then 6-1, 6-1 for whoever wins

Unfortunately Djokovic is just too consistent for Karatsev to make any significant inroads against.

Just 2 unforced errors by Djoko, he is scary.

Medvedev too good.

I could honestly see Medvedev in this form smoking Djokovic in a couple of nights. He's shown he can hang with the top guys when they're at their best. Djokovic hasn't been close to his peak in this tournament and Medvedev is playing as well as we've ever seen.

Yeah, he's 9-0 in AO semi finals and 8-0 in AO finals.

She's getting old bro. But I've been impressed with her performances in Australia, until Osaka. She won't win another French Open, she probably has three more chances to win #24 (2021 Wimbledon and US Open, and 2022 Australian Open). If she gets a good draw, maybe she can go all the way, but she will probably never beat Naomi again, and I think she will continue to fall just short.

Sucks for Serena that younger Japanese-American Serena is finding her stride right now. Osaka looks really tough to beat on Hard court right now. Obviously she needs to stay healthy and in form, but she should be the solid favorite for the next 2 hard court slams.

Of course as soon as I praise him, Medvedev starts making boneheaded errors.

Hopefully the final is a cracker, with Medv winning it in 5.

The 2005 Australian Open was the first year the men's SFs were split over two evenings.

-Winner of men's final: Thu (9), Fri (7)
-Djokovic is 8-0 in finals, Thu (5) and Fri (3)
-Only the big 3 have played Fri and won the final, Safin and Wawrinka played Thu
-Nadal (2014) is the only #1 to lose a final (he played Fri, Wawrinka played Thu)
-A lower-ranked Fri winner is 0-6 against a higher-ranked Thu winner

The Big 3 are 25-1 in finals against non Big 5 players (Del Potro d. Federer, 2009 US Open)

Interesting. 2014 Rafa was injured - can't believe that was 7 years ago. Crazy.

The extra day break for being the #1 seed is a good one.

Medv has beaten 12 top 10 players in a row.

That is the only time the #1 seed has lost the final. Thu 4-0, Fri 5-1

The #1 seed has played the Friday in 2006 (1-Federer d Baghdatis), 2009 (1-Nadal d. 2-Federer), 2010 (1-Federer d. 5-Murray), 2012 (1-Djokovic d. 2-Nadal), 2014 (8-Wawrinka d. 1-Nadal) and 2019 (1-Djokovic d. 2-Nadal)

Has definitely earned his upcoming career-high ranking (#2 if he wins final, otherwise #3). Has defeated every other top 10 player in the last 4 tournaments (except for Federer).

Paris Masters
86-Anderson, 25-de Minaur, 9-Schwartzman, 17-Raonic, 7-Zverev

ATP Finals
7-Zverev, 1-Djokovic, 9-Schwartzman, 2-Nadal, 3-Thiem

ATP Cup
9-Schwartzman, 41-Nishikori, 7-Zverev, 10-Berrettini

Australian Open
Pospisil, Carballes Baena, 28 Krajinovic, McDonald, 7-Rublev, 5-Tsitsipas, 1-Djokovic?

Other streaks v top 10: https://twitter.com/TennisMyLife68/s...85002233167877. Everyone on that list has won multiple slams and is a current or former #1, other than Medvedev who has only just made his first final and has a career high ranking of 4.

So the better player usually wins AO finals. Got it.

I'd bet on Medvedev if the odds weren't so tight. I think he's figured out how to outlast the old guys.

How accurate / 'good' are the ATP and WTA rankings? I ask because I follow golf and not tennis and golf's official rankings are flawed (there is a much better ranking system out there).

I haven't followed pro golf closely for about 5 years but I recall the official world golf ranking being far better than tennis rankings. And that's during normal times. The rankings right now are completely ****ed up because they've frozen points from 2019 and 2020 for tournaments that got cancelled.

Ash Barty played 4 tournaments in 2020, won one of them (an AO warmup) and finished the year #1.

Federer is currently #5 despite having played only one tournament in 2020, a SF at AO.

The normal tennis rankings are a rolling 52 week ranking, but the points don't diminish with time. So the points from the tournament you played 52 weeks ago are worth exactly the same as the points from the tournament last week. The points from the tournament you played 53 weeks ago are worth nothing. The golf rankings, at least the last time I paid attention to them, were a rolling 2 year system with points lowering in value every 13 weeks.

There are a few different people who maintain tennis elo ratings, for example on tennisabstract.com which are clearly more accurate for determining the best players (and surface specific) but are not perfect and have their own problems.

Super psyched for the Djokovic-Medvedev final. Could be one of the best in years and an all-time great. I'm gonna bet on Djokovic until someone can beat him but I don't feel great about it.

All Rafa fans should become huge Medvedev fans. If Djokovic doesn't pass Rafa for all time major wins it's gonna be because of Medvedev. He might be able to block him at future Aussie and U.S. Opens.

Fed is gonna be stuck at 20. I don't believe Rafa will win anything other than the French Open from now on. My guess is he'll win 2, maybe 3 more of them. That puts him at 22 or 23 majors. Tomorrow night will tell a lot about whether Novak can get past that. If Djokovic loses tomorrow I would think it's very likely that Rafa will end up with the most majors.

Last I saw Medvedev was in 2019 US Open final against Nadal. he was ok then, but he is obviously playing at a much higher level now. He took care of Tsitsipas easily, and Rublev actually played quite well but seemed to have no chance.

Djokovic is a slight favorite but I don't see how he can beat Medvedev unless he tries some kind of mind games like a fake injury time out.

I also got a kick out of Medvedev reacting to the crowd (1:18) when he broke Tsitsipas at 5-5 with that incredible backhand down-the-line winner. It seemed he held back his emotions the entire match with crowd almost 100% behind Tsitsipas, until that point.

Ranks should be done on money.

Same way they do it in darts/snooker etc

That way the more prestigious the tournament the more points. Would be a fairer more reflective results.

Winners of slams currently get:

AO - A$2,750,000 - $2.16m
FO - €2,200,000 - $2.66m
WIM - £2,350,000 - $3.3m
US - $3,800,000

They'd probably have to agree to match the US. The 1000 events have higher prizes in the states as well.

Unsurprisingly, Osaka defeats Brady in 2 sets. Players to win their first 4 slam finals:

7 - Roger Federer
6 - Monica Seles
4 - NAOMI OSAKA

Melbourne has a very large Greek community

thx for this detailed reply and the elo link

Not sure if anyone noticed it, but the final point against Tsitsipas Medvedev's 1st serve was 201, 2nd serve 200.

Yeah, this is gonna be sweet. I think Medvedev has to be considered the best hard court player at the moment, he got an easy draw here, and there's no questions about his health. On the other hand, betting against Vax at AO is like betting against Tom Brady in the super bowl, so I'm abstaining from this one.

I also love the contrast in how they react to the crowd. Vax is so desperate to be loved and admired. He takes it as a personal insult and gets mega butthurt if anyone dares to root for the other guy. Med OTOH, embraces the villian role, and then after winning the match, thanks the crowd for their animosity. Love it!

Another big question with regard to the big 3 major totals is the emergence of Sinner. He's a lock to win double digit majors assuming no career threatening injuries. It'll be interesting to see how he matches up against the other contenders. I think Vax would be the toughest matchup for him but you never really know until you see them play a real match. At this point, I don't see Thiem ever beating Nadal at RG.