Wimbledon 2008

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
thetitans2k said:
NO one can come close to matching Nadal or Federer. The finals are predictable, but won't be boring.
Click to expand...

Oh, I know the match itself won't be boring! It'll be high-class tennis at its finest, as it always is when Federer and Nadal play against one another. I just feel it's boring in the sense that we continue to see the same two players battling it out for every grand slam title. This kind of thing obviously goes in phases, though.
 
C'mon Zheng! Please not another boring Williams sisters final.....and Venus is the most annoying player on the circuit.
 
GibsonGirl said:
Oh, I know the match itself won't be boring! It'll be high-class tennis at its finest, as it always is when Federer and Nadal play against one another. I just feel it's boring in the sense that we continue to see the same two players battling it out for every grand slam title. This kind of thing obviously goes in phases, though.
Click to expand...

We may have to just wait till a few other players step up their game...the only other player to do so at the moment is Djokovic...Gasquet has plenty of talent to do so, but he just isn't mentally tough enough...Murray may step up, but has seen the physical effort he needs to develop to go one step further. I can't really think of anyone else who could push the top two. Gulbis might in a few years...about it at the moment.

That's not to say the rest aren't excellent tennis players...just Rafa and Fed are responsible for upping the entire level tennis is played at.

Clement and Schuettler are both old pros who have been about for donks...with Clement being notable for his brightly coloured bandanas which he changes for every match...solid pros they both are but it is the furthest either have ever been in a grand slam....both are former top 10 players though...but Nadal shouldn't really be bothered by either.

A few comments on the bbc tennis forum have been annoying me ie. 'Nadal is a great athlete but he is not a naturally gifted tennis player'?....it takes a lot more than being a great athlete to win matches...the majority of tennis players are great athletes these days.
 
GibsonGirl said:
Oh, I know the match itself won't be boring! It'll be high-class tennis at its finest, as it always is when Federer and Nadal play against one another. I just feel it's boring in the sense that we continue to see the same two players battling it out for every grand slam title. This kind of thing obviously goes in phases, though.
Click to expand...

It does. Look on the positive though, at least we're lucky enough to have Nadal to compete with Federer. He may not be the most popular player but having 2 high level players is better than having a single guy (Pete Sampras for example) who's a prohibitive favorite in every tournament. Hopefully another player will step up and push them (maybe Djokovic?)
 
intedomine said:
C'mon Zheng! Please not another boring Williams sisters final.....and Venus is the most annoying player on the circuit.
Click to expand...

The last all-Williams final happened in 2003. It's not as predictable anymore as, say, Federer-Nadal.

LJT said:
We may have to just wait till a few other players step up their game...the only other player to do so at the moment is Djokovic...Gasquet has plenty of talent to do so, but he just isn't mentally tough enough...Murray may step up, but has seen the physical effort he needs to develop to go one step further. I can't really think of anyone else who could push the top two. Gulbis might in a few years...about it at the moment.

That's not to say the rest aren't excellent tennis players...just Rafa and Fed are responsible for upping the entire level tennis is played at.
Click to expand...

I would say that Djokovic is probably the greatest threat to Nadal and Federer right now. Give him two years, three years, and I'm sure he'll be a top contender if he continues to play as well as he has over the past few tournaments (current Wimbledon excluded). I just can't see Gasquet or Murray bringing themselves up to that level.


A few comments on the bbc tennis forum have been annoying me ie. 'Nadal is a great athlete but he is not a naturally gifted tennis player'?....it takes a lot more than being a great athlete to win matches...the majority of tennis players are great athletes these days.
Click to expand...

Let me guess. Die-hard Roger fans? I've seen a lot of ridiculous comments launched against Nadal by people who are afraid that he will surpass their hero. Either that, or they know absolutely nothing about tennis. Sheer physical fitness does not allow one to hit a perfect ground stroke.

Personally, I don't like Nadal very much, but my reasons have little to do with his ability or style of playing. I just...don't like him. I respect the fact that he is a brilliant tennis player - there's just something about his attitude/look that irritates me.



The Venus-Dementieva match has just gone to a tie-break in the second set. :yikes:

EDIT: Ah, no need for the yikes. :) Come on, Serena!
 
I really wish Roger could get that French Open. We're looking at probably the greatest tennis player of all time right now, but no one will give him his much deserved credit because he can't win the French.

Unfortunately he's run up against probably the greatest clay player ever in Nadal. I would love to see Nadal just slip up next year, and Roger would probably have no trouble winning, but I'd also like Roger to beat Nadal :)

It was the same thing with Sampras, couldn't win on clay, but Pete was always knocked out fairly early in the French, where Federer routinely makes it to the finals...and loses to Nadal :huh:
 
Very good point...while I think it was fair to knock Sampras for not being able to win on clay when you look at Federer it's more a case of "can't beat Nadal on clay" which isn't the same thing at all.
 
If Federer wants to be "greatest of all time" he should defnitely win in Paris.
 
U2girl said:
If Federer wants to be "greatest of all time" he should defnitely win in Paris.
Click to expand...

Why? Pete Sampras is considered by many to be the "greatest of all time," and he only ever made it to the semi-finals at Paris. Once. Federer has made it to the finals three times. Federer has also won more Australian Open titles than Sampras, and is close to reaching Sampras' Wimbledon record.

Then there's Björn Borg. Five Wimbledon titles (same as Federer, who might break that record tomorrow), four US Open titles (same as Federer), and no Australian Open titles. The only major difference between the two is that Borg was very successful at the French Open.

If Federer continues to play at his current standard over the next three or four years, there is no doubt in my mind that he will meet and exceed Sampras' grand slam record. He might not be able to be able to dominate on clay like Borg (or Nadal, for that matter), but I think he will certainly surpass him on every other surface.
 
If he wins the French before he retires, there's no doubt he's the greatest of all time.

He has beaten Nadal on clay, so it can be done :)
 
I think he's been good enough in the French that you can certainly fairly call him GoaT if he ends up with the most Slams. IMO he's been better in the French than Pete was, and people are quick to throw "greatest" around when discussing Pete.

Pretty good women's final today. Often when Venus and Serena play the match is less than what you'd expect from 2 players as good as they are; lots of unforced errors etc. But today I thought both played well, but Venus was just better. Or maybe it was rigged [/Dementieva]
 
whether the statistics will ever proof it I don't know
but from all the tennis footage I have seen Federer is the best tennis player ever
I guess winning Roland Garros would cement his position, but in my eyes there hasn't been a better player ever anyway

Federer would have studied what happened in that 2nd set between Nadal and Schuettler
Schuettler didn't even play that much better (he still was hardly able to read Nadal's service) but at times he made the ball do less himself and left more for Nadal to do
who didnt seem to enjoy that
 
Who caught Laura Robson yesterday?

The sweetheart 14 year-old whippersnapper Brit who won the Jr. Ladies Title at Wimbledon?

She's awesome and is now my favorite tennis player of all-time.

Meet the future of women's tennis in England...

IO_28012_gallery.JPG


Interviewer: "What would happen, Laura, if you played Venus Williams here next year?"
Laura Robson: "I would take her down!!!"
 
GibsonGirl said:
Why? Pete Sampras is considered by many to be the "greatest of all time," and he only ever made it to the semi-finals at Paris. Once. Federer has made it to the finals three times. Federer has also won more Australian Open titles than Sampras, and is close to reaching Sampras' Wimbledon record.

Then there's Björn Borg. Five Wimbledon titles (same as Federer, who might break that record tomorrow), four US Open titles (same as Federer), and no Australian Open titles. The only major difference between the two is that Borg was very successful at the French Open.

If Federer continues to play at his current standard over the next three or four years, there is no doubt in my mind that he will meet and exceed Sampras' grand slam record. He might not be able to be able to dominate on clay like Borg (or Nadal, for that matter), but I think he will certainly surpass him on every other surface.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If Sampras had won in Paris, there's no doubt he'd get the "greatest ever" mantle - as would anyone winning most tournaments and dominating on all kinds of surface. I would also argue Sampras had a stiffer competition in the 90's in Agassi compared to Nadal (or even Djokovic) but anyway.

Which is why he's not declared best ever, just like Borg (who'd be my pick for the domination and the legend players he was up against). Then again, how about Australian Rod Laver who won 2 Grand slams ? :shrug:

Sure he'll probably get past those 15 titles and yes he's great on all surfaces but IMO to be the best that has to include winning on all surfaces.

All that said, come on Nadal !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
10 11 12
Replies
333
Views
10K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
N
  • Locked
NBA 2022-23 Thread
46 47 48
Replies
1K
Views
45K
U2inUtah
U2inUtah
LuckyNumber7
U2 Catalog: Take the Survey!
3 4 5
Replies
146
Views
10K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7
Axver
The 2015 rugby union thread
3 4 5
Replies
142
Views
8K
Vlad n U 2
Vlad n U 2
lharper
Innocent Experience - Chapter 6
Replies
3
Views
1K
lharper
lharper

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom