Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

French Open 2009

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    French Open 2009

    Who is picking the tunes? Spacey electro, this is awesome.

    Comment


      #52
      French Open 2009

      The Greatest Player Of All Time.

      Nearly, nearly. But not quite. Beyond McEnroe, Aggasi, Sampras, etc. Only Laver and Borg compare.

      I think he needs to do two things. Turn the tables on Nadal in a slam final other than grass and/or beat Nadal in the French (preferably, but not neccesarily, in the final). And also do what Borg, Laver and Nadal have done, win on clay and grass back-to-back. Which should happen in four weeks time.

      Odd day for the French tournament, though. It has been far and away the biggest slam for the last four years, because of this just completed story. It won't be any more.

      Comment


        #53
        French Open 2009

        As for today, it seemed to be decided on the serve. Federer, especially in the first set, seemed to know exactly where Soderling was going before he even hit it. Federer, in contrast, in that decisive second set tie-break, produced an ace on every single point he served.

        Comment


          #54
          French Open 2009

          I missed this historic event as my Mrs had me put the new bed up (reinforcing the phobia I have for allen keys). Federer finished Soderling off quicker than I managed to put the bloody thing up. For that alone, he's the greatest to me.

          Ok, so it wasn't against Nadal. But Nadal wasn't injured, he had an off day and his elimination was not only a shock, it was a sensation. Soderling himself was no slouch, overcoming Gonzalez with as much ease as he did against Nadal, to prove that this win was no fluke. Maybe Soderling froze on the big occasion, who knows, but I'll reserve judgment until I've seen the final (I'm dying to watch that tie-break now).

          There were also some decent clay court players in Federer's way, not least Del Potro, who could pose a threat to Nadal in years to come. That was Federer's biggest game on clay, no question.

          The difference with Nadal is that when fully fit and fully focused he's irresistable. But when he has a slightly sluggish day, he's there for the taking from anyone in the top 32. Federer is meant to be past his best, yet he's still won 2 slams during his so called fall from grace. This reinforces the fact that Federer on an off day over five sets is still too much for anyone, except Nadal of course. That's probably one thing (but not the only one) that makes him 'the greatest'.

          Comment


            #55
            French Open 2009

            Janik wrote:
            The Greatest Player Of All Time.

            Nearly, nearly. But not quite. Beyond McEnroe, Aggasi, Sampras, etc. Only Laver and Borg compare.

            I think he needs to do two things. Turn the tables on Nadal in a slam final other than grass and/or beat Nadal in the French (preferably, but not neccesarily, in the final). And also do what Borg, Laver and Nadal have done, win on clay and grass back-to-back. Which should happen in four weeks time.

            Odd day for the French tournament, though. It has been far and away the biggest slam for the last four years, because of this just completed story. It won't be any more.
            Well...

            I would rather he beat someone who was better, but you know, fuck it: its done now. Let him fall into insignificance... (yes, I know that isnt going to happen)

            If he can beat Nadal at Wimbledon, he WILL be the best, now (and then). If not, then he will just be another hairy arsed tennis player with loads of money and lots of titles, who no-one (other than me: I had £50 at 11/2) cares about.

            If he can beat Nadal in any slam final, he is the best.

            Comment


              #56
              French Open 2009

              And also do what Borg, Laver and Nadal have done, win on clay and grass back-to-back.
              Yeah, but neither Borg or Nadal did what Federer achieved at the other end of that spectrum, winning on grass then winning at Flushing Meadow on either grass or the hard court.

              Laver's from a different era and could have done what Federer's done, but no-one asked him to. But Rod was apparently quoted last week saying that he felt it was a privelege - for him - to even be mentioned in the same breath as Federer.

              Borg never won at Flushing Meadow, even when it was grass (in his day!), let alone hard court. Nadal's not even come close.

              Federer's surely the greatest ever, as things stand.

              Comment


                #57
                French Open 2009

                ykika:

                I pretend to know about tennis etc, and, I do.

                You said the magic word (about Nadal): irrestible

                If Nancy Drew can beat all the odds in a slam final against Mr Hairy arsed Mallorcan, then he wins the title of the best ever.

                I suspect not.

                There are too many good players who can beat him (Fed), without actually winning anything. Soderling, today was himself... not good. He couldnt hit the service bow with a cows banjo, and therein lay the game. (Yes, del Potro, COULD, but give it time... he will win a slam, Murray may not)

                Now, Federer, is magnificent. Totally and utterly.

                (grumble, grumble)

                Comment


                  #58
                  French Open 2009

                  If he can beat Nadal in any slam final, he is the best.
                  How about the Wimbledon finals of 2006 and 2007?

                  Comment


                    #59
                    French Open 2009

                    Federer is one of those apparently soulless ruthless sportsmen with very little personality that I normally hate but has won me over by being absolutely fantastic.

                    Statistically, he is the best player ever but a further Grand Slam win against Nadal rather than A.N. other would nail it beyond doubt and he's only 27

                    I still see Nadal equalling it though

                    Comment


                      #60
                      French Open 2009

                      What's Federer's record? He's reachead the Semi- Finals at least in the last 22 or so majors. That is just magnificent consistency.

                      At the very top of their games, Nadal is probably just that little bit better, but as they said on the radio today, Nadal's game is all out. He has to push to the limit to make it work. Admittedly, what makes him exceptional is that he manages to do it so consistently and for so long now.

                      Federer is the master at coming up with plan B, and plan C, plan D even. Nadal probably lost to Soderling because his knees were in agony. And who was there to capitalise? Mr. Consistency. He didn't miss his chance. He's always there. That's what makes him so great.(and he's looked after his knees).

                      Nadal is good enough to join them in the pantheon. There's no doubt about that, but at the moment, the only one who can hold a card to Federer is Laver. What would he have achieved without the wilderness years in the mid 60s?

                      Comment


                        #61
                        French Open 2009

                        Bored of Education wrote:
                        Federer is one of those apparently soulless ruthless sportsmen with very little personality that I normally hate
                        That's a bit harsh. Which tennis players do you think have a personality then?

                        Comment


                          #62
                          French Open 2009

                          It's probably just about impossible to really judge the great players we've never seen - Laver, Emerson, Tilden and co.

                          An attempt at a top 10 since the 1970s:

                          1. Federer
                          2. Borg
                          3. Sampras
                          4. Lendl
                          5. McEnroe
                          6. Connors
                          7. Agassi
                          8. Nadal (with lots of potential to rise obviously)
                          9. Wilander
                          10. Edberg

                          The top 3 (not necessarily in that order) are surely unarguable. Likewise, the next 4 but you could argue about the order all day. Becker is probably the only omission of any real note much as I like Vilas.

                          Comment


                            #63
                            French Open 2009

                            Federer is one of those apparently soulless ruthless sportsmen with very little personality that I normally hate
                            Federer has no soul? His reaction yesterday seems to fatally injure that notion.

                            He comes across as a fundamentally decent chap. Much as I enjoyed the antics of the showmen of the past, I find his humility very attractive.

                            Comment


                              #64
                              French Open 2009

                              Doesnt matter about 'no soul': class will out.

                              However, because Federer goes over two generations (bear with me), then he has to continue to beat the number 1 at this moment.

                              Result wise, he is the best. Just (Sampras wasnt quite, and not because of the lack of French, just because, he occasionally bottled it).

                              Nadal is a physical specimen, and Federer is a skilled artisan, and thats possibly why the mens tennis at the moment, is as good, if not better, than its ever been, with both the power and agility, as well as the touch and sublime skill. I hope to non-specific-deity, that Nadal gets to Wimbledon in one piece.

                              Apologies earlier to Federer (like he is listening), but Soderling wasnt even playing at his best. I will take my £55 + stake, and try and ignore it, but I would have preferred a better final (in both ladies, and mens finals).

                              One thing (to Mr Arab): we cant know everyone, but we do know that physicality makes the better players now, MUCH better than the good players then. Its unfortunate, but if you are not 6' something now, then you are pretty fucked. Which is a shame for the Rochus brothers, who try their nuts off in every tournament, and then get slaughtered by speed, power, and ... well, touch, but that relates to the previous speed and power getting to the ball in the first place.

                              G-man: Federer is a nice man. Humble (as Nadal), intuitive (where tennis is going, including his own), and perhaps, only perhaps, that is likely to be his claim to fame, other than breaking every record ever.

                              Is there such a thing as too nice?

                              Doesnt matter. Nadal will pull out of Wimbledon, AFTER the seedings, and then it will be a free for all, with Federer beating Roddick (depending on the draw) in the final.

                              Comment


                                #65
                                French Open 2009

                                If Nadal does pull out of Wimbledon, Andy Murray will be seeded 2, and if the draw pits him against the number 4 seed in his half of the draw that will be Del Potro.

                                Murray could be a good bet for Wimbledon in the absence of Nadal.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X