*Official* Tennis Thread

[superkingdave]

Yeah should be a good watch..not on at a great time for your Aussies though?

 

[Jono]

Nah but I'll wake up to watch it.

Can't believe Novak is paying 3.00 to beat Murray.

 

[superkingdave]

Murray wins in straight set, missed the first as i was out but supposedly he played well, in the second he put in a performance pretty much like he's been putting recently, workmanlike but not that great. Epic choke from Djokevic in the second set though.

Murray should go no 3 soon i reckon, especially if he starts playing as well as he was prior to his illness

 

[Magrat Garlick]

Murray should go no 3 soon i reckon, especially if he starts playing as well as he was prior to his illness

270 points between him and Novak right now. So a semi or two quarters in the masters would do it.

 

[Mister Wright]

270 points between him and Novak right now. So a semi or two quarters in the masters would do it.

It's 170 points.

Only 170 points now separate them. Murray became the first three-time winner on the ATP tour this year.

Not only is the big fella over-rated he's a chocker now. 5-3 up in the second and goes down 5-7.

 

[Anil]

right now, outside of the rankings...the best players are nadal, murray, djokovic and then federer in that order...

 

[Uppercut]

Federer is quite clearly better than Djokovic, and i'd have him over Murray every single time.

 

[luckyeddie]

Federer is quite clearly better than Djokovic, and i'd have him over Murray every single time.

Then you could quite possibly be throwing your money away - or maybe not.

In head-to-heads, Murray is 6-2 ahead of Federer, including winning their last four meetings. It is going to be an interesting few months coming up, because it is more than likely that Murray will leapfrog Djokavic in the rankings, so he will then be seeded to play Federer in semi-finals much more frequently.

There are two things in your favour, though.

1. Federer is never more dangerous than when people are writing him off
2. It's clay court season next, followed by a bit of green stuff. Although Federer despises the red surface, he is far more proficient on it than Murray has been for a couple of years. He's also picked up the deeds to Wimbledon following the retirement of Pistol Pete.

If Federer has an iffy European summer, then he could well be number 3 by the time the next Australian Open comes around.

 

[Uppercut]

Then you could quite possibly be throwing your money away - or maybe not.

In head-to-heads, Murray is 6-2 ahead of Federer, including winning their last four meetings. It is going to be an interesting few months coming up, because it is more than likely that Murray will leapfrog Djokavic in the rankings, so he will then be seeded to play Federer in semi-finals much more frequently.

There are two things in your favour, though.

1. Federer is never more dangerous than when people are writing him off
2. It's clay court season next, followed by a bit of green stuff. Although Federer despises the red surface, he is far more proficient on it than Murray has been for a couple of years. He's also picked up the deeds to Wimbledon following the retirement of Pistol Pete.

If Federer has an iffy European summer, then he could well be number 3 by the time the next Australian Open comes around.

Alright- I'd have him over Murray in a five-set match in a major tournament every single time.

It could be that he's more used to the longer fight, maybe he finds it easier to become motivated when it really matters, maybe he handles the pressure better. But i find it difficult to choose Murray over Federer in terms of quality when i can't remember him ever even equalling Roger's performance in a slam event (although i've probably forgotten a really obvious time where it happened).

 

[luckyeddie]

Alright- I'd have him over Murray in a five-set match in a major tournament every single time.

It could be that he's more used to the longer fight, maybe he finds it easier to become motivated when it really matters, maybe he handles the pressure better. But i find it difficult to choose Murray over Federer in terms of quality when i can't remember him ever even equalling Roger's performance in a slam event (although i've probably forgotten a really obvious time where it happened).

Well, seeing as Murray is still only 21, there's not too far to go back . They have only met in a slam once - last year's US Open, when Federer beat him in the final in straight sets (after Murray had blitzed Nadal in the semis). All their other meetings have been 'best of three', so there can be no argument against what you are saying, apart from 'insufficient data'.

 

[Simon]

because it is more than likely that Murray will leapfrog Djokavic in the rankings, so he will then be seeded to play Federer in semi-finals much more frequently.

Wrong. Under the ATP seeding system 3 and 4 have just as much chance of playing 1 and 2 in the semis. In the draws seed 1 is always placed at the top, seed 2 at the bottom then its randomly drawn as to which of 3 and 4 will be in the respective half of the draw.

 

[Uppercut]

Well, seeing as Murray is still only 21, there's not too far to go back . They have only met in a slam once - last year's US Open, when Federer beat him in the final in straight sets (after Murray had blitzed Nadal in the semis). All their other meetings have been 'best of three', so there can be no argument against what you are saying, apart from 'insufficient data'.

Indeed. Well, Federer's one of the greatest players ever, and having only lost in the Aussie Open in a five-set final i'm not willing to believe he's fallen so far to be a lesser player than Murray. Murray's promising, and i do really rate the guy, but he's certainly not the second best player in the world.

 

[luckyeddie]

Wrong. Under the ATP seeding system 3 and 4 have just as much chance of playing 1 and 2 in the semis. In the draws seed 1 is always placed at the top, seed 2 at the bottom then its randomly drawn as to which of 3 and 4 will be in the respective half of the draw.

Thanks for the info - I stand corrected.

 

[luckyeddie]

Indeed. Well, Federer's one of the greatest players ever, and having only lost in the Aussie Open in a five-set final i'm not willing to believe he's fallen so far to be a lesser player than Murray. Murray's promising, and i do really rate the guy, but he's certainly not the second best player in the world.

Which is why I said, in my previous post, that much depended upon how Federer performed this summer.

I'm not bigging Murray up - to me he is still 'Angus Podgorny' - and will remain so until he defeats the blancmanges from the Andromeda nebula.

 

[Jono]

Indeed. Well, Federer's one of the greatest players ever, and having only lost in the Aussie Open in a five-set final i'm not willing to believe he's fallen so far to be a lesser player than Murray. Murray's promising, and i do really rate the guy, but he's certainly not the second best player in the world.

Fed should probably win a title this year first tbh.

Its all well and good if he wants to be like the Williams and only play tournaments he really gives a **** about, but considering he won't win the French, its going to be a long time between drinks.

Then you could quite possibly be throwing your money away - or maybe not.

In head-to-heads, Murray is 6-2 ahead of Federer, including winning their last four meetings. It is going to be an interesting few months coming up, because it is more than likely that Murray will leapfrog Djokavic in the rankings, so he will then be seeded to play Federer in semi-finals much more frequently.

There are two things in your favour, though.

1. Federer is never more dangerous than when people are writing him off
2. It's clay court season next, followed by a bit of green stuff. Although Federer despises the red surface, he is far more proficient on it than Murray has been for a couple of years. He's also picked up the deeds to Wimbledon following the retirement of Pistol Pete.

If Federer has an iffy European summer, then he could well be number 3 by the time the next Australian Open comes around.

All true, but I don't think Federer despises the red surface. He only despises the red surface when Rafa is on the other end.

Federer is quite clearly better than Djokovic, and i'd have him over Murray every single time.

Both Fed and Djokovic have been far from their best this year. Pretty bad timing with Rafa awesome and Murray improving every tournament.

 

[Mister Wright]

Nah disagree. Think Djokovic has been at his best.

 

[Uppercut]

Fed should probably win a title this year first tbh.

Its all well and good if he wants to be like the Williams and only play tournaments he really gives a **** about, but considering he won't win the French, its going to be a long time between drinks.

All true, but I don't think Federer despises the red surface. He only despises the red surface when Rafa is on the other end.

Both Fed and Djokovic have been far from their best this year. Pretty bad timing with Rafa awesome and Murray improving every tournament.

Fine. Federer is miles better than Murray, there's no contest, but only when he tries.

 

[Jono]

He's not miles, he was miles.

Anyway, Roger definitely tried here

Masters Cup = big.

Reckon Roger tried against Novak too. He did chuck a hissy fit ala Wimbledon 2007:

Bit of a broken racquet.

Including his five-set loss to Rafael Nadal in last year's Wimbledon final, Federer has won just six of his past 16 matches that have gone to a deciding set.

 

[Uppercut]

Hmm. Maybe when you follow tennis very closely you give a bit more weight to minor tournaments, but i don't. To me Murray is like a promising young cricketer who has performed very well at FC level but never quite stepped up when it mattered most. Federer is a proven performer who, while clearly over the hill, is still exceptional.

 

[Jono]

Hmm. Maybe when you follow tennis very closely you give a bit more weight to minor tournaments, but i don't. To me Murray is like a promising young cricketer who has performed very well at FC level but never quite stepped up when it mattered most. Federer is a proven performer who, while clearly over the hill, is still exceptional.

LOL @ comparing FC cricket to Masters Shields. Sachin Tendulkar doesn't throw his bat in anger when he gets out in a first class match.

The Masters Cup (where the best 8 players of the year face off) isn't a 'minor' tournament. Neither is any 1000 Masters Shield tournament tbf, but if you're going to classify those as minor, fair enough. But the Masters Cup isn't. Hence why Federer dominated that tournament for so long.

Its also important to remember that Murray was sick during his loss at the Aust Open. He may have lost to Verdasco anyway, who was playing awesome, but Murray was playing a good tournament until that match.

We'll see at Wimbledon how Murray goes when the pressure is completely on him.