Re: World Tour Final: 2016

by Jahu Sun Nov 20, 2016 7:51 pm

Come on take it nowwwwwwwwwwwwww

by Jahu Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:00 pm

Yes yesssss Andy does it.

Glad he won first WTF and also finish No1 this year.

Well done.

by Veejay Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:05 pm

that was a shockingly poor performance from djokovic
but hats off to murray, thoroughly deserves the world end no1 ranking
happy to see the back of this season,not much i saw tickled my fancy
really hoping that next season has more to offer or ill start losing interest in following the game
its been a boring and awful season without federers beautiful shotmaking

by Daniel Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:17 pm

Wow. What a snoozer that was. Murray played not to lose - as usual. Just boring safe play. Djokovic is finished as the force he was a year ago. No chance he's ever coming back. Pathetic would be an understatement. That smash into the net was the worst shot I've ever seen a pro hit.

Garbage all round.

Even though Murray had it in the bag, he was whining and bitching. Can't stand the cretin.

by Tenez Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:18 pm

Shocking from Djoko indeed. So bizarre. One felt that he could turn it around any time but was just too nervous. His confidence has gone down the drain.

It was an ugly match. That's where we miss some gutsy winning tennis only Federer coudl provide.

by Veejay Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:20 pm

Daniel wrote:Wow. What a snoozer that was. Murray played not to lose - as usual. Just boring safe play. Djokovic is finished as the force he was a year ago. No chance he's ever coming back. Pathetic would be an understatement. That smash into the net was the worst shot I've ever seen a pro hit.

Garbage all round.

Even though Murray had it in the bag, he was whining and bitching. Can't stand the cretin.

by Veejay Sun Nov 20, 2016 8:21 pm

Tenez wrote:Shocking from Djoko indeed. So bizarre. One felt that he could turn it around any time but was just too nervous. His confidence has gone down the drain.

It was an ugly match. That's where we miss some gutsy winning tennis only Federer coudl provide.

cannot agree more tenez

by Tenez Sun Nov 20, 2016 9:12 pm

well the good news is that Djoko has not equalled the 6 masters of Federer and on that performance alone he clearly did not deserve it.

by Daniel Mon Nov 21, 2016 8:19 am

He also didn't equal his YE #1 (5 - Sampras 6) - and it also puts a huge dent in his quest to have more than 302 weeks #1.

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 9:42 am

I wonder whether he will recover that number 1 spot. He has so much to defend and he is so nervous nowadays.

It's easy to show off when playing a gutsy talented player you know has not the fitness to keep up.....but when asked to hit winners, we don't find many at the very top nowadays.

Yesterday's match was not decided by the winners but the UEs count again.

So sad.

by legendkillar Mon Nov 21, 2016 9:47 am

Tenez wrote:Shocking from Djoko indeed. So bizarre. One felt that he could turn it around any time but was just too nervous. His confidence has gone down the drain.

It was an ugly match. That's where we miss some gutsy winning tennis only Federer coudl provide.

That right there for me symbolises the epitome of fanaticism in sport. Now I am not just singling you out Tenez, because I see it across many forums. I don't subscribe that Federer is the only one who can provide gutsy winning tennis. His Swiss counterpart has more than exceeded him that count in recent memory.

More and more I see on forums people proclaiming the death of tennis or other sports in general should someone exceptional stand to one side. People were watching tennis before Federer and will so afterwards. I won't miss Federer because he is talent and potential realised personified. He has achieved and fulfilled his talent. Became the standardbearer of the sport. Like you I've watched sport over decades and seen many not achieve the level of success their talent has warranted. Le Tissier, Garcia, Michalak to name a few. People should not mourn Federer's absence. If Goffin or Fognini had an ounce of (I hate the word) professionalism of a Federer, they would've fulfilled their promise.

I don't buy into the gloom that Murray is no.1. For years people have wanted Djokovic knocked off the top and Murray has done that. Djokovic's body language at the end of the match said to me this is a guy clearly relieved from burden of that ranking. Least with Murray as No.1 the field might see him as a beatable No.1. I hope that energises the rest of the field.

by AceofDeath Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:30 am

legendkillar wrote:People should not mourn Federer's absence.

No, we should mourn the fact that Murray can't hit a winner and only wins matches because he outlasts everyone, just like Nadal.

Tennis is an afterthought with these boring styles of play.

by Daniel Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:33 am

Wawrinka isn't Federer 2006. No-one is. But I agree there are players capable of playing proper attacking tennis. Unfortunately, the number isn't very large.

On current tour:

Wawrinka
Federer (a shadow of his former self, though)
Del Potro

Are the only ones who can blow the other guy off the court - totally wipe them out. Then you have the ones who either have nerve issues or consistency issues

Kyrgios
Thiem
Raonic (to some extent).
Cilic (Plays one great match every leap year)

But that's about it. The top 2 in the world are extremely defensive baseliners - and they lead the rankings by a fair distance. The Wn1 is the most safe boring player I have ever seen play the game.

I am hoping Del Potro comes back to form, because if he does - these pretenders are fucked.

Say what you want about Nadal, the old Nadal would kill the current Murray and Djokovic in most tournaments. There's no-one truly challenging these two - and it isn't because they are playing great. That Tour Finals final was the worst standard I have seen from ANY pro in a major final - let alone the top 2.

by luvsports! Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:10 pm

I WILL MOURN HIS PASSING AND WEEP FOR DAYS ON END!

by legendkillar Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:38 pm

luvsports! wrote:I WILL MOURN HIS PASSING AND WEEP FOR DAYS ON END!

Worry not young man! you'll need to wait another lifetime for another Federer! Winking

by legendkillar Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:48 pm

Don't usually agree much with Big Mac, but I think for once he speaks some sense:

"Murray is an amazing athlete. He's going to try to take advantage of this time because it's limited, we all know that," said former number one John McEnroe.

"I do anticipate he's going to do everything possible to take advantage of it.

"But I would hope there's a lot of hungry players behind him that see a void and an opening, as well as Novak, who wants to catch Rafa Nadal and potentially Roger Federer."

The bits in bold certainly are true and hold weight.

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 1:55 pm

LK my post was not so much about Federer but the type of games displayed by the current top 2. Simply ugly if not disgusting from a spectator standpoint. Stan gaves us 3 great slams certainly and i created a great thread about him. But I referred to Frderer cause unlike Stan Fed had enough talent to match those RRunners consistently. Stan is just way too much up and down.

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 1:59 pm

Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

by Daniel Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:15 pm

McEnroe can't be all that intelligent if he thinks it's even remotely possible to catch Federer. He has been harping on about it for years. First Nadal, now Djokovic. He clearly has no comprehension for how difficult it is to reach 17 slams - or the fact Djok would need to completely rewrite the history of tennis post age 27 to do it. You'd think he would do considering he is Great that stopped winning Slams long before 30. But I really wonder if he's hit his head since then.

On Murray - I don't even think he's professional. Do you know another player that bitches and screams like he does ? gets distracted by lights ? Shouts at his own team?

by legendkillar Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:32 pm

Tenez wrote:Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

BO3. 5 matches. Over 11 hours of on court time. Average 2 hours 15 per match!

by Veejay Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:55 pm

legendkillar wrote:
Tenez wrote:Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

BO3. 5 matches. Over 11 hours of on court time. Average 2 hours 15 per match!

im with tenez on this LK,murray isnt a natural athlete
he has worked very hard to get his fitness level there and i too suspect that he has had some chemical help along he way to get there

by Veejay Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:56 pm

Daniel wrote:McEnroe can't be all that intelligent if he thinks it's even remotely possible to catch Federer. He has been harping on about it for years. First Nadal, now Djokovic. He clearly has no comprehension for how difficult it is to reach 17 slams - or the fact Djok would need to completely rewrite the history of tennis post age 27 to do it. You'd think he would do considering he is Great that stopped winning Slams long before 30. But I really wonder if he's hit his head since then.

On Murray - I don't even think he's professional. Do you know another player that bitches and screams like he does ? gets distracted by lights ? Shouts at his own team?

i agree,its unbearable watching him..very unprofessional behaviour too

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:42 pm

legendkillar wrote:
Tenez wrote:Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

BO3. 5 matches. Over 11 hours of on court time. Average 2 hours 15 per match!

Yes. The stats are very impressive. Thats my point. But he had a bad record v Nadal and Djoko over the distance despite being of the same age. So he can do it now cause Froome can do it too and si can the olympic team. To me there is something fishy in UK sport like there was in RDA or spain more recently.

There is no explanation to Murray amazing fitness considering we have known him for years and he was never an outstanding athlete. And we also have his brother as reference when considering the genetics.

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:46 pm

Daniel wrote:
On Murray - I don't even think he's professional. Do you know another player that bitches and screams like he does ? gets distracted by lights ? Shouts at his own team?

What does professional mean? It means doing the job....or delivering if you prefer. Whatever he does on and off the court he has delivered the number 1 spot. Whether we like him or not.

by noleisthebest Mon Nov 21, 2016 5:46 pm

Tenez wrote:I wonder whether he will recover that number 1 spot. He has so much to defend and he is so nervous nowadays.

It's easy to show off when playing a gutsy talented player you know has not the fitness to keep up.....but when asked to hit winners, we don't find many at the very top nowadays.

Yesterday's match was not decided by the winners but the UEs count again.

So sad.

I am bewildered (though not surprised) with his match last night.

He played some great tennis against Nishikori just 24 hours before.

Yes, I know it's different opoonents etc, but such fear I have not seen in him probably ever.

With the 24:7 H2H (or stg like that) what reason did he have for such performance?
Where did the confidence go?

I will not dwell any further...it's pointless.

Can he recover number one?

As I said before this tournament, until he sorts his household - he won't.

Personally, I think he should retire.

Though, as I also said...miracles do happen.

This has been such a strange year.

Hopefully, 2017 will be better.

ps

At least Serbia has a junior number one Big Grin

http://www.itftennis.com/juniors/rankings/player-rankings.aspx

by Veejay Mon Nov 21, 2016 6:29 pm

Tenez wrote:
Daniel wrote:
On Murray - I don't even think he's professional. Do you know another player that bitches and screams like he does ? gets distracted by lights ? Shouts at his own team?

What does professional mean? It means doing the job....or delivering if you prefer. Whatever he does on and off the court he has delivered the number 1 spot. Whether we like him or not.

i think wha daniel means is that his behaviour on court is very unprofessional
i have to agree with him,the tantrums he throws,his mannerisms,how he addresses the umpire, the way plays up to the crowd
i would find all of that incredibly distracting if i was his opponent
in comparison to federer,who always shows his opponent a lot of respect by only ever focusing across the net and rarely celebrates a point in a way to intimidate his opponent
if youre a professional in any type of career,theres a certain code of conduct,a lot of the times its unwritten rules that you live or abide by,if you do that,people call you professional

by Tenez Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:58 pm

yes but that is a side effect of being "professional". Some needs this to deliver. Like Energy companies need to make pricing very complicated to confuse customers and increase revenue.

I say he is professional cause nothing is left to chance when it comes to winning. This negativity he spits out frees him a bit while probably affecting the opponent.

Ugly certainly but helps him deliver.

by Daniel Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:43 pm

It's not a side effect of being professional. It's the exact opposite. Borg and Federer did not win 10+ slams with that kind of frailty and behaviour - and it's a miracle Murray has won what he has with it. He's likely underachieved due to his lack of professionalism.

No other player has behaved the way Murray does - not even McEnroe. Murray screams and shouts at the smallest of things and does things no pro would. It's not a strength.

by noleisthebest Mon Nov 21, 2016 11:50 pm

It is/ used to be a weakness of character as he is/was unwilling to control his behavior: rude, selfish and very ugly - a spoilt brat.

Maybe at the beginning of his career it appeared as his player's weakness...but it has always been a masked vanity: he was hysterical because he was losing and couldn't do anything about it (usually vs Federer, Nadal and Djokovic)

Now, it's different...it's a calculated, planned muttering, yelling, intimidating. Very professional, very Machiavellian.

He knows exactly why he is doing it.

It's not his weakness...in a perverted sense - it's his "strength" and a weapon. He annoys the opponent and tries to get under his skin, and if he succeeds he is avle to destabilise their emotional balance and drag them down into his slow and dead tennis.

He did it to Stan, to Nishi...

Did you notice the not stop talking to himself.

That is extremely irritating for an opponent.

And he does it all on purpose. He does not damage himself - only the player across the net. Slowly, but surely - like a dripping tap.

The yelling of c'mon on the opponent's UE!
What's all that about?

It's like someone tells you they lost their job and you say: Yess!

Would any of you do it?

What type of person can?

Well, Andy Murray.

Sorry...SIR Andy Murray.

by Slippy Tue Nov 22, 2016 7:39 am

Tenez wrote:Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

Which matches do you think he's won this year by outlasting someone? I can't think of any. Indeed, he's lost two big 5 set matches including against Del Potro. He's in good shape (as one would expect a top athlete to be) but I doubt he's in the top 10 of the ATP based on pure stamina.

by legendkillar Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:20 am

Tenez wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
Tenez wrote:Murray is anything but an amazing athlete. He has an amazing "team" and is certainly very professional. But its clear that no one can be built like that and outlast everybody else without chemical help.

Thats a simple fact and only real fanatism can blind this fact.

BO3. 5 matches. Over 11 hours of on court time. Average 2 hours 15 per match!

Yes. The stats are very impressive. Thats my point. But he had a bad record v Nadal and Djoko over the distance despite being of the same age. So he can do it now cause Froome can do it too and si can the olympic team. To me there is something fishy in UK sport like there was in RDA or spain more recently.

There is no explanation to Murray amazing fitness considering we have known him for years and he was never an outstanding athlete. And we also have his brother as reference when considering the genetics.

Wasn't disputing the points you put forward. In fact those numbers I posted you could argue lend themselves to your views. Simply if you look at those numbers, quite scary.

by Tenez Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:56 am

Yes and it's also interesting to see he is allowed to suddenly take 30s on average again.

Those extra seconds make such difference when someone his loaded with extra red cells. It's almost a clear sign that the ATP wanted to have a new World number 1.

by Veejay Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:05 am

Tenez wrote:yes but that is a side effect of being "professional". Some needs this to deliver. Like Energy companies need to make pricing very complicated to confuse customers and increase revenue.

I say he is professional cause nothing is left to chance when it comes to winning. This negativity he spits out frees him a bit while probably affecting the opponent.

Ugly certainly but helps him deliver.

i think that there is a difference between being successful and being professional
its entirely plausible to be successful without being professional
being professional means that you are abiding by a certain code of conduct or doing what is expected of you to be classified as being professional
murray does not conduct himself on court in a professional manner,his work ethic may be very professional and he can certainly get the job done but the way he behaves on court is very unprofessional
lets be honest,you cant really throw tantrums like that in a professional environment,whether it be in business or any other professional career,it would be very unprofessional to do so

by Slippy Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:25 am

Are the match lengths really scary? Imagine it was a slam:

Cilic - easy two sets
Day off
Kei - equivalent to 4 sets
Day off
Stan - easy two sets

Easy week 1 for a slam.

The weekend is where it gets tougher. It was basically playing a long four set match followed by the final the next day. I thought that would be tough and Novak would win a competitive first set and ease to the second. In fact, Novak was poor and Andy played some good aggressive stuff. The match ended in c. 90 minutes. I suspect Andy wouldn't have had much left if it went to 3.

None of this seems "scary" to me. Surely we'd expect any professional athlete to be able to manage that schedule?

by Slippy Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:22 am

Veejay wrote:
Tenez wrote:yes but that is a side effect of being "professional". Some needs this to deliver. Like Energy companies need to make pricing very complicated to confuse customers and increase revenue.

I say he is professional cause nothing is left to chance when it comes to winning. This negativity he spits out frees him a bit while probably affecting the opponent.

Ugly certainly but helps him deliver.
i think that there is a difference between being successful and being professional
its entirely plausible to be successful without being professional
being professional means that you are abiding by a certain code of conduct or doing what is expected of you to be classified as being professional
murray does not conduct himself on court in a professional manner,his work ethic may be very professional and he can certainly get the job done but the way he behaves on court is very unprofessional
lets be honest,you cant really throw tantrums like that in a professional environment,whether it be in business or any other professional career,it would be very unprofessional to do so

Agree with this. Andy seems very professional off-court and seems fairly "normal" given his wealth and status (as do the other big 4 members incidentally). However, his demeanour on court isn't always as professional as it could be. I can think of at least three big slam matches where he's managed to talk himself out of potential winning positions by letting small things get to him. I can also fully understand why that behaviour makes him more difficult to appreciate as a neutral.

by legendkillar Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:22 am

Slippy wrote:Are the match lengths really scary? Imagine it was a slam:

Cilic - easy two sets
Day off
Kei - equivalent to 4 sets
Day off
Stan - easy two sets

Easy week 1 for a slam.

The weekend is where it gets tougher. It was basically playing a long four set match followed by the final the next day. I thought that would be tough and Novak would win a competitive first set and ease to the second. In fact, Novak was poor and Andy played some good aggressive stuff. The match ended in c. 90 minutes. I suspect Andy wouldn't have had much left if it went to 3.

None of this seems "scary" to me. Surely we'd expect any professional athlete to be able to manage that schedule?

First rule of any comparison is compare apples with apples.

This was a BO3 format, not a Slam. On average Andy's match lengths were over 2 hours. For a BO3 format match average, that is quite scary.

The very fact that it was observed by pundits watching the practice sessions on match day that Murray was walking and moving stiffly would suggest that such a schedule is not quite the manageable schedule that all professional tennis players can aspire to?

by Veejay Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:38 pm

you also have to take into consideration that its the end of the season,they have all that tennis in their legs
especially murray who won the last 4 tournaments
i was quite surprised that he looked fresher and fitter in the final then djokovic

by Slippy Tue Nov 22, 2016 1:46 pm

LK - as I indicated above, I expected him to tire if the match went long. It obviously wasn't ideal to play a 3.5 hour match the day before. My point was that I'd expect a competent athlete to be able to compete the day after, albeit probably be a bit stiff and maybe struggle in a long match. Fortunately for Andy, Novak was poor and he was able to close the match out quickly.

I don't regard Andy's performance as superhuman or overly exceptional fitness wise. He looked a bit drained all week and I'm sure he was very sore on Monday. Tenez seems to be saying only a drugged up competitor could possibly have won in Andy's shoes. It's that I'm really disagreeing with.

by legendkillar Tue Nov 22, 2016 2:38 pm

Slippy wrote:LK - as I indicated above, I expected him to tire if the match went long. It obviously wasn't ideal to play a 3.5 hour match the day before. My point was that I'd expect a competent athlete to be able to compete the day after, albeit probably be a bit stiff and maybe struggle in a long match. Fortunately for Andy, Novak was poor and he was able to close the match out quickly.

I don't regard Andy's performance as superhuman or overly exceptional fitness wise. He looked a bit drained all week and I'm sure he was very sore on Monday. Tenez seems to be saying only a drugged up competitor could possibly have won in Andy's shoes. It's that I'm really disagreeing with.

The competency of an athlete isn't completely measured by their physical conditioning. Especially when in this case we are talking tennis. The point is if I were a tennis player, would I actually be preparing for potentially 5 BO3 matches by ensuring that my body could withstand nearly 12 hours of on court tennis? On top of that when you have to fit in periods of recovery and practice? I wouldn't take anything like that for granted. I wouldn't expect many tennis players alive who could say with absolute confidence their body could endure that amount of tennis.

Croft, Rusedski, Flemming, Petchey were all saying and expecting each and every upcoming Murray match must be a stretch too far given how much tennis he has played post US Open. Look at the amount of matches played by Murray and by Djokovic coming into the final:

Murray: 26 matches (including DC) = 48 hours and 11 minutes of tennis (that includes 2 walkovers!)
Djokovic: 11 matches = 18 hours and 45 minutes of tennis

I can see why some eyebrows are raised. A quarter of that court time was at one tournament alone!

by Veejay Tue Nov 22, 2016 2:51 pm

Slippy wrote:LK - as I indicated above, I expected him to tire if the match went long. It obviously wasn't ideal to play a 3.5 hour match the day before. My point was that I'd expect a competent athlete to be able to compete the day after, albeit probably be a bit stiff and maybe struggle in a long match. Fortunately for Andy, Novak was poor and he was able to close the match out quickly.

I don't regard Andy's performance as superhuman or overly exceptional fitness wise. He looked a bit drained all week and I'm sure he was very sore on Monday. Tenez seems to be saying only a drugged up competitor could possibly have won in Andy's shoes. It's that I'm really disagreeing with.

slippy,no pro athlete in any physical sports or discipline competes on pure adrenaline alone
its not only completely impossible with how physically demanding competitive sport is today,you simply would stand no chance otherwise
they are all drugged up,whether it be on banned substances or legal substances ( or a combination of both)

by Tenez Tue Nov 22, 2016 3:42 pm

legendkillar wrote:
The competency of an athlete isn't completely measured by their physical conditioning. Especially when in this case we are talking tennis.

By what then? Murray's great shots? Every player he played in that 02 had better shots than him....even Djoko for the first few games. He just was able to force enough UEs to all his opponents and that's why he won. And how do you force UEs to opponents? By telling them that you will retrieve almost anything and that if it is not good enough, you will have to be running with me.

It's very simple.

by legendkillar Tue Nov 22, 2016 3:49 pm

Tenez wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
The competency of an athlete isn't completely measured by their physical conditioning. Especially when in this case we are talking tennis.

By what then? Murray's great shots? Every player he played in that 02 had better shots than him....even Djoko for the first few games. He just was able to force enough UEs to all his opponents and that's why he won. And how do you force UEs to opponents? By telling them that you will retrieve almost anything and that it is not good enough, you will have to be running with me.

It's very simple.

Huh?

Totally irrelevant to the point I am making. The point was made that a competent athlete (well tennis player) is expected to be able to endure 12 hours of tennis in a BO3 format tournament over 5 matches. I am questioning whether any player would actually have the upmost confidence that their body could endure that amount of court time and tennis.

In terms of competency. It's not just an athlete's body that has to be well tuned and conditioned. The mind equally if not most, needs to be in fine order too.

So no, it's not that simple. A player's mind and body can only stretch so far...Unless it has the capacity to absorb more in which case is unique to the individual case.

by Tenez Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:23 pm

It's not about running for 12h. They can all do it when resting every other game. It's about pulling the risky (little margin) shot ato the end of a 10 or 20 shot rally.

That is difficult and that is what Murray avoids doing and that is why he wins....no different than what Nadal and djoko used to do.

by noleisthebest Tue Nov 22, 2016 4:44 pm

Tenez wrote:It's not about running for 12h. They can all do it when resting every other game. It's about pulling the risky (little margin) shot ato the end of a 10 or 20 shot rally.

That is difficult and that is what Murray avoids doing and that is why he wins....no different than what Nadal and djoko used to do.

I'd call it micro fitness.

Plus, Murray often pushes the ball back causing the attacker to create pace (i.e. use more energy and risk), not to mention giving opponents stress over timing overheads in the indoor lights conditions.

So he uses B grade shots to win.

It's hard to like and respect.

Plus, he is clearly reverting umpiring to dark ages of allowing 30 secs.

I reckon majority tennis fans still don't understand the importance of keeping that 25/29 sec. rule.

by Jahu Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:52 pm

Mats finally saying what I've been saying for last 5 years, no one cares for Djoko.

https://twitter.com/SarahCTeNniS/status/800762874448805888/video/1

by noleisthebest Tue Nov 22, 2016 11:07 pm

Wilander is a first class idiot.

by Tenez Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:19 am

I think it is fair to say no one cares for Djokovic but it's even fair to say to that most of the crowd cares but dislike Murray.

by Slippy Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:53 am

Tenez wrote:I think it is fair to say no one cares for Djokovic but it's even fair to say to that most of the crowd cares but dislike Murray.

Murray was second behind Federer (albeit a long way behind) in the fans favourite award. He's generally a popular guy with fans and his fellow players.

by Slippy Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:53 am

noleisthebest wrote:Wilander is a first class idiot.

Agree with this!

by Jahu Wed Nov 23, 2016 7:39 am

As far as he does not like Djoko, I like Wilander.

Is he a dumbass commentator on matches, yes.

by Sponsored content

Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat	Sun
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30

Who Is Going To Win WTF?