[Winstonm]

Quote

It's so ridiculous when people claim now that the level of competition is not as high as in past generations. I have heard the same criticism about Tiger Woods. I go so far as to say it's patently absurd

I'm never impressed with the "Well, back in my day Tiger Woods had to walk to the course through three feet of snow" argument.

[andrei]

jdonn, on Jul 6 2009, 10:12 AM, said:

This 'mentally weak' talk is people favoring their own eras due to personal bias, nothing more.

bump

Have anybody seen last night AusOpen qtf match Federer - Davydenko?

So Davydenko is on a 13 match winning streak, also winning his last 2 matches against Federer.

He is playing very well early, 6-2 3-1 and he has 3 more chances for 4-1 and a double-break. He lost them. One was a mis-hit from Federer landing 2 meters from the net, a very easy shot for Davydenko, but he put it in the net.

Next thing you know? Federer's winning 13 games in a row, 2-6 6-3 6-0 2-0.

I guess Fed stepped up his game, lol

[gwnn]

buna Andrei,

I'm happy that I wasn't alone in the whole N hemisphere who watched it!

I didn't actually like the match that much. Sure enough Davydenko was great in the 1st set and Federer was great in the 3rd set but overall the match wasn't at a very high technical level. Of course it was a great battle and there was suspense, but since that 13 game streak it was never going to turn around.

Now it looks like it's going to be Fed vs Murray in the final, what say you? I have absolutely no clue, Murray was extraordinary vs Nadal, at a level that I think he has never even approached.

[andrei]

I watched it, but it was so predictable. As soon as Davydenko had 1 double-fault and 3 unforced to lose his service for 3-3 it was clear it will be all downhill for him. How can you dominate for 12 games and lose 13 straight after?

How about the new #2, Djokovic? Gifted only third-string players for the first 4 rounds, barely breaking a sweat, and in the first tough match to play he is tired after 2.5 hours, complaining of mysterious injuries and such.

I guess it is nice for Federer fans but man, very frustrating for all others who want to see some good men tennis.
You can see more fight in Serena or Henin than in any of the men players, other than Federer and Nadal (which might not play at the same high level again)


Murray was playing very good against Nadal, but it would be unsurprising if he would stink it up against Cilic, which he already did in September at US Open.

[gwnn]

haha women's tennis? are you serious? Venus vs Li was the worst match ever surely?!

[andrei]

I am not saying that women are going to beat men at tennis.

All I am saying is that Serena has more fight in her than almost all men players out there.

She recovered from 6-4 4-0 down, but it wasn't handed to her. In the third set, which she won 6-2, she had 18 winners to 4 unforced errors of her opponent.

Are you wondering about Federer - Davydenko 3rd set? 2 winners Federer to 14 unforced for Davydenko.

[Fluffy]

there was a time, it was Sampras's time I think, where women's tennis was the only fun to watch, and not because of the women with little clothes, but because you couldn't see anything on a men's match (Except on clay, was it when Thomas Muster won everything there?).

Now it is a bit different and I didn't know why untill I read here that grass is no longer as fast.

[gwnn]

it's how it should be don't you agree?

1. Nadal
2. Federer
3. Serena
4. Henin-Hardenne

you said that Serena and Justine have more fight in them than any guy out there except Nadal and Roger. Well why should the top 10 fighters all be men? I don't understand.

All I was saying that Venus vs Li was extremely poor, nobody had any fighting spirit whatsoever.