Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
US Open (Tennis)
Comments
-
If he does as well as Henman and reaches Semi finals of Grand Slams and as high as 4 in the world he would have done very well with Dominic Theim at 23 and Alexander Zverev the Wunderkind who is already in the Mens top 50 at the tender age of 19.ForeverAddickted said:
Hopefully Kyle Edmund is going to be the next Andy Murray rather than Tim Henmansoapboxsam said:The Paradox for me with Murray is, he was saying how he loves the raucous
atmosphere of New York in the rounds when he was Kicking butt, but when the games against Nishikori got close he was distracted by everything.
I have been on the roller coast ride with Andy since he beat Roddick 11 years ago. This defeat did surprise me because he grabbed defeat from the Jaws of victory.
When he retires we will realise how great he is when the next generation reach the odd quarter final, once in a blue moon.0 -
Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
0 -
Henman was such a disappointment because, at his very best, he was good enough to win a Slam, but could never quite string together two weeks of top performances at the right time. If it had just stayed dry or he hadn't lost his mojo after the rain break vs Goran, he may well have been Britain's first mens Wimbledon champion since Perry. Instead he is, very harshly, a bit of a joke figure. I doubt the Japanese laugh at Nishikori like we do at Henman, even though he is probably a similar level within the current ranks to that of Henman in his days.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
The likes of Jeremy bates were just flat out no hopers. I suspect Edmund will end up somewhere between the two. Looks like a, reasonably, regular 3rd round to qtr finals type of player to me.1 -
Absolute toilet performance so far from Monfils. Rightly booed by the crowd here.0
-
Hen an just didn't have enough power to his game as tennis evolved, maybe if he had been around 10 years earlier he might have won WimbledonExiled_Addick said:
Henman was such a disappointment because, at his very best, he was good enough to win a Slam, but could never quite string together two weeks of top performances at the right time. If it had just stayed dry or he hadn't lost his mojo after the rain break vs Goran, he may well have been Britain's first mens Wimbledon champion since Perry. Instead he is, very harshly, a bit of a joke figure. I doubt the Japanese laugh at Nishikori like we do at Henman, even though he is probably a similar level within the current ranks to that of Henman in his days.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
The likes of Jeremy bates were just flat out no hopers. I suspect Edmund will end up somewhere between the two. Looks like a, reasonably, regular 3rd round to qtr finals type of player to me.0 -
Grass was always his best chance for sure, though in true British style, just when we had a serve-volleyer that might be good enough to win Wimbledon, they started changing to courts to better favour the baseliners. 6 career grand slam semi finals though show he got close often enough for it not to be a fluke like Rusedski making the US open final that time.killerandflash said:
Hen an just didn't have enough power to his game as tennis evolved, maybe if he had been around 10 years earlier he might have won WimbledonExiled_Addick said:
Henman was such a disappointment because, at his very best, he was good enough to win a Slam, but could never quite string together two weeks of top performances at the right time. If it had just stayed dry or he hadn't lost his mojo after the rain break vs Goran, he may well have been Britain's first mens Wimbledon champion since Perry. Instead he is, very harshly, a bit of a joke figure. I doubt the Japanese laugh at Nishikori like we do at Henman, even though he is probably a similar level within the current ranks to that of Henman in his days.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
The likes of Jeremy bates were just flat out no hopers. I suspect Edmund will end up somewhere between the two. Looks like a, reasonably, regular 3rd round to qtr finals type of player to me.1 -
I think Henman over achieved throughout his career. He didn't have a world class ground shot or serve but mixed it with the best for a decade. I'm not his biggest fan but I admire his toughness.Exiled_Addick said:
Henman was such a disappointment because, at his very best, he was good enough to win a Slam, but could never quite string together two weeks of top performances at the right time. If it had just stayed dry or he hadn't lost his mojo after the rain break vs Goran, he may well have been Britain's first mens Wimbledon champion since Perry. Instead he is, very harshly, a bit of a joke figure. I doubt the Japanese laugh at Nishikori like we do at Henman, even though he is probably a similar level within the current ranks to that of Henman in his days.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
The likes of Jeremy bates were just flat out no hopers. I suspect Edmund will end up somewhere between the two. Looks like a, reasonably, regular 3rd round to qtr finals type of player to me.0 -
Yes, it's unfair when people say he didn't win Majors because he was too nice or too middle class, he made the most of his talents. As it turns out, he had one golden chance to win Wimbledon and it didn't happen for him...SantaClaus said:
I think Henman over achieved throughout his career. He didn't have a world class ground shot or serve but mixed it with the best for a decade. I'm not his biggest fan but I admire his toughness.Exiled_Addick said:
Henman was such a disappointment because, at his very best, he was good enough to win a Slam, but could never quite string together two weeks of top performances at the right time. If it had just stayed dry or he hadn't lost his mojo after the rain break vs Goran, he may well have been Britain's first mens Wimbledon champion since Perry. Instead he is, very harshly, a bit of a joke figure. I doubt the Japanese laugh at Nishikori like we do at Henman, even though he is probably a similar level within the current ranks to that of Henman in his days.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Or will Kyle be the new John Lloyd or Jeremy Bates?
I suspect Henman and Murray are the exceptions rather than the rule.
Hope I'm wrong
The likes of Jeremy bates were just flat out no hopers. I suspect Edmund will end up somewhere between the two. Looks like a, reasonably, regular 3rd round to qtr finals type of player to me.0 -
Has anyone ever had an easier path to a major final than Djokovic in this tournament?
1 walkover, 2 retirements, played a total of 13.5 sets.
Compared to Wawrinka who's played 23 sets and spent more time on court than anyone in the torunament0 -
Depends on what you define as easy I guess, in terms of sets yes I think he is, but then at least he's played a couple of top 10 players along the way (though only half of the game v Tsonga!) whereas others in the past have had draws really open up and not play anyone of note.Chris_from_Sidcup said:Has anyone ever had an easier path to a major final than Djokovic in this tournament?
1 walkover, 2 retirements, played a total of 13.5 sets.
Compared to Wawrinka who's played 23 sets and spent more time on court than anyone in the torunament
Only example I can think of off the top of my head is Mal Washington at Wimbledon 1996 when he only played one seed in Todd Martin, and basically Todd Martin choked and threw it away.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Murray wins!!!
Jamie that is, a second grand slam title of the year, it's as if the Murray brothers alternate who wins, and who crashes out :-)
Andy in Winbledon and the Olympics
Jamie in Australia and the US1 -
Decent women's final yesterday, so far a good men's final0
-
Hoping Wawrinka can do it but think Djokovic will win.0
-
Never appreciated what a good player Warinka is.0
-
It is now! Sheesh.0
-
That was a staggering performance, some of the highest-level sport I've seen2
-
Equals Murray (britains greatest sportsman according to some) with three slams.
Three finals three wins - Stan has got to feel unlucky that he plays in the sports greatest era. Imagine how many slams Stan could have won if not for Roger Novak and Rafa....0 -
Murray = 3 Grand Slams / 1 Davis Cup / 2 Olympic Gold Medals / 1 Olympic Doubles Silver MedalMrOneLung said:Equals Murray (britains greatest sportsman according to some) with three slams.
Three finals three wins - Stan has got to feel unlucky that he plays in the sports greatest era. Imagine how many slams Stan could have won if not for Roger Novak and Rafa....
Wawrinka = 3 Grand Slams / 1 Davis Cup / 1 Olympic Doubles Gold Medal
Both have extremely similar records and believe the gap is closer between Murray / Wawrinka than Djokovic / Murray... At the same time Andy isnt our Greatest EVER Sportsman but he is our Greatest in the last couple of decades.0 -
Three slams at three different venues. He just needs Wimbledon for a career Grand Slam.MrOneLung said:Equals Murray (britains greatest sportsman according to some) with three slams.
Three finals three wins - Stan has got to feel unlucky that he plays in the sports greatest era. Imagine how many slams Stan could have won if not for Roger Novak and Rafa....0 -
On another note its mental that Wawrinka is two years older than Murray and Djokovic
Surely those two have been around for a lot longer than Stan!!0 - Sponsored links:
-
I'm not so sure he'd have a load more - he's been a bit of a late bloomer in upping his game from a top ten player (Ferrer sort of level) to a Grand Slam winner.MrOneLung said:Equals Murray (britains greatest sportsman according to some) with three slams.
Three finals three wins - Stan has got to feel unlucky that he plays in the sports greatest era. Imagine how many slams Stan could have won if not for Roger Novak and Rafa....
His two finals v Djokovic have been stunningly good performances.0 -
Wawrinka has been doing the circuit for many years. Just never broke the top 10 until more recently than the other guys.
His Grand Slam record was three QF appearances prior to US Open 2013. He was a consistent third or fourth rounder from 2005 but only kicked on in the last three years.0 -
And to think Dan Evans very nearly beat him. Evans should take a lot of heart from that.7
-
Yes Stan was lucky to get away with that one, Djokovic had a ridiculous route to the final.Weegie Addick said:And to think Dan Evans very nearly beat him. Evans should take a lot of heart from that.
Murray has had a terrific season really. Hopefully now with a little more strength in depth from the British players that next year should be great for everyone
0 -
I do think that Murray was physically spent and yes I do think he has been a great sportsman for us - was just comparing the slams total as doubt Stan will be mentioned amongst the greats of this era.
Anyone know how many games the main protagonists have each played this year including Davis Cup and Olympics ?0 -
I'm guessing you mean Djokovic / Murray / Nadal / Federer / Wawrinka?MrOneLung said:Anyone know how many games the main protagonists have each played this year including Davis Cup and Olympics ?
Federer v Murray hasnt happened this year, nor has Federer v Nadal, nor has Federer v Wawrinka
Djokovic and Murray have faced each other four times... (Djokovic has won three)
Nadal and Murray have faced each other twice... (Both won on one occasion)
Djokovic has played Nadal three times this year winning all of them
Djokovic has faced Federer just once this year yet won
Murray has faced Wawrinka once this year and won
Djokovic has faced Wawrinka once this year and lost (Last Night)
Nadal has faced Wawrinka once this year and won0 -
Sorry FA - might not have been clear.
I meant how many games has each of them played in total this year, not against each other.0 -
Djokovic in his current state of fitness was always vulnerable if facing a true contest. A fresher Murray in the final would have done the same to him surely?
Stan does seem to be a bit of a bogey player for Djokovic though,0 -
Wawrinka ... 39-12MrOneLung said:Sorry FA - might not have been clear.
I meant how many games has each of them played in total this year, not against each other.
Murray ... 54-8
Federer ... 21-7
Djokovic ... 56-6
Interesting as had Murray won just one more of those matches against Djokovic they'd have a joint Win-Loss record this year.1 -
On another note... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/37336113
Wawrinka, who has now won his past 11 finals.
That is definitely impressive... As Wawrinka says in response to Djokovic's "Big Five" claim... He's not quite there yet as his overall record against the others appears poor in the rounds leading up to a Final yet at the moment Stan is the one person these guys dont seem to want to face if he actually reaches the Final as is really able to step up.
At the same time though I dont think it can be called the Big Four now though because Nadal for me is History
A great Tennis player and he will certainly go down with the greatest yet injuries are just too common now1
