- This topic has 79 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
I am ( even as a Scot ) not one of Murray’s biggest fans, but I have been a tennis fan for decades and take quite a keen interest in the sport, and in fairness to Andy Murray, he has improved immeasureably in recent years. Not only has his fitness and temperament improved, but his overall game has reached another level.
Tactically, he is much more astute than Tim Henman ever was; his game plan, allied to his variation of shot, makes him harder to play against than most. Federer and Nadal will testify to that. Henman was also a "choker " – Murray is not.
Andy Roddick played his best tennis for some time against Murray in the semi-final, and as a consequence deserved to win that match – but it goes without saying that he will have to play twice, if not three times as good against Roger Federer, if he harbours any hope at all of winning his first Wimbledon title.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Henman lost to the eventual winner every time he lost a Wimbledon semi-final -to call him a "choker" is completely unfair. He wasn’t good enough to beat the very best, doesn’t make him a choker. Cheap shot that. I wish i could "choke" my way to being one of the best 5 tennis players on planet earth.
There are so many "winners" in football every year, only a maximum of four blokes playng tennis are "winners" each year.
The fact is the 1st time Murray played someone rom the top 16 he got beat – perhaps such an easy ride in the QF’s did him no favours in preparing for a tight battle against Roddick.
We’re going to know very soon after the start of this match if Roddick stands a chance against Federer, and what cunning plan his coach may have. I do hope it’s a good match and not a walkover, but it’s fascinating in that it’s two men who are potentailly very dangerous with things to prove. One seeing his glory days beginning to slip away from him and another that never quite achieved his true potential but has been given another chance; both very hungry to win. Fascinating stuff!
Larry Stefanki hit the nail on the head when he said that Murray’s passive style means he is unlikely to progress beyond the semis at Wimbledon. That’s not to say that he can’t win a Slam on a hard court. He can and probably will. Great "defensive" players like Borg and Nadal modified their games when they played on grass and Murray will need to do the same.
Another 5th-set thriller in the Men’s final, just like last year…..9-9 at present. Win or lose, Andy Roddick is playing the best tennis of his life.
I’d gladly have sacrificed my profits on Federer winning that match to see Roddick win. He was gutted, i really felt for him.
I had to stop watching it for the last 15 minutes; it was too painful…I wanted Roddick to win. However, did I hear one of the commentators say that Federer had had glandular fever in the last year or so? You’d have to wonder if he wasn’t quite 100%, given that it’s a pretty nasty thing to suffer from and takes an awfully long time to get over completely.
I’d gladly have sacrificed my profits on Federer winning that match to see Roddick win. He was gutted, i really felt for him.
Same here on the latter (though at the time, wallet ruled heart and I was cheering Federer). Roddick looked a broken man- it was tragic, to the point where I started to wonder if this could be the end of him, which would be a great shame given the new side to his game he showed in the latter stages of this years’ tournament.
Federer deserved to win and I’m glad he did. Had he lost two consecutive five set Wimbledon finals, it might have knocked his confidence for six. Roddick played at the top of his game and Federer just had no answer to his strong serve. That said, Federer, though certainly not playing anywhere close to the level he can, served brilliantly himself, and he also hit many more aces than Roddick during the match. The fact that he won through in the end, simply reflects the man’s class, resilience and determination to win – and illustrated completely what it is that seperates the true champion from the rest.
I noticed Pete Sampras’s reactions as the match ebbed and flow; allowing himself the faintest hint of a smirk as Federer lost the first set, followed by a slight grimace as he took the second. Oh, did he not want his record to be broken. It’s hard for any of us to hide our true emotions – even if you are a tennis legend.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
However, did I hear one of the commentators say that Federer had had glandular fever in the last year or so?
You did, and he did. It’s what has been most widely held to have contributed to the dip in form (by his own lofty standards) that he endured last year.
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
What will it mean for Roger Federer if Nadal misses Wimbledon? nadal won the queens title and pulling out of that will lose some points. He won wimbledon to that will drop a lot of point for him. Does that mean roger can become #1 again?
_____________________
affiliateelite ~ affiliateelite.com ~ adgooroo ~ adgooroo.comWhat will it mean for Roger Federer if Nadal misses Wimbledon? nadal won the queens title and pulling out of that will lose some points. He won wimbledon to that will drop a lot of point for him. Does that mean roger can become #1 again?
Federer is now officially number 1 in the ATP men’s rankings.
Murray is 2, and Nadal is now at 3.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.