Jump to content

US Open Tennis


lichtie23

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 854
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I thought both Soares and Murray were excellent.  Soares shots allow Murray to bring out his net game.  The dynamic with John Peers was great, but this is just another level.  Two slams this season says it all.  Well done Jamie.  I also liked his quip at the end to his brother - I won this US Open, get it up ya Andy :lol:

Casper Ruud defeats Taro Daniel in straight sets to win his first challenger tournament.  Hopefully he get's a few tour wild cards so he can play against a higher calibre of opponent to improve.  He will be on the verge of the top 300.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Wimbledon the only slam where the men play best of 5 sets in doubles? Am I right in thinking even Wimbledon had best of 3 for the early rounds this year? Every year?

I'd tried google for this, of course, but it isn't giving me the answers as quickly as I suspect someone on here (probably Loki) will be able to!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I know that one is a better tennis player than the other, but, given what they specialise in, which Murray brother can claim to have had the better last 12 months:

Andy - Davis Cup winner, Wimbledon winner, Olympics Gold medal, Australian and French finalist, winner at Rome Masters, finalist at Cincinnati and Madrid and 5th win at Queen's.

Jamie - Davis Cup winner, Australian Open winner, US Open winner, ATP ranked No1 in April, finalist in Canada and Monte Carlo Masters and winner at Apia, Sydney.

Belter of a year for the Murray family, regardless, and certainly a "break out" 12 months for the older brother.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah he said it on court after the match.

Yes WImbledon is the only slam that still plays best of five.  It was curtailed this year because of the weather, so best of three was used to allow them to catch up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 September 2016 at 22:52, John Lambies Doos said:

 


Don't need to tbh. My original description stands. Monfils is a journeyman, as is tsonga as is berdych as is gulbis as is isner etc etc etc

 

Just ignores the actual meaning of the word after it is explicitly explained and claims it still makes sense. Hilarious stupidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just ignores the actual meaning of the word after it is explicitly explained and claims it still makes sense. Hilarious stupidity.

Oh dear.

Go on then Einstein, tell me how he is not a journeyman? Or just insult and stick to your pack mentality

Perhaps you could read this... incidentally written 6 yrs ago. It might help. What a sheep you are

http://www.espn.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=5376000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:

Oh dear.

Go on then Einstein, tell me how he is not a journeyman? Or just insult and stick to your pack mentality

Perhaps you could read this... incidentally written 6 yrs ago. It might help. What a sheep you are

http://www.espn.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=5376000

I hadn't seen that article before and it was a very good read.  Again it emphasises the traits that define Monfils - entertainer, master trick shot maker, athletic, his mental attitude and his style of play.  Throughout the article players and coaches state that he upholds entertainment over wins.  Roger Rasheed states that he tried to curb that and make him stronger and that worked to a certain extent but Monfils is still Monfils.  He is still a maverick.  His shot making can be extraordinary.  Once he retires he will take over from Mansour Bahrami as the entertainer on the senior circuit.

Even by your definition of the word journeyman, Monfils is not a journeyman.  He wins tournaments, he won a 500 event last month.  He certainly hasn't won the titles his talent deserves, but that is mostly as he chooses to entertain than have the single minded attitude of the likes of Djokovic or Murray.  Likewise Tsonga and Berdych (both have titlles at 1000, 500, 250) aren't journeymen either.  Guys constantly in the top 10 aren't journeymen.  The dominance of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic (43 slam titles) has stifled opportunities for players not as good as them.

Even at Masters level Djokovic, Federer and Murray have been dominant winning 30, 28, 24 and 12 titles respectively.  It again limits opportunities for players.  The fact that Berdych and Tsonga have won at this level despite the big fours dominance says to me they (Berdych and Tsonga) are far from journeymen.  Even Gulbis isn't a journeyman, he doesn't devote his time to being the best player, he participates in tennis as a hobby.  Your definition of journeyman is wrong and who you apply it to is wrong.

To me a tennis journeyman would be someone hovering outside the top 100 just doing enough to earn a living and just not good enough to get the big win to get him or her noticed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway I am really looking forward to the match tonight.  The last five matches at Grand Slam level has all been epic affairs.  Four five set matches and the magnificent four set performance by Stan in Paris (Novak leads 3-2).  In fact Stan has also won all ten finals he has played under Magnus Norman's stewardship.  Has the ingredients of a cracker.  I hope Wawrinka does it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...