Wimbledon 2018

mickmackey1

Mrcaramelchoc wrote: »

im delighted angelique won.but jeez serena looked so tired from halfway through the first set.

and djokovic should win it tomorrow.anderson has to be really tired and hurting from yesterdays epic.

Come to think of it, last year a Williams sister also looked knackered in the 2nd set of a Wimby final.


I think Anderson has a fighter's chance, six hours of mainly big serving is probably less demanding than a 4 hour slugfest. And Djokovic's stamina doesn't look to be quite what it was so if Anderson could win the 1st set things will get very interesting.


What an epic contest today... Djokovic has this unique ability to torture the opponent by giving him so many looks at the win, only to emerge victorious with what seems an air of inevitability. Considering how abject he was in eg Indian Wells and Miami, it's an incredible resurrection. This was a glorious opportunity for Nadal to close within 2 of Federer, and his fans' earnest wish that Djoker would rise again to deprive the GOAT of No 21 has turned round and bitten them in the a$$.

yerwanthere123

Nice to see the usual Wimbledon nonsense in full swing on here :rolleyes:

Very happy for Kerber. Imagine being told three years ago that Kerber would not only win a slam, but overtake Azarenka, Kvitova and Li Na. Tennis is crazily unpredictable

A great tournament for Serena, she's almost 37 and extremely rusty, yet she still breezed to a grand slam final easily. All she needs is a little more match play and she'll be back winning slams. Wouldn't be at all surprised if Kerber and Serena have a rematch at the US Open final.

As for the men's final, hoping Kevin can do the unthinkable, but it's not looking good. At the very least Djokovic will probably be tired too, he effectively played another match today.

MuffinTop86

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I’m sure lots will agree with this, people tend to get quite exercised over the equal pay issue. Regardless of rights and wrongs though, you could argue if you’re talking in terms of match time that Williams has probably spent as much time on court as Djokovic or Nadal over the past 2 weeks.

Sorry to jump back so far, I’m only catching up with this thread now.
Wasn’t the argument about the unequal pay based on the fact that the ladies only play max 3 sets?
As far as I can remember, it was the Williams’ sisters who argued that the ladies can play 5 sets as well. I might be wrong, but if not, and in the interest of fairness, why was the number of sets to win matches increased to mens when the pay was?

Joe_ Public

MuffinTop86 wrote: »

Sorry to jump back so far, I’m only catching up with this thread now.
Wasn’t the argument about the unequal pay based on the fact that the ladies only play max 3 sets?
As far as I can remember, it was the Williams’ sisters who argued that the ladies can play 5 sets as well. I might be wrong, but if not, and in the interest of fairness, why was the number of sets to win matches increased to mens when the pay was?

Open to correction but I think the main barrier against women playing bo5 are the Grand Slam organisers who say the schedule cannot cope with it. Since play at Wimbledon doesn’t start till 12 (or 1 on show courts), you’d never squeeze it all into 2 weeks, even with no rain stoppages. The WTA has no issue with playing bo5 as far as I’m aware.

Chivito550

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Open to correction but I think the main barrier against women playing bo5 are the Grand Slam organisers who say the schedule cannot cope with it. Since play at Wimbledon doesn’t start till 12 (or 1 on show courts), you’d never squeeze it all into 2 weeks, even with no rain stoppages. The WTA has no issue with playing bo5 as far as I’m aware.

Surely there’s nothing stopping it being best of 5 from quarters on though?

Joe_ Public

Chivito550 wrote: »

Surely there’s nothing stopping it being best of 5 from quarters on though?

Yeah that makes sense to me, I don’t see what’s stopping it. I’ve heard the argument put forward that women aren’t physically able for 5 sets but I simply attribute that to the same mentality that said they couldn’t run marathons back in the day. Personally I think they could look st reducing the early rounds in the men’s, but doubt that would ever be a runner.

walshb

Anderson/Nole are both world class athletes.

Their semis are finished now.

It’s not like either man was playing non stop. Out of the 11 hours total on court for both men how much actual in play effort happened?

Too much is being made of this Anderson semifinal. Nole put in a hell of an effort vs. Nadal over the course of two days...Anderson put in a hell of an effort over 1 day..and had the whole of yesterday to recover.

They weren’t cross country skiing, running 4 minute miles, boxing 12 rounds or doing a triathlon..plenty breaks and refreshments in between games...

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Anderson/Nole are both world class athletes.

Their semis are finished now.

It’s not like either man was playing non stop. Out of the 11 hours total on court for both men how much actual in play effort happened?

Too much is being made of this Anderson semifinal. Nole put in a hell of an effort vs. Nadal over the course of two days...Anderson put in a hell of an effort over 1 day..and had the whole of yesterday to recover.

They weren’t cross country skiing, running 4 minute miles, boxing 12 rounds or doing a triathlon..plenty breaks and refreshments in between games...

If Djokovic bouncing the ball doesn’t count as physical effort, there’s half an hour you can disregard right there.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

If Djokovic bouncing the ball doesn’t count as physical effort, there’s half an hour you can disregard right there.

Or Nadal and his endless idiosyncrasies...

Gwynplaine

walshb wrote: »

Or Nadal and his endless idiosyncrasies...

He needs a bigger shorts, arse bursting out of the one he had on yesterday.

Christy42

Gwynplaine wrote: »

walshb wrote: »

Or Nadal and his endless idiosyncrasies...

He needs a bigger shorts, arse bursting out of the one he had on yesterday.

I feel like that, and the fact that his shirt went see through after about 2-3 games each time he changed was part of the point of the clothes.

walshb

Best of 5 sets women...can’t think of anything more painful..

NoviGlitzko

walshb wrote: »

Best of 5 sets women...can’t think of anything more painful..

Less of it now walsh.

The Golden Miller

Big day for Yugoslavia!

NoviGlitzko

Question tennis fans (and sorry if this a bit off topic), which tennis player have you seen in your time watching tennis had the highest peak regardless of surface?

The Golden Miller

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Question tennis fans (and sorry if this a bit off topic), which tennis player have you seen in your time watching tennis had the highest peak regardless of surface?

Djokovic

NoviGlitzko

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Djokovic

Tie between Nole and Federer for me.

I also don't think any player in the next 100 years would've beaten Rafa at the FO in 2008, but yeah can't mention surfaces.

walshb

Highest peak? As in a period of brilliance?

Nole or Roger.

Roger circa 2007 and Nole 2011...

Nole 2011 probably best...

Even if Roger should have had two slam semi wins over him that year..

walshb

Some may disagree but RF in 2009 was playing the best tennis of his career...

2006 and 2007 were more successful, but he didn’t have the same strength of comp in those years...

NoviGlitzko

walshb wrote: »

Highest peak? As in a period of brilliance?

Nole or Roger.

Roger circa 2007 and Nole 2011...

Nole 2011 probably best...

Even if Roger should have had two slam semi wins over him that year..

As in the most complete peak of a tennis player you've seen where you thought this guy is literally unbeatable. Not necessarily achievement's even though they're probably correlated.

walshb

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

As in the most complete peak of a tennis player you've seen where you thought this guy is literally unbeatable. Not necessarily achievement's even though they're probably correlated.

Nole In Australia 2012 for me the peak...

I’d probably pick that player over any player in history at any point in history..

walshb

Top 5.

Nole 2012 Oz final

Nadal 2008 SW19 final

RF 2005 SW19

Nole 2015 U.S. Open final

Rafa 2009 Oz final.

mickmackey1

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Question tennis fans (and sorry if this a bit off topic), which tennis player have you seen in your time watching tennis had the highest peak regardless of surface?

Marat Safin's destruction of Sampras in the 2000 USO Final.

The Golden Miller

Young McEnroe also would be pick alongside Djokovic

walshb

I disagree. Both were off the charts brilliant in that final...

walshb

The Golden Miller wrote: »

Young McEnroe also would be pick alongside Djokovic

1984 SW19 his most dominant display, but he’d be blown off the court by the current greats. The levels have gone up so much..

Even the Mac of later 80s early 90s be too strong for 1984..

NoviGlitzko

A lot of tennis fans would argue his movement was at it's best in 2006-7, although on the flip side you could say with experience over the latter years his overall game has developed more. I started watching tennis properly in 2008 so I can't say this from experience.

walshb

His 2011 SW19 was his best of 2011..

Fed should have beaten him in Flushing Meadow that year..

dominatinMC

I'm torn between 2011 Djokovic and 2010 Nadal. I feel 2010 Nadal doesn't get as much credit as he should, winning 3 slams on 3 different surfaces that year was an unreal achievement.

walshb

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

A lot of tennis fans would argue his movement was at it's best in 2006-7, although on the flip side you could say with experience over the latter years his overall game has developed more. I started watching tennis properly in 2008 so I can't say this from experience.

His overall game and serving and tactical brilliance improved post 2006/2007.

Better overall player in 2008 and onwards..

Jeez, 2017 RF a beast of a player..

Joe_ Public

Very obviously true, but at the same time hardly their fault they were conditioned to play for the time they were born into. Doesn't lessen their greatness in any way, least as far as I'm concerned anyway. For McEnroe groundstrokes were pretty much merely a means of getting himself to the net, probably wouldnt get him far in todays climate alright.

Pero_Bueno

Looks like Wimbledon.com is broadcasting this for free - outside the UK at least ...

Christy42

The conditioning makes them impossible to compare in my opinion. I also don't think you can simply ignore court type.

If you could put peak Nole,Fed, or Nadal in the same competition this court style would decide who would win.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Very obviously true, but at the same time hardly their fault they were conditioned to play for the time they were born into. Doesn't lessen their greatness in any way, least as far as I'm concerned anyway. For McEnroe groundstrokes were pretty much merely a means of getting himself to the net, probably wouldnt get him far in todays climate alright.

I was a Big Mac fan. His groundstrokes were ugly, and not close to strong enough to see him compete today. You’re talking straight sets losses to the likes of RF/Nole and Rafa. Him and many others before him and after him..

Sampras? Would absolutely fare better, but that’s mainly due to his serve. Take that away and he loses 90 percent of rallies v the three best of recent years..

walshb

I was more thinking the 5 setters being best to analyze..

walshb

I’m thinking this could be very close...

iamwhoiam

The slow hand clapping for a legal challenge is just awful

NoviGlitzko

walshb wrote: »

I was a Big Mac fan. His groundstrokes were ugly, and not close to strong enough to see him compete today. You’re talking straight sets losses to the likes of RF/Nole and Rafa. Him and many others before him and after him..

Sampras? Would absolutely fare better, but that’s mainly due to his serve. Take that away and he loses 90 percent of rallies v the three best of recent years..

Sampras on 'real' grass would get victories against these guys. I'm sure of it. Any other surface and you're correct.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

I was a Big Mac fan. His groundstrokes were ugly, and not close to strong enough to see him compete today. You’re talking straight sets losses to the likes of RF/Nole and Rafa. Him and many others before him and after him..

Sampras? Would absolutely fare better, but that’s mainly due to his serve. Take that away and he loses 90 percent of rallies v the three best of recent years..

Of course, no player who played with the wooden racquets 30-40 years ago can compete with todays guys. Thats how the game has advanced and changed. How much allowance should you make when comparing eras? I'm not sure. Take golf for example, would Nicklaus be able to compete with the guys booming 350 yard drives today? Obviously he wouldn't.

walshb

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Sampras on 'real' grass would get victories against these guys. I'm sure of it. Any other surface and you're correct.

May get a few, but would lose more...they are simply too strong...

This real grass talk I hear is a crock of sh1t...

But even on ‘real’ grass, are they somehow inferior?

NoviGlitzko

walshb wrote: »

May get a few, but would lose more...they are simply too strong...

This real grass talk I hear is a crock of sh1t...

But even on ‘real’ grass, are they somehow inferior?

Well certainly Rafa is. You're probably right, but he'd still struggle against Pete. Therein is the beauty of fast grass. It heavily depleted defensive play. As you know yourself Federer had to adapt his S&V game to a baseline one when grass was homogenized in the early 00's. Fed/Nole would beat him for sure though IMO.

The Golden Miller

You can't judge era's like that. Natural talent doesn't improve year on year, generation after another. External factors and conditions do. Borg grows up under the same conditions as the others today, and the cream will still float to the top. So judging a young McEnroe under the conditions he played in, yes I would put him up there alongside Djokovic. Unless everything now in every sport is the best ever?

The Golden Miller

NoviGlitzko wrote: »

Well certainly Rafa is. You're probably right, but he'd still struggle against Pete. Therein is the beauty of fast grass. It heavily depleted defensive play. As you know yourself Federer had to adapt his S&V game to a baseline one when grass was homogenized in the early 00's. Fed/Nole would beat him for sure though IMO.

Federer-Sampras games would be decided by how good or consistent Sampras' serve is on any given day imo

dominatinMC

Back to Wimbledon 2018, Anderson looks really fatigued. Would be surprised if Djokovic doesn't take it in 3

Blazer

Joe_ Public wrote: »

. Take golf for example, would Nicklaus be able to compete with the guys booming 350 yard drives today? Obviously he wouldn't.

Of course he would using today’s technology.
Unlike tennis game is not hugely exerting stamina etx wouldn’t come into it.

Royale with Cheese

This is as competitive as last year's final.

The Golden Miller

dominatinMC wrote: »

Back to Wimbledon 2018, Anderson looks really fatigued. Would be surprised if Djokovic doesn't take it in 3

Aye, it's over already

C__MC

Nasal will be kicking himself with the tie break from Friday

Game over here,

MisterAnarchy

Joe_ Public wrote: »

How much allowance should you make when comparing eras? I'm not sure. Take golf for example, would Nicklaus be able to compete with the guys booming 350 yard drives today? Obviously he wouldn't.

Nicklaus would eat the guys today ,absolutely eat them.

He was one of the longest hitters in his day ,back when they had wooden heads and a crappy ball.
He was one of the best putters of all time and his temperament was phenomenal.

Pero_Bueno

Jesus the crowd really hate Djokovic ! ...