US Open starts on Monday (Tuesday 1.00am AEST)

... Sam Stosur's win against Victoria Azarenka a valuable boost on eve of US Open

That was a great result. That’s a really good feeling lifting a winner’s trophy again,” Stosur said of her first title since the US Open in 2011. “I managed to put consecutive matches back-to-back and have two top-five wins, which I hadn’t had in a while in the one week. “I beat Azarenka for the first time, so there was lots of positives to come out of that week.”

Mens and Ladies seeds ...

1. Novak Djokovic
2. Rafael Nadal
3. Andy Murray
4. David Ferrer
5. Tomáš Berdych
6. Juan Martín del Potro
7. Roger Federer
8. Richard Gasquet
9. Stanislas Wawrinka
10. Milos Raonic
11. Kei Nishikori
12. Tommy Haas
13. John Isner
14. Jerzy Janowicz
15. Nicolás Almagro
16. Fabio Fognini

1. Serena Williams
2. Victoria Azarenka
3. Agnieszka Radwańska
4. Sara Errani
5. Li Na
6. Caroline Wozniacki
7. Petra Kvitová
8. Angelique Kerber
9. Jelena Janković
10. Roberta Vinci
11. Samantha Stosur
12. Kirsten Flipkens
13. Ana Ivanovic
14. Maria Kirilenko
15. Sloane Stephens
16. Sabine Lisicki

Aussie open starts on Monday - here are the matchups if all the top 8 seeds in both the Mens and the Ladies advance to the quarter finals (you can click on any of players listed below if you want to visit their Wikipedia page) ...

Mens ...

(1) Rafael Nadal vs (5) Juan Martín del Potro

(4) Andy Murray vs (6) Roger Federer

(3) David Ferrer vs (7) Tomáš Berdych

(2) Novak Djokovic vs (8) Stanislas Wawrinka

... and if the 4 top seeds advance to the semi-finals, here are the matchups ...

(1) Rafael Nadal vs (4) Andy Murray

(2) Novak Djokovic vs (3) David Ferrer

Ladies ...

(1) Serena Williams vs (7) Sara Errani

(4) Li Na vs (6) Petra Kvitová

(3) Maria Sharapova vs (8) Jelena Janković

(2) Victoria Azarenka vs (5) Agnieszka Radwańska

Again, if the 4 top seeds advance to the semi finals, here are the matchups ...

(1) Serena Williams vs (4) Li Na

(2) Victoria Azarenka vs (3) Maria Sharapova

All the seedings for the Open

As for the notable Aussies, Sam Stosur is in Serena Williams' quarter of the draw, Ashleigh Barty is up against Serena in the first round whilst Casey Dellacqua is in Sara Errani's quarter of the draw ... Bernard Tomic plays Rafael Nadal first up whilst Lleyton Hewitt is also in Nadal's quarter of the draw.

For what it's worth, here are my tips for both finals (winners in dark italics)

Rafael Nadal vs Novak Djokovic

Victoria Azarenka vs Li Na

.

Edited January 11, 201411 yr by Macca

Kyrgios looks an absolute ripper at the ripe old age of 18. Star in the making.

Kyrgios looks an absolute ripper at the ripe old age of 18. Star in the making.

doesn't he. let's hope so

It's funny, I saw it as Roger making a lot of unforced errors (albeit in his attempt to hit the far corners or near the sidelines) Wouldn't be ruling a line through him yet, though if Murray wins on Sunday night we might start seeing a small gap between the top 2 and the next 2 (but probably mainly on hard surfaces) A big '4' would be fantastic for the sport. Not sure about Tsonga - maybe someone else will emerge in the next year or so.

Nadal seems to get a few injuries but he's still only 26. The next slam is the French which is Rafa's favourite. After that it's Wimbledon (and we know how good Roger is on grass) . Still a fair bit to play out 'dl' and the final on Sunday will tell us a lot (especially if Murray wins)

You may well have been right last year Macca.

as we now know Roger was injured last year & was feeling down & loss of confidence. it seems he has taken steps to overcome with doctors 7 Re inspiration; looks to have changed has game style somewhat & with Edberg.

also I think I heard them say the courts are quicker? could this allow more serve & volley?\

I like Nadal, but his hand looks woeful.

You may well have been right last year Macca. as we now know Roger was injured last year & was feeling down & loss of confidence. it seems he has taken steps to overcome with doctors 7 Re inspiration; looks to have changed has game style somewhat & with Edberg. also I think I heard them say the courts are quicker? could this allow more serve & volley?\ I like Nadal, but his hand looks woeful.

Glad to see I didn't embarrass myself at least! (one year on)

Looking forward to tonight's clash.

Glad to see I didn't embarrass myself at least! (one year on)

Looking forward to tonight's clash.

no you didn't, but you wouldn't anyway. for having a thought.

Raffa took it.

Roger looks like he needs more time with the bigger racket, that has more power. he over-hit early on, past the baseline. he'll need time to adjust to what he's been doing for so many years now.

no you didn't, but you wouldn't anyway. for having a thought.

Raffa took it.

Roger looks like he needs more time with the bigger racket, that has more power. he over-hit early on, past the baseline. he'll need time to adjust to what he's been doing for so many years now.

Champions can often find that last gear towards the end of their career but Roger didn't have it tonight. He did defeat Andy Murray in the quarters although Murray may not have been at his best in that match.

I did hear Jim Courier talk about Roger's new racquet and how it could have a big effect on his touch. It's a brave move to change things up so late in his career but I guess it's a case of nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Federer will probably gear himself for Wimbledon now - hopefully the Wimbledon officials won't put Nadal, Murray and Federer in one side of the draw like what has happened in the Aussie Open.

Full credit to Rafa tonight, he was very aggressive throughout the match and to win in straight sets was quite impressive. Wawrinka awaits ... I've watched a few of Stan's matches and what does stand out in particular is that he showed great form against Djokovic.

Nadal may not have it all his way in the final although you'd reckon Rafa's experience will be telling.

Looking forward to the Ladies final tomorrow night - Li Na against the "pocket rocket", Dominika Cibulkova. Apparently, 116 million people in China watched Li Na win her first and only major back in 2011 (the French Open) so it's fair to say she's got a reasonable amount of support

She's my tip to win tomorrow night (now!) but I don't know a great deal about Cibulkova.

Edited January 24, 201411 yr by Macca

Champions can often find that last gear towards the end of their career but Roger didn't have it tonight. He did defeat Andy Murray in the quarters although Murray may not have been at his best in that match.

I did hear Jim Courier talk about Roger's new racquet and how it could have a big effect on his touch. It's a brave move to change things up so late in his career but I guess it's a case of nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Federer will probably gear himself for Wimbledon now - hopefully the Wimbledon officials won't put Nadal, Murray and Federer in one side of the draw like what has happened in the Aussie Open.

Full credit to Rafa tonight, he was very aggressive throughout the match and to win in straight sets was quite impressive. Wawrinka awaits ... I've watched a few of Stan's matches and what does stand out in particular is that he showed great form against Djokovic.

Nadal may not have it all his way in the final although you'd reckon Rafa's experience will be telling.

Looking forward to the Ladies final tomorrow night - Li Na against the "pocket rocket", Dominika Cibulkova. Apparently, 116 million people in China watched Li Na win her first and only major back in 2011 (the French Open) so it's fair to say she's got a reasonable amount of support

She's my tip to win tomorrow night (now!) but I don't know a great deal about Cibulkova.

totally agree.

I think Rogers lacking penetration. he doesn't have the power to match the big hitters & servers. hence the racket. but also he looks to be wanting to try to get to the net more, enter Edberg. Wimbledon beckers.

wawrinka looks more powerful but on the other night, seems lack the class to hit the winning shots into the corners, or on the baseline.

I hope Li Yeah takes it. got to be positive...

So I have to ask.

Did anyone watch that abomination called fast 4 tennis on monday night?

So I have to ask.

Did anyone watch that abomination called fast 4 tennis on monday night?

Caught glimpses of it. Didn't make much of an impact on me.

So I have to ask.

Did anyone watch that abomination called fast 4 tennis on monday night?

Didn't mind it as I find long drawn out 5 setters a tad boring.

The purists will dislike it in the same manner as traditional cricket lovers don't appreciate 20/20.

Whilst on tennis, Sam Stosur is a concern as she continues to blow opportunities.

Didn't mind it as I find long drawn out 5 setters a tad boring.

The purists will dislike it in the same manner as traditional cricket lovers don't appreciate 20/20.

Whilst on tennis, Sam Stosur is a concern as she continues to blow opportunities.

It's interesting that ch9 are the broadcast partners and they're showing the games in prime time ... if it was hidden away on one of the cable channels then one might not take much notice.

The other thing to consider is the money on offer to the players ... they're going to need the big guns involved and the tournaments are going to need to have some meaning to the public & the players.

Like anything new, it's a wait and see process and a lot will depend on ratings numbers - apparently the numbers were quite good (all things considered)

Edited January 14, 201510 yr by Macca

Didn't mind it as I find long drawn out 5 setters a tad boring.

The purists will dislike it in the same manner as traditional cricket lovers don't appreciate 20/20.

Whilst on tennis, Sam Stosur is a concern as she continues to blow opportunities.

It's interesting that ch9 are the broadcast partners and they're showing the games in prime time ... if it was hidden away on one of the cable channels then one might not take much notice.

The other thing to consider is the money on offer to the players ... they're going to need the big guns involved and the tournaments are going to need to have some meaning to the public & the players.

Like anything new, it's a wait and see process and a lot will depend on ratings numbers - apparently the numbers were quite good (all things considered)

The problem that I have with it is I see it as something that isn't necessary.

At least with cricket, the shortest format of the game before T20 came along went for 7.5 - 8 hours.

I understand the Federer v Hewitt game went for just under 2 hours as a best of 5 sets. Well that's about the same amount of time a best of 3 sets match goes for, so for the people who don't like 5 set matches, why don't they just avoid Grand Slams and Davis Cup?

Yeah, it'll take some time before it has me convinced.

The problem that I have with it is I see it as something that isn't necessary.

At least with cricket, the shortest format of the game before T20 came along went for 7.5 - 8 hours.

I understand the Federer v Hewitt game went for just under 2 hours as a best of 5 sets. Well that's about the same amount of time a best of 3 sets match goes for, so for the people who don't like 5 set matches, why don't they just avoid Grand Slams and Davis Cup?

Yeah, it'll take some time before it has me convinced.

You may or not be part of the target audience, TD. They would have done a few surveys you'd reckon - data bases of tennis goers and the like. There was a fair crowd there and they seemed quite enthused by the whole concept. It's on again tonight but ch9 got lucky on Monday night with the t20 game on ch10 being interrupted by rain.

I've no idea whether it will work or not but I watched the last hour of the match and I didn't "dislike" it. The people launching this brand of tennis will probably see my attitude as a win. I much prefer traditional tennis with those 5 set marathons being favs of mine.

One thing I do know is that a popular view is a popular view. If it finds an audience, so be it.

Edited January 14, 201510 yr by Macca

I didn't see it but if the only difference is 4-game sets rather than 6 games, I can't see what the appeal will be, particularly if as TD says some matches still go for 2+ hours.

T20 is successful not just because its shorter, but because it's a different product to 50over cricket - in tactics, execution, wow factor and all the gimmicks.

Other than time, what distinguishes fast4tennis from normal tennis?

I didn't see it but if the only difference is 4-game sets rather than 6 games, I can't see what the appeal will be, particularly if as TD says some matches still go for 2+ hours.

T20 is successful not just because its shorter, but because it's a different product to 50over cricket - in tactics, execution, wow factor and all the gimmicks.

Other than time, what distinguishes fast4tennis from normal tennis?

That's the angle ... time. And that time factor might prove to be a reason why it may become quite popular

Only time will tell Gv :-)

I didn't see it but if the only difference is 4-game sets rather than 6 games, I can't see what the appeal will be, particularly if as TD says some matches still go for 2+ hours.

T20 is successful not just because its shorter, but because it's a different product to 50over cricket - in tactics, execution, wow factor and all the gimmicks.

Other than time, what distinguishes fast4tennis from normal tennis?

There are a number of time saving factors other than the game reduction Grapeviney, the main ones are -

No advantage scores after deuce, sudden death point decides the game.

Tie breaker after score reaches 3 all which is first to 5 points.

No sitting down at change of ends with maximum 60 secs between games.

Didn't mind it as I find long drawn out 5 setters a tad boring.

The purists will dislike it in the same manner as traditional cricket lovers don't appreciate 20/20.

Whilst on tennis, Sam Stosur is a concern as she continues to blow opportunities.

Most of the memorable matches over my years of watching tennis have been "drawn out 5 setters". Except McEnroe's dissection of Connors in a Wimbledon final which was like watching an artist combined with a surgeon. Superb exhibition.

I had a look tonight and found it a bit like dancing with your sister. The steps are the same but it doesn't quite feel right.

I take your view that a lot of cricket purists don't like 20/20. I do. I also loved the recent Test series against India which was often riveting.

20/20 is almost a different game. It's not just the time constraints it's the tactics, the approach to batting, the balance of attack & defence. Plus you've got a heap blokes trying to hoik it out of the ground - great fun. But very different to Test cricket

From what I saw tonight there is no difference in the game being played in Fast4Tennis. The approach is the same, the tactics are the same, the shot selection is the same. The only difference is the scoring. On court, it's just tennis.

I guess I'm with Grapeviney on this - I don't see a need for it or a market that is demanding it. Time will tell - which is kinda ironic in a way

Most of the memorable matches over my years of watching tennis have been "drawn out 5 setters". Except McEnroe's dissection of Connors in a Wimbledon final which was like watching an artist combined with a surgeon. Superb exhibition.

I had a look tonight and found it a bit like dancing with your sister. The steps are the same but it doesn't quite feel right.

I take your view that a lot of cricket purists don't like 20/20. I do. I also loved the recent Test series against India which was often riveting.

20/20 is almost a different game. It's not just the time constraints it's the tactics, the approach to batting, the balance of attack & defence. Plus you've got a heap blokes trying to hoik it out of the ground - great fun. But very different to Test cricket

From what I saw tonight there is no difference in the game being played in Fast4Tennis. The approach is the same, the tactics are the same, the shot selection is the same. The only difference is the scoring. On court, it's just tennis.

I guess I'm with Grapeviney on this - I don't see a need for it or a market that is demanding it. Time will tell - which is kinda ironic in a way

Where there is a dollar to be made then there's a good chance that that dollar will almost certainly be made ... especially if this new version of tennis is appreciated by both males and females.

We probably never had a need for t20 cricket either but that version of cricket is here to stay. Michael Vaughan said the other day that we might look back in 10-15 years time and note that t20 cricket "saved" cricket. A big statement but who's to say he's wrong?

Back on the Fast4 Tennis ... I'm left wondering how much Federer & Nadal were paid for their time ... the old adage of "you've got to spend money to make money" might have been in operation. Apparently last night's matches were in aid of the Rafa Nadal Foundation (which assists socially disadvantaged youth)

The other bit that I found interesting is that I believe that Tennis Australia (the organisers of this venture) have patented the whole concept. If they can lock in most of the current day big guns I can see it possibly working.

Edited January 15, 201510 yr by Macca

The Australian Open starts on Monday and here's how things would play out if all the highest ranked seeds survived to the quarter finals, semi finals & the final.

Men's Quarter Finals

1. Novak Djokovic vs 8. Milos Raonic

4. Stan Wawrinka vs 5. Kei Nishikori

3. Rafael Nadal vs 7. Tomáš Berdych

2. Roger Federer vs 6. Andy Murray

Men's Semi Finals

1. Novak Djokovic vs 4. Stan Wawrinka

2. Roger Federer vs 3. Rafael Nadal

Men's Final

1. Novak Djokovic vs 2. Roger Federer

Women's Quarter Finals

1. Serena Williams vs 8. Caroline Wozniacki

4. Petra Kvitová vs 6. Agnieszka Radwańska

3. Simona Halep vs 5. Ana Ivanovic

2. Maria Sharapova vs 7. Eugenie Bouchard

Women's Semi Finals

1. Serena Williams vs 4. Petra Kvitová

2. Maria Sharapova vs 3. Simona Halep

Women's Final

1. Serena Williams vs 2. Maria Sharapova

All the Men's seeds

All the Women's seeds

17. Carla Suárez Navarro 18. Venus Williams 19. Alizé Cornet 20. Samantha Stosur 21. Peng Shuai 22. Karolína Plíšková 23. Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova 24. Garbiñe Muguruza 25. Barbora Záhlavová-Strýcová 26. Elina Svitolina 27. Svetlana Kuznetsova 28. Sabine Lisicki 29. Casey Dellacqua 30. Varvara Lepchenko 31. Zarina Diyas 32. Belinda Bencic

That's a distrubing list. Some absolute tennis journey women including the two Aussies. I thought Venus gave it away years ago? Nope top 20. Suarez Navarro actually looks like she's from the 1980's. She looks ripe to beaten by Steffie Graf.

Garbine Muguruza is the one to watch from that list. Could go deep.

Dimitroff in Fed and Murray's side of the draw. If he's in form this could be the year he beats both of them and makes it through to the semi at least.

I like Nadal over Berdych as long as Rafa is fit he's too mentally strong.

Stan gets a pretty strong draw to get back to the semi's.

Can't see the Djoker being trouble by Raonic. The unseeded Del Potro or Gael Monfils might cause more trouble in that quarter. Those latter two could have a heck of a second round match.

Great effort from Kokkinakos tonight. Watching the other Special K in the 5th now.

The Fanatics give me the "Edgar Britts". The are worse than those stupid faux Swedish supporters from the '80s

Edited January 19, 201510 yr by Go the Biff

Special K just got up, he is great to watch. Entertainment guaranteed.