I know Ruud hasn't won a great deal but last year he was in two Grand Slam finals (out of the three he played), made a Masters 1000 final and lost in the final of the ATP finals. He doesn't have any titles to boast about but objectively last year was pretty good for him even if a bit under the radar because he didn't have a highlight win or big title to his name.The CVs of most of the top twenty are shite. The world #2 hasn’t even won a 500.
It was sublime. It isn’t right now, hence Murray is still beating a recent Wimbledon final with one leg.
22 slams, 36 1000s and 23 500s don't count?The world #2 hasn’t even won a 500.
Rafa isn't the world number 2. Ruud is.22 slams, 36 1000s and 23 500s don't count?
Except for the dude above me.It is being hailed as just that. Right here.
Rafa has been #2 since October.Rafa isn't the world number 2. Ruud is.
Ay. Shite.22 slams, 36 1000s and 23 500s don't count?
Rafa hasn't been number 2 since Sunday night since his points dropped off, so they were right technically. But, following on from that and the misrepresentation at the top of the men's game right now:Rafa has been #2 since October.
Do you think Murray playing like today would struggle to beat seeded players at grand slams in past eras? I understand that the top five is undoubtedly weaker than previously, but do you think the number 15 player in the word now is worse than back then?He’s 35, physically destroyed and has no right to be playing professional tennis in his current state. He’s just gone out and beaten a player who has, up until recently, been a top ten player for around two years.
If anything, it emphasises just how poor the game is at the moment.
Okay so everybody is supposed to.Except for the dude above me.
Murray is one of the greatest of all time (despite being 4th best in his own era!) so it’s no surprise that even the metal hip version is still able to mix it with the top current players. The top of the game is a little weaker now than it has been for a while but Berrettini would be a top 10-15 player in any era.Do you think Murray playing like today would struggle to beat seeded players at grand slams in past eras? I understand that the top five is undoubtedly weaker than previously, but do you think the number 15 player in the word now is worse than back then?
This is spot on on both counts, imho, and it really humbles Berrettini’s happy-go-lucky attitude with conditioning and drive. On the other hand, Murray (and Wawrinka) were just unlucky to live in the supranatural-three era.Murray is one of the greatest of all time (despite being 4th best in his own era!) so it’s no surprise that even the metal hip version is still able to mix it with the top current players. The top of the game is a little weaker now than it has been for a while but Berrettini would be a top 10-15 player in any era.
The big question is how Murray can recover for a tough 2nd round. His form looks good enough to make the second week.
Both Wawrinka and Murray beat Djokovic in 4 slam finals and Wawrinka beat Djokovic at AO 2014 quarters. Federer and Nadal better be thankful to these two guys or Djokovic would have surpassed them in the slam count 2 years ago. Both, especially Wawrinka, raised their game to unthinkable level. Not a single win was a choke by Djokovic.This is spot on on both counts, imho, and it really humbles Berrettini’s happy-go-lucky attitude with conditioning and drive. On the other hand, Murray (and Wawrinka) were just unlucky to live in the supranatural-three era.
That is totally wrong way to look at it. If in early 2000s Hewitt, Safin, Nalbandian and Roddick managed to challenge Federer - it would have been "strong" era, but because they didn't - it is a weak era. If players like Del Potro (he actually has an excuse due to brutal injury to the wrist), Berdych, Cilic, Gasquet, Tsonga, Murray managed to archive higher peak - late 2000s and early 2010s would have been a strong era. And then there were Tsitsipas, Thiem, Zverev, Medvedev, Dimitrov, etc... If they managed to do something we would have another illusion of time of great champions. The reason why there is no big number of champions since early 2000s are Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Only Wawrinka and Murray are multi-slam champions since big3 era started (end of 2011). Rest of grand slam champions are under 5 since 2006 - Cilic, Nishikori, Medvedev, Thiem and Del Potro. Maybe I am missing someone - o yeah Alcaraz. Once Nadal and Djokovic are gone I will be surprised if 10 time grand slam champion emerges until 2040 and it will be the time of "great champions". As far as young kids choosing sports, they all choose few and stick with one eventually. Tennis is unique because it requires commitment from very young age, sometimes too young to choose something else.I still watch plenty of tennis of course, but in terms of the competition on the men’s side, I felt that it probably passed its peak depth-wise and was generally on the downward trajectory in recent times, especially with tennis becoming less and less of an attractive career option to aspiring male athletes compared to team sports. If Nadal was born in 1996 instead of 1986 for example, growing up when La Liga, the European Cup turned Champions League and his beloved Real Madrid (and Barcelona) were all far more glamorous, would he still have chosen tennis over football? I personally doubt it. Likewise if Murray was born in 1997 instead of 1987, growing up during the peak era for the Old Firm in terms of spending, and when the glamour and popularity of the Premier League south of border was sky-rocketing, I doubt he would have chosen tennis over football (he had a trial at Hibs right).
Last year I remember watching a video summary of the 1992 US Open (a thrilling tournament), and thinking that was at least as much depth in the ATP top 100 back then as there was 30 years later in 2022, if not more. Borg and Connors had plenty of brutal early round matches in the early round matches of grand slams in the 70s. I believe that tennis was more popular than the NBA in the US in the late 70s-early 80s.
I'm watching the Molcan / Auger-Aliassime match but they just said that Nadal was in obvious severe pain earlier in the match and has just had treatment off court for it. He hasn't played well for a few months though, regardless of any injury.Nadal playing terrible. On the verge of going 2 sets down. Don't see him winning this match, let alone getting close to defending his title with the way he's playing today. Wasn't all that good vs Draper too.
Yeah, he pulled up towards the end of the 2nd set. The way he was playing, he was going to lose anyway. Hope just a scare and nothing serious.I'm watching the Molcan / Auger-Aliassime match but they just said that Nadal was in obvious severe pain earlier in the match and has just had treatment off court for it. He hasn't played well for a few months though, regardless of any injury.
I guess it's a double-edged sword. His body needs matches but it can't take the matches, so he gets injured more frequently.Yeah, he pulled up towards the end of the 2nd set. The way he was playing, he was going to lose anyway. Hope just a scare and nothing serious.
He needs to get on tour and play regularly as since Wimbledon its been very stop start.
I think he'll be trying for the Olympics next year at RG at least.I'm fairly certain Nadal will retire from tennis this year. The man is done.
He's been pretty much constantly injured since Indian Wells last year. It continued through the clay and then Ofcourse Wimbledon and US season as well and now he looked injured yet again today. He's said in the past that he'll wind up when his body can't handle it anymore and I think that time is coming. He's not competitive on tour anymore and he's lost 7 of his last 9 matches. I think the Olympics next year may be a step too far for him. I'd not be remotely surprised if he loses early and retires at the end of RG.I think he'll be trying for the Olympics next year at RG at least.
From everything Rafa has said I don't think he'll pack things up if it's just his form and niggling injuries that are the issues.
Unless he has serious problems with his foot or another major injury injury I think he's sticking around, even with patchy results.
Her serve is fine, especially her first serve. Predictably, she's injured again. She's needs to stop fecking about with a new coaching setup every 4 months, and based on that assertion probably tell her dad to eff off as well.Emma's serve is just so tragic. Lost the first set now broken in the second. Another early slam exit beckons.
Her serve does look different though, its not bad. I think that having any parent around you as a tennis player and interfering is almost always a bad thing, with exceptions.Her serve is fine, especially her first serve. Predictably, she's injured again. She's needs to stop fecking about with a new coaching setup every 4 months, and based on that assertion probably tell her dad to eff off as well.
Sorry, I meant her serve is normally fine. She started feeling her stomach in her second service game of the first set.Her serve does look different though, its not bad. I think that having any parent around you as a tennis player and interfering is almost always a bad thing, with exceptions.
I was just looking at a video of her 2 years ago and seems she changed her forehand a lot too actually, her preparation doesnt come up as far or around as far and its a much smaller swing.Sorry, I meant her serve is normally fine. She started feeling her stomach in her second service game of the first set.
Yeah, there are exceptions, the Williams sisters (I've had a volte face on my opinion of them both since watching King Richard, was never a fan before) and Murray spring to mind.
I don't 'see' enough to spot things like that in sport generally. Prob coaching again?I was just looking at a video of her 2 years ago and seems she changed her forehand a lot too actually, her preparation doesnt come up as far or around as far and its a much smaller swing.
She will win nothing in the coming future without finding a way to stay fit and become a consistent pro. I also doubt she has the game, she is neither Hingis nor Henin… more similar to Radwanska and clearly at a disadvantage against ball hitters.Nice win for Gauff. Some excellent defence in the tiebreak. Raducanu needs to find a way to stay fit for more than 5 minutes as her game is clearly capable of taking her to multiple slam titles, if she can get the match play experience.
Yeah… still hoping he would call time at the kindler Wimbledon instead of the gruelling Paris, however his RG goes.Rafa's looked finished for a while tbh
She has definitely got the game. You don’t win the US Open without dropping a set if you aren’t an extremely special talent. She hits the ball extremely cleanly off both wings and is far more aggressive than Radwanska. She’s one of the few women on tour who can have the crowd gasping with excitement at her shot-making.She will win nothing in the coming future without finding a way to stay fit and become a consistent pro. I also doubt she has the game, she is neither Hingis nor Henin… more similar to Radwanska and clearly at a disadvantage against ball hitters.
I mean, there are numbers of girls recently winning a Slam and then levelling out in the 20-50 tier of the ranking.She has definitely got the game. You don’t win the US Open without dropping a set if you aren’t an extremely special talent. She hits the ball extremely cleanly off both wings and is far more aggressive than Radwanska. She’s one of the few women on tour who can have the crowd gasping with excitement at her shot-making.
If she can cut out the silly errors, which she should be able to do with more match experience, she is capable of getting right to the top. Whether her body is capable of enabling her to get that consistent play remains doubtful currently though. Even today she seemed to be struggling with some stomach injury.
Numbers as in lots who won one then nada?I mean, there are numbers of girls recently winning a Slam and then levelling out in the 20-50 tier of the ranking.
She looks to have miles more potential than Gauff based on what I saw this morning, the only reason she lost today was because she hit too many unforced errors probably due to her tiring in the rallies as both Henman & Wilander mentioned on EuroSport. People forget last year was her first season on tour. She basically won the US Open as a teenaged amateur player. That was probably the greatest single achievement by a British athlete ever. It simply should never have happened. The reason she won is because her movement & ball hitting ability are exceptional. Her eye hand coordination is that of Federer/Nadal/Djokovic level. She’ll be winning slams within a couple of seasons as her fitness develops on the tour and you can quote me on that.She will win nothing in the coming future without finding a way to stay fit and become a consistent pro. I also doubt she has the game, she is neither Hingis nor Henin… more similar to Radwanska and clearly at a disadvantage against ball hitters.
