Welcome to the LTLF Forest Forum.
Page 29 of 30 FirstFirst ... 1927282930 LastLast
Results 701 to 725 of 732

Thread: tennis innit

  1. #701
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wadiya
    Posts
    2,638

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Benali (on loan) View Post
    He's still one of the more popular serial winners in sport, I suppose.

    It's hard to dominate a sport and not seem boring, annoying or both to a decent chunk of people.

    Lewis Hamilton, Team Sky, Manchester United, Australian cricket team, Sir Mo....if you're not a big fan, you probably dislike all of those.
    Interesting that he actually isn't

    Whilst he has the highest number of Grand Slam titles ever, because he's 5 years older than Nadal and 7 than Djokovic and Murray, their records are better.

    Federer won his first slam in Wimbledon 2003, beating (unseeded) Mark Philippoussis in the final, and where any other previous GS winner exited before the 4th round.

    He then won 3 the year after, meaning 4 of his slams came before Nadal (whose first GS was Wimbledon 03, but missed much of 04 injured) won his first (French 05).

    2 in 2005 (W and US) then Wimbledon, Aus and US in 2006 and 2007, mean that most of his slams came whilst Djokovic and Murray were teenagers. In fact, since winning the 2010 Aus Open (his 16th major) he has only won 4 (Aus in 2017 and 2018, and Wimbledon 2012 and 2017).


  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many

  3. #702
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    12,409

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Iíve always liked the underdog and loved Federer before most did and recognised he was a serious talent. When he beat Sampras all those years ago I wasnít surprised but then everyone jumped on the bandwagon and when someone gets really big, itís like when you have that favourite unknown music track all to yourself and then it becomes popular. Doesnít really feel the same anymore. Then you grow up, get over it and realise that youíre watching one of the best who is still doing it at a grand old age (in sporting terms) and you can only marvel at the standard of performance.

    This is after setbacks and comebacks too. Just extraordinary.

    In terms of Henman, Henmania, Henman Hill and all that. Embarrassing. Could never get behind him. Always wanted a better serve volleyer in Pat Rafter to win Wimbledon more than him.


  4. #703

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Statto View Post
    Interesting that he actually isn't

    Whilst he has the highest number of Grand Slam titles ever, because he's 5 years older than Nadal and 7 than Djokovic and Murray, their records are better.

    Federer won his first slam in Wimbledon 2003, beating (unseeded) Mark Philippoussis in the final, and where any other previous GS winner exited before the 4th round.

    He then won 3 the year after, meaning 4 of his slams came before Nadal (whose first GS was Wimbledon 03, but missed much of 04 injured) won his first (French 05).

    2 in 2005 (W and US) then Wimbledon, Aus and US in 2006 and 2007, mean that most of his slams came whilst Djokovic and Murray were teenagers. In fact, since winning the 2010 Aus Open (his 16th major) he has only won 4 (Aus in 2017 and 2018, and Wimbledon 2012 and 2017).
    But he did dominate for a while, because as you say he's older and was winning slams before the other two. They haven't had a period where they had it all to themselves. Though Djokovic has managed four in a row when Federer and Nadal looked like they might be on the way out.

    We're also mostly British here, influenced by British media. The general public that enjoys sports, if not the big tennis fans. Wimbledon dominates views of tennis in this country, and Federer has won eight times and just made his twelfth final.

    Djokovic may get the place to himself a for a few years when the other two retire.


  5. #704

    Default Re: tennis innit

    In France Nadal is king, the dominant one and no also doubt boring to a quite a lot of people who just want to see somebody else in the final.

    It was Kuerten, even Bruguera 20-25 years ago, and many people watching Sampras win Wimbledon every year would not have been able to identify the first two in a line-up.

    In Australia, Djokovic dominates/annoys.

    This is regional boredom.


  6. #705
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    In a tophat.
    Posts
    13,950

    Default Re: tennis innit

    If you played Serena Williams in a game and put on you best performance do you think you'd take a point off her?

    doyen of boomer energy

  7. #706

    Default Re: tennis innit

    My head would drop in the second set if hadn't already benefited from a double fault or a ridiculously unforced error.


  8. #707

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanRoy22 View Post
    Iíve always liked the underdog and loved Federer before most did and recognised he was a serious talent. When he beat Sampras all those years ago I wasnít surprised
    Henman then beat him in the next round.

    Henman > Federer > Sampras

    Strange moment in time.

    I annoyed my parents cheering for Ivanisevic to beat Henman in the semi final. My favourite final when Ivanisevic beat Rafter in five. Always regret not going to that. It was played on a Monday and if you queued early enough there were tickets available. Decided at the time, I'd already taken too much holiday in some random summer job to go.

    Last edited by Francis Benali (on loan); 12-07-19 at 23:08.

  9. #708
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    12,409

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Benali (on loan) View Post
    Henman then beat him in the next round.

    Henman > Federer > Sampras

    Strange moment in time.
    It was. Henman wasn’t a bad player but I think he lacked that killer instinct and that’s why I couldn’t get behind him because you always knew he’d get near and flop. I mean, even Greg Rusedski made a Grand Slam final.

    He had that Jimmy White or Frank Bruno thing in him. Always a fringe contender who could have done better if they had that fierceness inside.


  10. #709
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wadiya
    Posts
    2,638

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by BryanRoy22 View Post
    It was. Henman wasn’t a bad player but I think he lacked that killer instinct and that’s why I couldn’t get behind him because you always knew he’d get near and flop. I mean, even Greg Rusedski made a Grand Slam final.

    He had that Jimmy White or Frank Bruno thing in him. Always a fringe contender who could have done better if they had that fierceness inside.
    Rusedski won more career titles as well. Still not particularly many (AM won a lot of titles in 2016 alone...) by B4 standards, which would be comparable considering both players made 4 in the world.


  11. #710
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Satan's Chimney
    Posts
    25,394

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Henman was one of the last great serve-and-volley players. Probably its last great proponent.

    Problem for Tim was he hit his peak at a time when power came to dominate the game. If he'd been born ten years earlier he'd have won multiple slams.


  12. #711
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wadiya
    Posts
    2,638

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
    Henman was one of the last great serve-and-volley players. Probably its last great proponent.

    Problem for Tim was he hit his peak at a time when power came to dominate the game. If he'd been born ten years earlier he'd have won multiple slams.
    Karlovic, Lopez, Federer, Raonic... it's not completely dead. But, anyone who plays that way now can also play from the baseline (because a good serve and volley player will always get passed by a good baseliner), and use both strategies. Henman didn't have that option, really.

    Dan Evans is probably the closest to Henman on tour at the moment.


  13. #712
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Satan's Chimney
    Posts
    25,394

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Statto View Post
    Karlovic, Lopez, Federer, Raonic... it's not completely dead. But, anyone who plays that way now can also play from the baseline (because a good serve and volley player will always get passed by a good baseliner), and use both strategies. Henman didn't have that option, really.

    Dan Evans is probably the closest to Henman on tour at the moment.
    None of them are true serve-and-vollyers though are they?

    You can spot a serve-vollyer from their serve - they serve and run into the net off it

    None of those players do that


  14. #713
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wadiya
    Posts
    2,638

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
    None of them are true serve-and-vollyers though are they?

    You can spot a serve-vollyer from their serve - they serve and run into the net off it

    None of those players do that
    Yes they do but they have other strategies as well. Lopez was using s&v on most serves at Queens. It's used as a mixing up tactic more than anything else now - if you try it against Murray, Nadal or Djokovic on every serve, you're just going to get bagelled.


  15. #714
    It's all about mid-table...
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wetherspoons
    Posts
    17,175

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Fedz is majestic especially at his age but he'll have all on to beat the machine Jokov today.

    Should be a cracker to watch if that's your bag.


  16. #715

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quick thought between 3rd and 4th set of the final.
    Of course Federer and Nadal are GREAT players but I don't understand why Nole is so far behind them in people's mind.
    Especially if you consider that he has most wins in the matches between them three!


  17. #716
    It's all about mid-table...
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wetherspoons
    Posts
    17,175

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Longest final in history.


  18. #717
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Satan's Chimney
    Posts
    25,394

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Glad Djoko beat that smug Swiss twat


  19. #718
    lol
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Outer SF region
    Posts
    16,448

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
    Glad Djoko beat that smug Swiss twat
    Same

    Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk


  20. #719
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    JLB Credit
    Posts
    8,617

    Default Re: tennis innit

    I love watching tennis. It has the big advantage of the players and pundits all being knowledgable and likeable and not insufferable twats like in football.

    Great final, too. For Federer to have two Championship points and Djokovic to pull eight rallies in a row out of the bag was just incredible.

    Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


  21. #720

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
    Glad Djoko beat that smug Swiss twat

    Me tooooo

    Incredible fact, Federer was better in almost every statistics categories:
    Games won, Winners, Unforced Errors, Total Points Won, Net Points Won, Aces, Distance Covered, Double Faults, Break Points etc…


  22. #721

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Andreescu Canada's first grand slam winner.


  23. #722
    It's all about mid-table...
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wetherspoons
    Posts
    17,175

    Default Re: tennis innit

    That Sabrina Willyums is finished.


  24. #723

    Default Re: tennis innit

    The worst has happened for Roger Federer. Nadal is one behind him, and injury-free you can already give him the French.

    Daniil Medvedev is a interesting character. Men's tennis needs more of him.


  25. #724
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wadiya
    Posts
    2,638

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Quote Originally Posted by Francis Benali (on loan) View Post
    The worst has happened for Roger Federer. Nadal is one behind him, and injury-free you can already give him the French.

    Daniil Medvedev is a interesting character. Men's tennis needs more of him.
    A fit Nadal has been upset at RG before. Soderling is the most obvious example, and Novak Djokovic beat him in the QFs 2015 before losing to Stan Wawrinka in the final; of the B5, Murray is the only one not to lift the French (but in the 3 years Rafa hasn't wone it, they only have 1 win each).

    You have to wonder how long they can carry on - only Cilic and Del Potro outside the big 3/4/5 have won a slam recently - but all of them are well into their 30s, and it's still possible Murray won't be a contender again, even though he is pain free and still has the touch due to the lack of match practice he's looking a touch slow.

    It's interesting to see the pulling around for 4th place - Nishikori did for a while, Zverev, Thiem, Tsitsipas got 5th, indeed Zverev, Cilic, Raonic, Dimitrov and delpo (down at 71 because of his own injuries - having actually dropped out of the rankings entirely before) have all been 3 in the world.

    One stat in favour of the "Big 4" as a concept not 3 (excluding Murray) or 5 (including Stan, making it all multiple slam winners) is that they have all (and no-one else has) held #1 since Aus Open 2004, with only 5 slams since 2005 French not being won by a Big 4 member (but only 2 non "big 5").

    It hasn't felt it because he's still been a contender, but Federer's 20 titles were predominantly before Djokovic and Murray (his 5 US titles came in a row, between 04 and 08, the last of which he beat a 21 year old Murray in the final, and 5 of his Wimbledon titles (03-07) were also consecutive, the others being 09, 12 and 17. When you add his French (09) and 3 Aus Opens (04, 06, 07) 15 of his slams came before 2010.

    You can definitely see Nadal dominating clay - only Thiem is anywhere near comparable - so provided Federer doesn't win any more, and Nadal doesn't break, like you I would expect Nadal to equal the 20 then. And if the same carries on, each year until he finishes.

    Djokovic is almost impenetrable - injuries aside - on a hard court and this has been shown in his dominance of AU and US titles, and this also translated on grass for him to be dominant at Wimbledon too, more consistently than Federer. So Federer will probably only pick up one of those if Djokovic breaks or loses early, and he can still retain the consistency (which earlier losses to less heralded players have happened more recently, so isn't a guarantee at all) so I can't see where he will add to the 20.

    Djokovic will win more than Nadal and Federer by the time they all finish playing. He's a year younger than Nadal and 6 younger than Federer, so he's only 32, and will definitely pick up more than 4 slams. None of the next gen are stepping up anywhere near consistently enough.

    Thiem aside, the next new Slam winner will no doubt be born in 1996 or after.


  26. #725

    Default Re: tennis innit

    Djokovic will finish with the most, but he still won't be as popular as the other two. It bothers him too. And booed off for retiring again last week.

    I enjoyed how Medvedev handled the booing.

    New Yorkers do like to boo.


 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •