| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/18/2009 3:04:06 PM | Hello all.
Wimbers is just around the corner, ready your strawberries and cream for the biggest tennis tournament of the season.
I'd like to know who you all tip for the crown? With Rafa struggling for fitness It looks like the Fed Express could clear up again.
I'll be routing for Murray though 
Thoughts? | |
|
gx86
|
Joined: 1/24/2009
Msg: 2 | |
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/20/2009 11:52:10 AM | | No Nadal this year by the looks of it... Federer most likely to win again I'd say | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/20/2009 4:23:27 PM | | Would that be 16 wins in Grand Slam Events if Federer wins it? | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/21/2009 11:40:29 AM | This will be his 15th if he wins it and to be honest I can't see past him.
He took a rest after the French, so he'll be fresh for it, and he's a natural grass player so won't really need any help making the transition. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/21/2009 6:30:10 PM | I am a sucker for history being made, so I will be rooting for Federer to claim his 15th Grand Slam 
However, I won't be too disappointed if Murray turns him over in the final either  | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/21/2009 7:32:09 PM | Nadal is out. So it will be either between Federer and Murray.
However players like Djokovic, Tsonga, Soderling, Verdasco, Del Potro and Roddick can all be dark horses too. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/21/2009 11:48:48 PM | | hey tennis peeple.... are there like any profesional ping pong player or professional badmintion players that make the transition to tennis? i think they'd make the best volley players on the planet. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/22/2009 5:00:44 PM |
hey tennis peeple.... are there like any profesional ping pong player or professional badmintion players that make the transition to tennis? i think they'd make the best volley players on the planet. Transition to professional tennis? Impossible. But it would probably help them become decent recreational players faster.
Fed is the favorite obviously. Murray's game should translate so darn well to grass, and he won his first grass tournament last week, but not sure if he's a real threat to Fed just yet. His draw looks really really good, though, and if he can get through the early rounds and become energized by the public support and excitement that is sure to reach fever pitch if he gets to quarters... he's the second favorite. His biggest test could be Roddick.
Will be interesting to see how Del Potro does on grass. He's got a big serve and can flatten out his groundies, no reason why he shouldn't do well on grass, especially now that the grass has been slowed down to such an extent that some people say the US Open is the fastest of the Slams.
Fed's draw looks pretty good. Out of his half, Haas and Tsonga could pose the most problems. When he's on, Tsonga can do it all offensively. Fed usually does very well against power hitters, he struggles more against guys who have complete games, so not really worried about Karlovic and Soderling. If he gets really hot, a guy like Mardy Fish can give anybody problems on grass, but that's highly unlikely. Just not worried about Novak for some reason. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/23/2009 1:57:46 PM | Novak didn't look conincing at all in his match against Benneteau and who knows, if Benneteau hadn't taken that awkward slip in the third set it might've been different.
Murray also didn't look that convincing today his second serve was woeful, he'll definately need to step up a gear if he even wants to make it to the quarters. Credit to Kendrick though he made it difficult and played well.
Right now I can't see past Fed though, Del Proto looks to have made an eas transition to grass so he could be a threat but we'll have to see.... | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/24/2009 11:34:58 AM | ^ I thought that was a good first match for Murray. He's handling the pressure (the pressure of all of Great Britain hoping he'll be the first British Wimbledon champion in over 70 years) well, but can't imagine he didn't feel some nerves playing his first Wimbledon since he became an elite player, on Centre Court, against a guy who almost beat Nadal (last year?). Kendrick was playing good. He was gambling and it was paying off for a while. Murray faced a bit of adversity, came through, and that's good. He can relax a bit.
Kendrick was playing pretty good. He was attacking at unpredictable moments, serving really well, and not letting Andy Murray get a rhythm. It was really his only chance. He's not going to beat Andy by being patient and playing smarter, his only real chance was going for broke with his big serve and forehand. And it was working for a while, and probably would have worked against anybody (for a while) the way he was executing. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/25/2009 1:59:40 AM | Yes it was a decent first match for him, however it looks like he's going to really struggle against the big servers who have a decent return. I wouldn't be surprised if Roddick or Del potro turn him over.
From what I have seen over the course of his career he seems to handle pressure well and has th emental toughness to cope with the rpessure of being the only male brit left in Wimbledon. Remeber last year when he came back from 2 sets down agaionst gasquet? | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/25/2009 2:11:09 AM | I probably didn't explain myself well... what I mean by it was a good match for him is that he had a first round match that tested his nerves. If he had an easy triple bagel match over Kendrick, and he DID beat him 0 and 0 last time they played on grass, he could have got complacent and got caught later. Kendrick is a dangerous journeyman pro but a journeyman pro nonetheless, and now that Murray has overcome a match where he played poorly mostly due to nerves, he'll be better prepared and more confident when he runs into adversity against better players in later rounds.
I'm not saying he played good. I think he played about 75%. I'm saying it was good to be mentally tested early and to overcome it, because physically he has the game to win it all. It's a matter of overcoming nerves and this first round match was good preparation for withstanding the greater mental tests he will face later. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/26/2009 11:07:15 AM | Fair dos chauncey, looking at his match against gublis it looks as if you were right.
I however was horribly wrong about del potro although Hewitt is a really tough second round draw.. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/26/2009 4:05:42 PM | I thought Del Potro was going to be an impact player, too. But Hewitt played a really good match. I didn't watch every single point, but from what I saw, Hewitt was playing great, and not just that, he was playing really smart. He was hitting a lot of off speed short slices to exploit Del Potro's height and movement. If he'd been dumb enough to make it a straight up slug fest, Del Potro would have won, but Hewitt really mixed it up. Plus he hit a lot of clutch passing shots after he'd drawn Del Potro in and his movement almost looked as good as when he reached number one, he kept getting balls back, frustrating Del Potro. He played the perfect match.
Gulbis looked clueless out there. He needs to hire Brad Gilbert or Larry Stefanki to be his coach, because he's a guy with HUGE weapons, but no idea how to use them properly. He's literally hit or miss. In the Murray match, he looked like he still cared, like he wanted to get back in it, but he was just serving bombs and going for winners all over the place, like he thought he was going to simply hit his way back into the match against one of the best movers in the game. Horrible idea. He needs to take some cues from Agassi, who truly didn't become great until he learned to contain his power a bit and play higher percentage, more boring tennis.
Murray's draw looks great. Ditto for Hewitt.
I thought Fish had a chance against Novak, definitely didn't think he'd get routined in straight sets.
Fed looked good against Kolschrieber, especially in the second set, but I get worried when he has to hit so many spectacular shots to win points. A part of me thinks Fed still plays like it's 2006 when guys would hand him two or three games every set simply out of fear and awe of the great Fed. He needs to impose his game more instead of cranking it up only when it gets tight and showing his defense off too much. Still, no matter how he plays, if he's serving over 65% for the match, he's going to beat anybody on grass. Murray included. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/27/2009 5:14:28 PM | I think Soderling is going to give Federer a good test on Monday. He has confidence and game. Federer may have lost a little of that ache to win after the French.
I think Roddick is looking good too. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/27/2009 6:29:42 PM | I think Soderling is going to give Federer a good test on Monday. He has confidence and game. Federer may have lost a little of that ache to win after the French. Fed loves tennis. He's so comfortable being number 1, that's where he expects to be, and he really wants to make his mark on tennis history as profound as possible. So I think the opposite, that winning the French is great for Fed's chances from here on out. With that monkey off his back, he can swing more freely, and he's a guy who plays on emotion, innate timing, and feel. Remember, he's the guy who had his best years, the best years in open tennis history, without a coach. I'm seeing more of the old Federer this Wimbledon, he just needs to start a bit quicker and stop having lapses. He always plays better in later rounds, so whatever he's going through with a guy like Kolschreiber, I don't expect it against Soderling.
Robin will have to be serving lights out to stand a chance, but I actually think he's going to beat Robin in relatively routine 4 sets no matter how Robin is playing. The grass allows Fed to exploit Robin's movement way more than clay, so it could potentially be more lopsided than the French finals. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/28/2009 9:27:44 AM | ^^^ I'm pretty sure Federer will win but I think Sodderling will give him a good game.
Wimbers is just around the corner, ready your strawberries and cream for the biggest tennis tournament of the season.
Why do you say Wimbledon is the biggest tournament of the season? To me its no less important than the other slams. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 6/28/2009 4:03:24 PM | ^^^ It's typical tournament scheduling to give #1 and #2 the best chance of playing each other in the final so that you get the best possible game.
I use to play tournament softball and it always annoyed me that the better teams got byes in the first round. Us lesser mortals were tired before we got to them. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/1/2009 12:19:17 PM | WoooWhooo! Roddick is still in it!
It is painful to be at work and watching the scoreboard for a five setter...lol | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 2:05:32 AM | It's the biggest tournament as it's where tennis really first began and it's the tourney players hold in most high regard.
Also - I'm pleased that A-Rod is through, I like him, however I'll be cheering on Murray in the semis | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 8:15:13 AM | | Serena Williams had the tennis gods on her side today. Elena Denentolia who should have won loses by a milimeter. Best women's tennis match ever. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:12:35 AM |
MGM
Don't ruin it for the people who don't have cable.
I was waiting for NBC to show it at 12 noon.
Now, I won't watch.
Don't tell us tomorrow at 10 that Roddick beaten Murray. ha
You should go ahead and watch Serena vs. Elena best tennis match you will ever see. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:19:26 AM | Sorry, I did the same thing on the Roddick match. I didn't even think! Just posted.
However there may be a small earthquake in San Diego tommorrow when I found out Roddick beat Murray! LOL. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 10:28:18 AM | | What i want to know is how come the Wiliams sisters have always managed to get on opposite sides of the draw. This is the 4th time that they are in the final so i am starting to think it is fixed. I think there is a draw as to who gets to play who but i may be wrong so correct me if i am. | |
|
| Wimbledon
Posted: 7/2/2009 3:40:12 PM |
What i want to know is how come the Wiliams sisters have always managed to get on opposite sides of the draw. This is the 4th time that they are in the final so i am starting to think it is fixed. I think there is a draw as to who gets to play who but i may be wrong so correct me if i am. They've played each other 21 times, and 9 of them were in the finals. So 9 times they were on opposite sides of the draw, and 12 times on the same side.
Roddick will have to be serving lights out and hitting huge forehands to beat Murray. He will need to come out swinging and balls must be falling in. Murray is the more talented player but Roddick has been in these situations before, if there is any nerves in Murray at the beginning at all, Roddick needs to exploit that to the fullest. Otherwise, Murray will roll him in 3 or 4.
Wimbledon TV ratings have been dismal. A Williams sisters final would be great for tennis. Fed versus Murray will be a huge story everywhere else except in America. Andy would be much better for ratings but Murray and Fed will definitely make for a better tennis match. | |
|
Home
login 
