Offline
THE RULES
1. Pick quarterfinalists, semifinalists, finalists, and champions for both ATP and WTA draws. You will receive 7.5 points for each correct quarterfinalist, 5 points for each correct semifinalist and finalist, and 20 points for each correct champion. Due to the uncertainty involved, all champions are worth full points.
2. SUBSTITUTE PICK: Pick a player from each draw to replace one of your quarterfinalists. If this player makes the quarters, they will take the place of whomever you picked in that section of the draw
3. BIGGEST LOSER: pick the highest seed that will lose in the earliest round from each draw. The player must be a top-16 seed. You get 5 points if your seed is the highest to lose and 2 points if your seed falls in the same round as the highest seed to lose.
EXTRAS
***Unseeded quarterfinalists are worth an extra half point for every seed they take out en route.
***WTF bonus: if you have a pick that makes it to the quarterfinals that no one else made (not even as a substitute pick), you'll gain an extra 5 points for it. If there are only two contestants, then the WTF bonus is not in effect.
Offline
Okay, let's go for picks!
Men
Quarterfinals
Murray (Pouille) v. Federer
Wawrinka v. Tsonga
Zverev v. Raonic
Thiem v. Djokovic
Semis
Federer v. Wawrinka
Zverev v. Djokovic
Final
Federer d. Zverev
BL: Cilic
Women
Quarterfinals
Kerber v. Suarez Navarro
Halep v. Svitolina
Pliskova v. Radwanska
Wozniacki v. Serena
Semifinals
Kerber v. Svitolina
Pliskova v. Serena
Final
Kerber d. Pliskova
BL: Muguruza
Offline
MEN
Quarterfinals
Murray over Nishikori (Federer)
Sock over Wawrinka
Raonic over Nadal
Djokovic over Sousa
Semifinals
Murray over Sock
Djokovic over Raonic
Final
Djokovic over Murray 6-3, 5-7, 6-3, 3-6, 6-4
Biggest loser: Monfils
Quarterfinals
Kerber over Suarez Navarro
Halep over Svitolina
Pliskova over Radwanska
Konta (Cibulkova) over Serena
Semifinals
Kerber over Halep
Konta over Pliskova
Final
Konta over Kerber 6-4, 7-5
Biggest loser: Muguruza
Offline
You should throw yourself some points for picking Cilic as biggest loser even though Pouille lost in the first round.
Evans, the player who beat Cilic, was someone I tabbed for future greatness (or rather, goodness) when he reached the third round at the U.S. Open as a qualifier about four years ago. Then he disappeared, having zero good results anywhere, and I wondered if I had been delusional. The last six months or so have confirmed I was not crazy, at least on that front. I love watching the little guy play. He had match point against Wawrinka at the U.S. Open last fall and lost a long point, changing the entire course of the event, as it turned out. Wawrinka never came close to losing the rest of the tournament.
Offline
I think I will toss myself a point or two for getting Cilic. I think amending the rules to give that to the person who picks the best is reasonable. Of course, you
And, Djokovic's out! Wasn't expecting that. I didn't have him winning, but going deep was a no-brainer. Has he hit the point where he's just going to decline? Or do you think this is just a blip?
Offline
While Federer was very scratchy in his first two matches, I think it might actually help him at the Australian Open. Basically, he (like Serena) is no longer consistent enough to play well for 7 straight matches. So, by having his "bad" matches early on, he can keep up his quality of play for the rest of the tournament. He shellacked Berdych. We'll see what he has for Nishikori, but I'm not sure Nishikori is the kind of player that can really hurt him.
Offline
Djokovic's slump is just a blip. Obviously I don't know that for sure, but he has too much game still to decline. The loss to Istomin was a long time coming. He had gotten lucky in a lot of close matches over the years and finally did not come up with the goods to put away an inferior player at closing time.
Plus, Istomin was terrific. I understand why people are saying it might have been the biggest upset ever, but Istomin is a lot better than his ranking and Djokovic has been much less aggressive for a while now. To me, it doesn't rate with Rosol, a hack, beating Nadal at Wimbledon. People forget Nadal made the Wimbledon final five consecutive times before losing to Rosol in the 2nd round. HIs history on grass since then has changed the perception.
Offline
About Dan Evans, is he the new Jesse Levine? Other than being a funches favorite, both are somewhat undersized, talented shotmakers.
Offline
Dan Evans is a lot better than Levine, but yeah, I really like the comparison because they do have a lot of similarities I had not thought of.
The primary difference is although both have tremendous hands, Levine did not have enough power to beat big hitters. Evans has a lot of power despite his size. HIs good wins already are considerably better than anything Levine did before injuries derailed his career.
Offline
Well, this is certainly a wacky tournament. Murray going down to Zverev wouldn't be too much a surprise, but not the Zverev he lost to.
Coco is the kind of player that could beat Kerber if she's on. The surprise is that she was able to play consistently well and it was in straight sets. But, because I love bringing the phrase out, fuck Uncle Kiki, Coco's in the quarterfinals of a slam again.