them seriously) that you'd want a stable partnership rather than making a decision who you are going to play with as a partner on the second day of the tournament.

Well, they are but it is still only 4 times a year. That the they are the most prestigious tournaments is not because of mixed doubles, rather mixed doubles exists there because they are the grand slams. It's a good chance for men and women doubles players to earn more money but given that there are so few chances outside of the slams to play together, even if you wanted to, the partnerships tend to be malleable.

See draw, I put up in my previous post.

Note that something isn't as entirely serious as singles doesn't mean it's just a joke but that's your false dichotomy.

[ProfessorDavey]

Well, they are but it is still only 4 times a year. That the they are the most prestigious tournaments is not because of mixed doubles, rather mixed doubles exists there because they are the grand slams. It's a good chance for men and women doubles players to earn more money but given that there are so few chances outside of the slams to play together, even if you wanted to, the partnerships tend to be malleable.

See draw, I put up in my previous post.

Note that something isn't as entirely serious as singles doesn't mean it's just a joke but that's your false dichotomy.

I think if you are basically pairing up with a partner, who you've never played with before, after the tournament has actually started then on the spectrum from serious to joke it is clearly towards the non serious end.

And again your argument doesn't really make sense - if it is an opportunity to make money and gain some prestige then why on earth wouldn't you put together a serious partnership that you intend to last over many tournaments and over many years. There are players who have done exactly this in doubles, including in mixed doubles.

Rather this smack of one of them bumping into the other on the first day of the tournament and going 'hey, good to see you - do you fancy a match at the end of the week'.

[Nearly Sane]

I think if you are basically pairing up with a partner, who you've never played with before, after the tournament has actually started then on the spectrum from serious to joke it is clearly towards the non serious end.

And again your argument doesn't really make sense - if it is an opportunity to make money and gain some prestige then why on earth wouldn't you put together a serious partnership that you intend to last over many tournaments and over many years. There are players who have done exactly this in doubles, including in mixed doubles.

Rather this smack of one of them bumping into the other on the first day of the tournament and going 'hey, good to see you - do you fancy a match at the end of the week'.

Good to see you have moved from your dichotomy. Pity you can't admit that is what you did.

The reason why the partnerships can be late is exactly covered. The possibilities are far from endless. Match ups are rare.

[ProfessorDavey]

The reason why the partnerships can be late is exactly covered.

So do you think that their partnership - presumably formed once the tournament had actually started, will have longevity lasting beyond this single tournament itself?

If not then this is clearly - hey lets get together and play a match or two, have a bit of fun for a couple of days.

[Nearly Sane]

So do you think that their partnership - presumably formed once the tournament had actually started, will have longevity lasting beyond this single tournament itself?

If not then this is clearly - hey lets get together and play a match or two, have a bit of fun for a couple of days.

No, why would I think something is entirely opposed to what I wrote,and what is evidenced by the partnership you are having a conniption about?

Something can be not entirely serious and yet not just a joke. Your own posts cover that. If you want to have a wee fight with yourself while you disagree with you, then have at you.

[ProfessorDavey]

No, why would I think something is entirely opposed to what I wrote,and what is evidenced by the partnership you are having a conniption about?

Something can be not entirely serious and yet not just a joke. Your own posts cover that. If you want to have a wee fight with yourself while you disagree with you, then have at you.

Very nice verbose hyperbole NS. But as so often, completely missing the mark.

I'm not having a fit or a rage - merely noting that that they aren't taking this seriously - having a bit of fun - hence my comment "a bit of a joke". Noting that you removed the "a bit" which places it on a spectrum from serious to complete joke but further from the serious end of that spectrum.

But being more serious - I would have thought that of all the forms of tennis - mixed doubles is surely the most technically challenging, involving both the need for team-work between the partnership (that's necessary in all doubles) but also careful tactics to deal with the likely power mismatch between the female player on one team and the male player on the other. So if you were serious about it (they clearly aren't by the way) then you'd want to spend quite a lot of time working on that partnership and those tactics - as some longstanding mixed doubles pairings have done in the past.

[Nearly Sane]

Very nice verbose hyperbole NS. But as so often, completely missing the mark.

I'm not having a fit or a rage - merely noting that that they aren't taking this seriously - having a bit of fun - hence my comment "a bit of a joke". Noting that you removed the "a bit" which places it on a spectrum from serious to complete joke but further from the serious end of that spectrum.

But being more serious - I would have thought that of all the forms of tennis - mixed doubles is surely the most technically challenging, involving both the need for team-work between the partnership (that's necessary in all doubles) but also careful tactics to deal with the likely power mismatch between the female player on one team and the male player on the other. So if you were serious about it (they clearly aren't by the way) then you'd want to spend quite a lot of time working on that partnership and those tactics - as some longstanding mixed doubles pairings have done in the past.

K