Archive for Percy896's Tennis Forum This is a new tennis forum to discuss professional tennis, vote and create polls, and ask advice about equipment, fitness, or anything regarding tennis! Now with a new Fantasy Tennis League!
I picked the Aussie open because of the big surprise of Baghdatis. The rest of the GS were predictable
x.doublea
The AO was the tournament which was actually not Nadal vs. Federer in the final (altough Nadal didn't play....).
Rattler
Wimbly....Nadal was the biggest suprise.
Tennis fan
I picked the AO becuase oif Baghdatis. He came out of nowhere! The question follwoing the AO was whether he was a fluke or not; but he proved that he is no fluke, with his SF at Wimbledon and the fact that he easily got into the top-10
The US Open was kinda sad...
J-man
Rattler wrote:
Wimbly....Nadal was the biggest suprise.
But the thing was he had an easy draw. Other than Aggasi (but Aggasi was in his old man stages and Baghdatis). Baghdatis was the real only test. Now with the New and imporved Roddick and alot of things changing in tennis it will be intresting to see if Nadal can repeat
PSALT
J-man wrote:
Rattler wrote:
Wimbly....Nadal was the biggest suprise.
But the thing was he had an easy draw. Other than Aggasi (but Aggasi was in his old man stages and Baghdatis). Baghdatis was the real only test. Now with the New and imporved Roddick and alot of things changing in tennis it will be intresting to see if Nadal can repeat
You forgot about Kendrick who played the match of his life. Nadal had those three difficult matches. He has the harder draw than Federer. Federer's opponents either never showed up (Gasquet and Henman), were injured (Berdych, Federer himself said he could tell Berdych's shoulder was in bad shape), or were just jokes (Mahut and Bjorkman). Federer had such a tough draw on paper, but when it came down to it he was greatly helped by luck, opponents who are having bad days, and upsets.
J-man
Oh yes thanks for reminding me. Kenderick. Played a great match and pushed Nadal.
dav6789
None of the slams really caught my attention alot especially compared to last year's slams.
The A.Open was alright in the men's. Baghdatis was a real suprise coming through, but I would rather have seen Ljubicic v Nalbandian in the SF with Nalbandian playing Federer in the final. Baghdatis really had Federer scared in the final, so his run wasen't too bad. The women's event was just horrible. 3 players were injured on Mauresmo's way to the title, it was a bad way for her to win it especially because of all the question marks she still had over her head. Lindsay was playing so well but hurt her ankle and lost to JHH in a match she really should have won.
The French Open wasen't the best. The mens was terrible in the later stages. The semis had the top 4 in the world, but the tennis was shameful. Nalbandian v Federer had some good parts but he retired anyway. Ljubicic didn't even look bothered. The final had some good parts but wasen't the classic everyone was hoping for. The women's event was just as bad. The only exciting thing was Vaidisova's run, and her match against Kuznetsova was great. Kuznetsova didn't play well in the final though and JHH pretty much eased to the title.
Wimbledon was alright. Murray was excellent against Murray but fell apart against Baghdatis. I didn't like Federer winning the title with hardly any challenge. Bjorkman v Stepanek was fantastic, and I was happy Bjorkman got through. Baghdatis really lit up Wimbledon aswell. His matches against Hewitt and Nadal were great quality. Nadal did alright in the final but was never going to win it. The women's event was good. I was so glad when Mauresmo won the title, nobody expected her to. The final was great, as was her SF against Sharapova.
The US Open had Youzhny and Davydenko making suprise runs. I like Davydenko more now so I was glad to see him get through. Roddick also had a great run to the final but the final wasen't too good. Although I would have liked to see Mauresmo v JHH again in the final, Sharapova did really well to get through and win it. I wasen't really happy with the final, but Sharapova was better than JHH. I just hope the hype doesn't get too much (which it will). Lindsay saving MP's was really good to see, but she didn't have a clue on how to play JHH. She needs to get some more matches and get fitter for 07 if she is to beat JHH again, which she can.
Overall, I have to say Wimbledon was the best one but none of them compared to the slams of 05.
PSALT
dav6789 wrote:
None of the slams really caught my attention alot especially compared to last year's slams.
The A.Open was alright in the men's. Baghdatis was a real suprise coming through, but I would rather have seen Ljubicic v Nalbandian in the SF with Nalbandian playing Federer in the final. Baghdatis really had Federer scared in the final, so his run wasen't too bad. The women's event was just horrible. 3 players were injured on Mauresmo's way to the title, it was a bad way for her to win it especially because of all the question marks she still had over her head. Lindsay was playing so well but hurt her ankle and lost to JHH in a match she really should have won.
The French Open wasen't the best. The mens was terrible in the later stages. The semis had the top 4 in the world, but the tennis was shameful. Nalbandian v Federer had some good parts but he retired anyway. Ljubicic didn't even look bothered. The final had some good parts but wasen't the classic everyone was hoping for. The women's event was just as bad. The only exciting thing was Vaidisova's run, and her match against Kuznetsova was great. Kuznetsova didn't play well in the final though and JHH pretty much eased to the title.
Wimbledon was alright. Murray was excellent against Murray but fell apart against Baghdatis. I didn't like Federer winning the title with hardly any challenge. Bjorkman v Stepanek was fantastic, and I was happy Bjorkman got through. Baghdatis really lit up Wimbledon aswell. His matches against Hewitt and Nadal were great quality. Nadal did alright in the final but was never going to win it. The women's event was good. I was so glad when Mauresmo won the title, nobody expected her to. The final was great, as was her SF against Sharapova.
The US Open had Youzhny and Davydenko making suprise runs. I like Davydenko more now so I was glad to see him get through. Roddick also had a great run to the final but the final wasen't too good. Although I would have liked to see Mauresmo v JHH again in the final, Sharapova did really well to get through and win it. I wasen't really happy with the final, but Sharapova was better than JHH. I just hope the hype doesn't get too much (which it will). Lindsay saving MP's was really good to see, but she didn't have a clue on how to play JHH. She needs to get some more matches and get fitter for 07 if she is to beat JHH again, which she can.
Overall, I have to say Wimbledon was the best one but none of them compared to the slams of 05.
I do agree, the only interesting things at the AO was Baghdatis and Mauresmo, and Mauresmo was cheated out of winning the final match so no great matches for her. The French was too predictable. Wimbledon was boring barring Nadal-Kendrick, Mauresmo-Henin, and a couple other matches. Then so matter how upset Stevos gets when I say it, Sharapova took a title in NY because the rest of the top players weren't playing their best. Henin was conservative in the final, Mauresmo was horrible in the semi's, Clijsters wasn't there, and Davenport was still rusty. For the men Roddick's run was great (even with Beachjm being an idiot and trying to call anybody that said anything good about him as bandwagoners), Youzhny's run was nice even though I don't like his watered down all-court game, besides those two runs nothing good there either.
stevos14
Im sick of all these accusations that players only win because other players "didn't show up" or played horribly. Maybe the other player did something to them to make them not play their best, like taking advantage of their disadvantages. And Im not just talking about the USO comment, but Federer winning Wimbledon, JHH winning the FO. I mean, they had to get through the draw, if a player was playing better that tournament then shouldnt they have gotten to the final to beat them? Congratulations to all the players who 'just showed up', because they will be the ones that go down in history as 2006 ___ champ.
PSALT
stevos14 wrote:
Im sick of all these accusations that players only win because other players "didn't show up" or played horribly. Maybe the other player did something to them to make them not play their best, like taking advantage of their disadvantages. And Im not just talking about the USO comment, but Federer winning Wimbledon, JHH winning the FO. I mean, they had to get through the draw, if a player was playing better that tournament then shouldnt they have gotten to the final to beat them? Congratulations to all the players who 'just showed up', because they will be the ones that go down in history as 2006 ___ champ.
Henin was conservative in tha final, the fact is she is three times the player Sharapova is, if Henin was playing well she would have been imposing her will with S&V and would have matched Sharapova stroke for stroke. Mauresmo just played badly, anybody that watched the match could have seen that. You defend Sharapova to no end. Sharapova is a good player, but other players, tennis journalists, and the large majority of people who know anything about tennis hardly think she is terribly smart on court. You are seriously telling me she out thought Henin and Mauresmo to expose their weaknesses? They do that to her, that's why they always beat her. Whether you believe it or not, at their best Mauresmo and Henin are much better players than she will ever be. They have better volleys, have more variety, Henin can match her power, and Mauresmo can do the same on her BH side, they are the better players, period. Anybody that watched those two matches could see they lost because of themselves, not Sharapova.
x.doublea
Do you know what was the reason for the poor Grand Slams we were offered this year? Sickening attitude by various players. Like, what are they thinking? How many of these players are retiring in the late in the Slams. Djokavic, Nalbandian, etc. Like, these players just don't want to win... if you're in the late stages of a Grand Slam, you retire? Like, Djokavic retired in the RG QFs due to a cramp, I believe. Shows how much heart some of these people have....
Then you get Ljubicic. Ljubicic walks onto the court saying, "Oh, Federer is the best player... I don't know how anyone can beat him". Blah, blah, blah. Why is he even competing to win when his goal is to totally come in second?
The top players didn't show up often... like, when a 30-something year old named Bjorkman (no offense, but he shouldn't be competing late in a Slam for singles) makes the semifinals of Wimbledon by beating Max Mirnyi in the quarters, you know that the top players didn't show up.
The list can really go on....
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
Do you know what was the reason for the poor Grand Slams we were offered this year? Sickening attitude by various players. Like, what are they thinking? How many of these players are retiring in the late in the Slams. Djokavic, Nalbandian, etc. Like, these players just don't want to win... if you're in the late stages of a Grand Slam, you retire? Like, Djokavic retired in the RG QFs due to a cramp, I believe. Shows how much heart some of these people have....
Then you get Ljubicic. Ljubicic walks onto the court saying, "Oh, Federer is the best player... I don't know how anyone can beat him". Blah, blah, blah. Why is he even competing to win when his goal is to totally come in second?
The top players didn't show up often... like, when a 30-something year old named Bjorkman (no offense, but he shouldn't be competing late in a Slam for singles) makes the semifinals of Wimbledon by beating Max Mirnyi in the quarters, you know that the top players didn't show up.
The list can really go on....
I agree 100%, but can't believe you didn't mention Henin!
I also do agree about Ljubicic, he comments after losing to Nadal at the French were classless.
x.doublea
I didn't mention Justine because she really, really wants to win. It's just she doesn't like to lose through a routing....
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
I didn't mention Justine because she really, really wants to win. It's just she doesn't like to lose through a routing....
\
I would find it much more classy to be routed than to retire. Even if she tanked the match Mauresmo would still experience the thrill of winning the last point for a Slam title.
x.doublea
Well, I think Justine's actions and play caused much more controversy and mystery than the women's AO did (not that that's a good thing).
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
Well, I think Justine's actions and play caused much more controversy and mystery than the women's AO did (not that that's a good thing).
Henin's actions were probably the most contoversial thing in tennis this year.
leftys_rock
I thought Justine really didn't schedule wisely. She should have learned her lesson to never play/win the Tier II right before the GS. AO - won Medibank, lost in AO final. FO - did not win a single clay title, won RG. Wimby - won Eastbourne, lost in Wimby final. USO - won Pilot Pen, lost in USO final.
stevos14
PSALT wrote:
stevos14 wrote:
Im sick of all these accusations that players only win because other players "didn't show up" or played horribly. Maybe the other player did something to them to make them not play their best, like taking advantage of their disadvantages. And Im not just talking about the USO comment, but Federer winning Wimbledon, JHH winning the FO. I mean, they had to get through the draw, if a player was playing better that tournament then shouldnt they have gotten to the final to beat them? Congratulations to all the players who 'just showed up', because they will be the ones that go down in history as 2006 ___ champ.
Henin was conservative in tha final, the fact is she is three times the player Sharapova is, if Henin was playing well she would have been imposing her will with S&V and would have matched Sharapova stroke for stroke. Mauresmo just played badly, anybody that watched the match could have seen that. You defend Sharapova to no end. Sharapova is a good player, but other players, tennis journalists, and the large majority of people who know anything about tennis hardly think she is terribly smart on court. You are seriously telling me she out thought Henin and Mauresmo to expose their weaknesses? They do that to her, that's why they always beat her. Whether you believe it or not, at their best Mauresmo and Henin are much better players than she will ever be. They have better volleys, have more variety, Henin can match her power, and Mauresmo can do the same on her BH side, they are the better players, period. Anybody that watched those two matches could see they lost because of themselves, not Sharapova.
Wow, you completely took about a word of my post, and completely ignored another part ("and I'm not just talking about the USO"). Sharapova wins by consistent power and getting players on the defensive with a solid serve and great groundstrokes. I don't think she is a Hingis at all. I actually wasnt even talking about Sharapova in this post, so get your head on straight. Please reply AFTER you read the whole post, instead of assuming its about Maria. I didnt even mention her once
PSALT
stevos14 wrote:
PSALT wrote:
stevos14 wrote:
Im sick of all these accusations that players only win because other players "didn't show up" or played horribly. Maybe the other player did something to them to make them not play their best, like taking advantage of their disadvantages. And Im not just talking about the USO comment, but Federer winning Wimbledon, JHH winning the FO. I mean, they had to get through the draw, if a player was playing better that tournament then shouldnt they have gotten to the final to beat them? Congratulations to all the players who 'just showed up', because they will be the ones that go down in history as 2006 ___ champ.
Henin was conservative in tha final, the fact is she is three times the player Sharapova is, if Henin was playing well she would have been imposing her will with S&V and would have matched Sharapova stroke for stroke. Mauresmo just played badly, anybody that watched the match could have seen that. You defend Sharapova to no end. Sharapova is a good player, but other players, tennis journalists, and the large majority of people who know anything about tennis hardly think she is terribly smart on court. You are seriously telling me she out thought Henin and Mauresmo to expose their weaknesses? They do that to her, that's why they always beat her. Whether you believe it or not, at their best Mauresmo and Henin are much better players than she will ever be. They have better volleys, have more variety, Henin can match her power, and Mauresmo can do the same on her BH side, they are the better players, period. Anybody that watched those two matches could see they lost because of themselves, not Sharapova.
Wow, you completely took about a word of my post, and completely ignored another part ("and I'm not just talking about the USO"). Sharapova wins by consistent power and getting players on the defensive with a solid serve and great groundstrokes. I don't think she is a Hingis at all. I actually wasnt even talking about Sharapova in this post, so get your head on straight. Please reply AFTER you read the whole post, instead of assuming its about Maria. I didnt even mention her once
our whole converstation was about Sharapova, I am not going to waste my time debating about three different Grand Slams at one time. let's keep our debate about one player, not three, shall we? now, please actually respond to my post instead of throwing a fit that I didn't post half a novel in an attempt to debate all three of those Slams.
stevos14
Okay, then I guess you started the conversation about Sharapova. Wow sometimes I think you like to talk about her more than me!
Sure, Amelie didnt play great. But obviously Sharapova was playing great. You don't get double-bageled only by playing poorly. There's got to be some good pressure on the other end. Then in the final, Sharapova played some great tennis. Sure she doesnt have the variety of Henin, but she made some great winners and even took risks at the net. Henin wasn't in the zone for the whole match, but what pro ever really is all the time? Just like the other slams, where the players just adjusted to the way they were playing that day. If Justine is really that good, she should be able to find a way to win, even if shes not at her best. And if her shots arent failing her, its her strategy, and whos fault is that? Hers of course.
x.doublea
Well, I think a lot of Justine's power is forced (due to her small size), and when she doesn't feel good at all, she can't 'force' it as well.... perhaps.
leftys_rock
x.doublea wrote:
Well, I think a lot of Justine's power is forced (due to her small size), and when she doesn't feel good at all, she can't 'force' it as well.... perhaps.
You mean like she is forced to hit big? Or because it is being hit so hard to her she can't help but hit it hard back?
x.doublea
I mean, she tries to hit so big (and she can), and she uses so much of body in her shots that, when she's tired, she sort of can't and loses a bit of the edge? It's far fetched, but it might be one of the reasons why she's quite injury/sickness prone.
J-man
x.doublea wrote:
Do you know what was the reason for the poor Grand Slams we were offered this year? Sickening attitude by various players. Like, what are they thinking? How many of these players are retiring in the late in the Slams. Djokavic, Nalbandian, etc. Like, these players just don't want to win... if you're in the late stages of a Grand Slam, you retire? Like, Djokavic retired in the RG QFs due to a cramp, I believe. Shows how much heart some of these people have....
Then you get Ljubicic. Ljubicic walks onto the court saying, "Oh, Federer is the best player... I don't know how anyone can beat him". Blah, blah, blah. Why is he even competing to win when his goal is to totally come in second?
The top players didn't show up often... like, when a 30-something year old named Bjorkman (no offense, but he shouldn't be competing late in a Slam for singles) makes the semifinals of Wimbledon by beating Max Mirnyi in the quarters, you know that the top players didn't show up.
The list can really go on....
Novak D is a horrible sport. Alot of players put up with alot of crap when they play him
PSALT
stevos14 wrote:
Okay, then I guess you started the conversation about Sharapova. Wow sometimes I think you like to talk about her more than me!
Sure, Amelie didnt play great. But obviously Sharapova was playing great. You don't get double-bageled only by playing poorly. There's got to be some good pressure on the other end. Then in the final, Sharapova played some great tennis. Sure she doesnt have the variety of Henin, but she made some great winners and even took risks at the net. Henin wasn't in the zone for the whole match, but what pro ever really is all the time? Just like the other slams, where the players just adjusted to the way they were playing that day. If Justine is really that good, she should be able to find a way to win, even if shes not at her best. And if her shots arent failing her, its her strategy, and whos fault is that? Hers of course.
I never said that it was entirely Mauresmo's fault, Sharapova played like normal, she played well. Mauresmo played horribly and Sharapova did what she had to do to encourage Mauresmo to keep choking. Would Sharapova have beaten Mauresmo if Amelie was playing well, no.
Henin was clearly out of it in the final, it is one thing to find a way to win when you are playing badly against some ranked outside of the top 30, but if you are just out of it today, chanced are you won't have the chance to grind out a win against someone ranked in the top 10. Henin was never playing well in that match, she is at her best when she is running around the BH and dominating with a huge forehand, and getting to net. Henin is a good enough of player that when she is playing well, she can easily move any player around the court. She does it to Davenport all the time, Lindsay has a bigger game than Maria, so Maria's power wasn't the reason why she wasn't moving her around, so what was it? Anybody who watched that match could have seen Henin was not her usual agressive self, Sharapova took advantage of that. She did not win because she is normally the better player, she won because Henin wasn't playing well.
Not_Even_Amateur
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Sharapova was not playing out of her mind that night, the match was riddled with errors and Sharapova was simply the one making less of them. Both of them were in the negatives, it was not as if Sharapova was playing well. Compare Henin to Sharapova that night, then yes Sharapova was played some good tennis, compare Sharapova's form to past matches and she was well below her best. Henin handed that match to her, I would agree with you if Sharapova was playing clean tennis, but she was not.
Not_Even_Amateur
I still don't believe you watched the match you have completely ripped the context to shreds and are viewing the match as a bunch of stats. I thought better of you PSALT but whatever...
Not_Even_Amateur
Can I just question, on a sidenote, why are so many people voting Aussie Open...that was really bland!
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
I still don't believe you watched the match you have completely ripped the context to shreds and are viewing the match as a bunch of stats. I thought better of you PSALT but whatever...
I did watch the match, I am not ignorant enough to debate over a match I did not watch, Henin was conservative and let Sharapova's errors go unpunished. Sharapova did not earn that match, she played far below her best and got through because Henin played worse.
stevos14
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Thank you! I know PSALT will at least listen to you. Sharapova was so on her serve, she had a great FSP. Her forehand was glistening, smacking great winners, and she was moving better than she ever has. As NEA said, she didnt let Henin play her game. Why? Because Sharapova was smarter than her. She knew what she had to do and she did it. When is a top player always playing their best? Not too often. And the fact Henin lost 3 other slam finals this year, you'd think she'd be "on her game" for one of these, and since shes so good as you say, she would use her "amazing" variety and power to move them around? No, she failed three times. She was outplayed in all of them (yes even the AO, gas???)
And the Mauresmo match, okay I'll give that to you at least. But Maria wasnt playing badly either.
x.doublea
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
Can I just question, on a sidenote, why are so many people voting Aussie Open...that was really bland!
Well, I thought the AO had the most excitement, even though it was generated only by various players. Wimbledon was close though. US Open was a bit empty (in my opinion), and Roland Garros was just rather straight forward.
PSALT
stevos14 wrote:
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Thank you! I know PSALT will at least listen to you. Sharapova was so on her serve, she had a great FSP. Her forehand was glistening, smacking great winners, and she was moving better than she ever has. As NEA said, she didnt let Henin play her game. Why? Because Sharapova was smarter than her. She knew what she had to do and she did it. When is a top player always playing their best? Not too often. And the fact Henin lost 3 other slam finals this year, you'd think she'd be "on her game" for one of these, and since shes so good as you say, she would use her "amazing" variety and power to move them around? No, she failed three times. She was outplayed in all of them (yes even the AO, gas???)
And the Mauresmo match, okay I'll give that to you at least. But Maria wasnt playing badly either.
Firstly, you say that every time NEA agrees with you against me. NEA saying something doesn't make it true anymore than anybody else. I don't "listen" to him more than I do anyone else here.
I will stop you right at "Sharapova was smarter than her", fact, Henin is a genius compared to Sharapova. That is well accepted fact, Sharapova has never been smart on court, ever.
Anything other than that there is no debating, it is more or less just going after Henin for failing.
leftys_rock
PSALT wrote:
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Sharapova was not playing out of her mind that night, the match was riddled with errors and Sharapova was simply the one making less of them. Both of them were in the negatives, it was not as if Sharapova was playing well. Compare Henin to Sharapova that night, then yes Sharapova was played some good tennis, compare Sharapova's form to past matches and she was well below her best. Henin handed that match to her, I would agree with you if Sharapova was playing clean tennis, but she was not.
The stats in that match really didn't tell everything. Sharapova should have had much more winners, but many winners became forced errors for Henin.
And about the AO, it was nice that everybody was fresh in the year, but it wasn't very exciting except for Baghdatis. For the women, it was the last one standing won, and it was unfortunate with all the retirements. FO was terrible unfortunately, Wimbledon was in my opinion the best, Mauresmo played excellent grass court tennis and S & Ved her way to the title. USO didn't live up to the hype, but it was the one I watched the most of(thank you USA network) and could get an idea of. I thought the semis of the women were quite odd, 3 6-4 sets and 3 6-0 sets! But it was very nice to see Roddick making it to the final where unfortunately he couldn't dent Federer.
stevos14
PSALT wrote:
stevos14 wrote:
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Thank you! I know PSALT will at least listen to you. Sharapova was so on her serve, she had a great FSP. Her forehand was glistening, smacking great winners, and she was moving better than she ever has. As NEA said, she didnt let Henin play her game. Why? Because Sharapova was smarter than her. She knew what she had to do and she did it. When is a top player always playing their best? Not too often. And the fact Henin lost 3 other slam finals this year, you'd think she'd be "on her game" for one of these, and since shes so good as you say, she would use her "amazing" variety and power to move them around? No, she failed three times. She was outplayed in all of them (yes even the AO, gas???)
And the Mauresmo match, okay I'll give that to you at least. But Maria wasnt playing badly either.
Firstly, you say that every time NEA agrees with you against me. NEA saying something doesn't make it true anymore than anybody else. I don't "listen" to him more than I do anyone else here.
I will stop you right at "Sharapova was smarter than her", fact, Henin is a genius compared to Sharapova. That is well accepted fact, Sharapova has never been smart on court, ever.
Anything other than that there is no debating, it is more or less just going after Henin for failing.
How often does NEA agree with me? And both of you often dismiss my comments (or used to). I just know that you won't do that to his.
Just because a player hits with slice, then topspin, then flat, doesnt make them smart. It would NOT be smart for sharapova to play like that, since that is not her strength. She has the ability to smack the ball hard, flat, and deep, which has gotten her 2 grand slams already. Just because she isnt making mastermind plays doesnt mean she herself is not smart. Her serves are very intelligent, often using different spins and speeds and switching it up a lot, which she used to perfection that match. Her serve is obviously a huge factor. Im sure if Henin had the height and wingspan of Sharapova she would probably be smart enough to have the same gameplan.
PSALT
stevos14 wrote:
PSALT wrote:
stevos14 wrote:
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT you are totally wrong about Henin, but totally right about Mauresmo. The luck of Sharapova was getting past the SF, once she was there the title was hers though!! She didn't ALLOW Henin to play, that is the point, Henin couldn't match her stroke for stroke because her strokes were too damn good on the day! I sincerely don't think you watched the match, I have never been a massive fan of Maria but that night she won me over:
SHE OUTPLAYED HENIN, END OF.
Her serve was far too superior, Henin had one break point the whole match and that was the opening game. Does that tell you nothing? Henin couldn't touch this women because she was on fire! Stop letting your hatred of Sharapova blind you, you have a clear point with Mauresmo, the stats tell you that Mauresmo went home for two sets, but with Henin Sharapova was simply the far better player. End of story.
Thank you! I know PSALT will at least listen to you. Sharapova was so on her serve, she had a great FSP. Her forehand was glistening, smacking great winners, and she was moving better than she ever has. As NEA said, she didnt let Henin play her game. Why? Because Sharapova was smarter than her. She knew what she had to do and she did it. When is a top player always playing their best? Not too often. And the fact Henin lost 3 other slam finals this year, you'd think she'd be "on her game" for one of these, and since shes so good as you say, she would use her "amazing" variety and power to move them around? No, she failed three times. She was outplayed in all of them (yes even the AO, gas???)
And the Mauresmo match, okay I'll give that to you at least. But Maria wasnt playing badly either.
Firstly, you say that every time NEA agrees with you against me. NEA saying something doesn't make it true anymore than anybody else. I don't "listen" to him more than I do anyone else here.
I will stop you right at "Sharapova was smarter than her", fact, Henin is a genius compared to Sharapova. That is well accepted fact, Sharapova has never been smart on court, ever.
Anything other than that there is no debating, it is more or less just going after Henin for failing.
How often does NEA agree with me? And both of you often dismiss my comments (or used to). I just know that you won't do that to his.
Just because a player hits with slice, then topspin, then flat, doesnt make them smart. It would NOT be smart for sharapova to play like that, since that is not her strength. She has the ability to smack the ball hard, flat, and deep, which has gotten her 2 grand slams already. Just because she isnt making mastermind plays doesnt mean she herself is not smart. Her serves are very intelligent, often using different spins and speeds and switching it up a lot, which she used to perfection that match. Her serve is obviously a huge factor. Im sure if Henin had the height and wingspan of Sharapova she would probably be smart enough to have the same gameplan.
The only smart power player on tour right now are Davenport, and Serena when she is playing, and playing well. An arguement can also be made for Venus, but she isn't as smart a player as either of the two mentioned. The whole basis of power play is mindless pounding, few player ever go above that.
Sharapova's serve was the reason you say she won the match using her head? You need more to back up your opinion than that.
x.doublea
Well, I think a smart-power player is one who can vary his shots. And I don't mean by spins. Sort of like Andre hitting some shots deep and some with incredible angle, or like Davenport hitting with the deep penatrating cross court shots and then going down the line, or even Serena moving it side to side and also using some variance in angle. As far as I'm concerned, Sharpova hits hard, deep and flat... she still doesn't know how to maximize it's use. It's still good enough most of the time though. But you guys have to say that she's relying more on talent and athleticism right now rather than her brain....
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
Well, I think a smart-power player is one who can vary his shots. And I don't mean by spins. Sort of like Andre hitting some shots deep and some with incredible angle, or like Davenport hitting with the deep penatrating cross court shots and then going down the line, or even Serena moving it side to side and also using some variance in angle. As far as I'm concerned, Sharpova hits hard, deep and flat... she still doesn't know how to maximize it's use. It's still good enough most of the time though. But you guys have to say that she's relying more on talent and athleticism right now rather than her brain....
I concur, having variety in you serve does not make you a smart player. Sharapova is very straightfoward, she doesn't use angles much, she is content on simply overpowering you with brute force.
x.doublea
Yes, sort of the 'hit through you' type....
stevos14
Yes, she doesn't use enough variety, but she doesnt really need to does she? She has the goods to utilize her gameplan and win the US open!
Not_Even_Amateur
Wrong again. Nobody says Sharapova is a clever player, she rather isn't. But on that day she WAS!! Someone, either Sharapova or a coach, told her exactly what she needed to do to beat Henin. She executed it. It worked. She won. Henin had lost before she had even worked out how to return Sharapova's serve. Henin had lost before she even worked out how to get into this match. "Genius". Someone who cannot muster up the courage and or the brains to change and adapt a gameplan when they are being outplayed is one of two things:
a.)Foolish, i.e. not a genius
b.)Not a good enough player.
Mauresmo has done it all year round. She has been impeccable at it. And in that Final Sharapova won the mind battles against "Mrs. Grit" and completely outclassed her in terms of strategy. This does not make Sharapova a clever player PSALT, this is just this one game! Get that into you head! Sharapova simply nailed this match, end of...
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
Wrong again. Nobody says Sharapova is a clever player, she rather isn't. But on that day she WAS!! Someone, either Sharapova or a coach, told her exactly what she needed to do to beat Henin. She executed it. It worked. She won. Henin had lost before she had even worked out how to return Sharapova's serve. Henin had lost before she even worked out how to get into this match. "Genius". Someone who cannot muster up the courage and or the brains to change and adapt a gameplan when they are being outplayed is one of two things:
a.)Foolish, i.e. not a genius
b.)Not a good enough player.
Mauresmo has done it all year round. She has been impeccable at it. And in that Final Sharapova won the mind battles against "Mrs. Grit" and completely outclassed her in terms of strategy. This does not make Sharapova a clever player PSALT, this is just this one game! Get that into you head! Sharapova simply nailed this match, end of...
like I said before, it was not a clean match and Sharapova won because Henin was not getting to net when she could of. she was not putting the kind of pressure on Sharapova that both her and Mauresmo are so good at. Henin was glued to the baseline, which is unlike her.
Not_Even_Amateur
She was glued to the baseline because Sharapova glued her to the baseline. On Sharapova's serve Henin simply COULDN'T get to the net because Sharapova was playing so well, just getting the first move in and being the aggressor Henin, as ever in Grand Slam Finals, had no options because for all her "variety" she was truly beaten by someone as one dimensional as Sharapova. Henin sucks...
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
She was glued to the baseline because Sharapova glued her to the baseline. On Sharapova's serve Henin simply COULDN'T get to the net because Sharapova was playing so well, just getting the first move in and being the aggressor Henin, as ever in Grand Slam Finals, had no options because for all her "variety" she was truly beaten by someone as one dimensional as Sharapova. Henin sucks...
Sharapova was serving well, yes, she usually does, but Henin has the ability to get to net on her serve. Sharapova a good return, but she is no Lindsay or Serena. Henin had opportunity's to come to net, she chose not to take them. she allowed Sharapova to take control of points without even giving up a fight. she has held her own better than that against players with bigger strokes than Sharapova (Davenport, both Williams).
Not_Even_Amateur
No your wrong. This is why I don't think you watched the match. The game was a battle of holding serve, Henin only got broken three times - first one you don't even count...so really it was twice, one in each set, just two crucial games where Maria stepped it up! Henin WAS holding serve, regardless of how she was doing it, it was just that when it counted it was Maria who could get somewhere on Henin's serve and make dents in it, and Henin buckled under the pressure>>>exactly the opposite for Maria!
pacomexican
Wimbledon because of momo. Besides that the year wasn't so great. No really calssic tennis matches in slams.
stevos14
NEA, again you nailed it. Sharapova was not letting her get there. And like NEA and I said, she was too dumb to change. Sharapova has more grit than Henin, Sharapova also does not cheat.
PSALT
first of, whether or not Henin is a cheat (which she is) is irrelevant. as far as I saw she did not cheat in that match. also, not to get into an arguement, but there are many people (including me) that do see Sharapova's screams to be cheating.
Henin was not herself, it was clear. she was not pouncing on second serves, and simply DID NOT TAKE HER CHANCES. she is very good about taking advantage of holes (big or small) that players give to her. she was not playing like herself.
x.doublea
stevos14 wrote:
NEA, again you nailed it. Sharapova was not letting her get there. And like NEA and I said, she was too dumb to change. Sharapova has more grit than Henin, Sharapova also does not cheat.
Aren't people saying that she's technically cheating through her grunting and her father's coaching?
leftys_rock
x.doublea wrote:
stevos14 wrote:
NEA, again you nailed it. Sharapova was not letting her get there. And like NEA and I said, she was too dumb to change. Sharapova has more grit than Henin, Sharapova also does not cheat.
Aren't people saying that she's technically cheating through her grunting and her father's coaching?
Father's coaching, yes, grunting, no. I don't see why people make a big deal about her "screaming". She is NOT as loud as many people think. Yes, sound is heard, but she isn't "screaming". But the fact that her team flagrantly cheated was just .
Not_Even_Amateur
PSALT wrote:
first of, whether or not Henin is a cheat (which she is) is irrelevant. as far as I saw she did not cheat in that match. also, not to get into an arguement, but there are many people (including me) that do see Sharapova's screams to be cheating.
Henin was not herself, it was clear. she was not pouncing on second serves, and simply DID NOT TAKE HER CHANCES. she is very good about taking advantage of holes (big or small) that players give to her. she was not playing like herself.
Wrong again. SHARAPOVA GAVE HER NO CHANCES ON HER SERVE. End of! She couldn't take chances because there weren't any because when it counted Sharapova absolutely nailed that Rat to the wall and there wasn't a damn little thing she could do about it. Capiche?
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
PSALT wrote:
first of, whether or not Henin is a cheat (which she is) is irrelevant. as far as I saw she did not cheat in that match. also, not to get into an arguement, but there are many people (including me) that do see Sharapova's screams to be cheating.
Henin was not herself, it was clear. she was not pouncing on second serves, and simply DID NOT TAKE HER CHANCES. she is very good about taking advantage of holes (big or small) that players give to her. she was not playing like herself.
Wrong again. SHARAPOVA GAVE HER NO CHANCES ON HER SERVE. End of! She couldn't take chances because there weren't any because when it counted Sharapova absolutely nailed that Rat to the wall and there wasn't a damn little thing she could do about it. Capiche?
No "capache", Henin did nothing to those second serves! She never tried to be agressive on them, and NEVER TOOK HER CHANCES! She just hit the second serves back.
Not_Even_Amateur
Again you either never watched the match or forgot:
a.)Sharapova's first serve came up trumps when she needed it, that was a recurrent theme of the match I watched
b.)Her second serves were absolutely incredible.
Henin didn't have a chance...shame, I suppose.
PSALT
Not_Even_Amateur wrote:
Again you either never watched the match or forgot:
a.)Sharapova's first serve came up trumps when she needed it, that was a recurrent theme of the match I watched
b.)Her second serves were absolutely incredible.
Henin didn't have a chance...shame, I suppose.
this arguement has dwindled to nothing, I suggest we end it now.
Not_Even_Amateur
Your suggestion is duly noted.
stevos14
Good idea. Wierd seeing NEA have blue now, makes it much more confusing.
x.doublea
I agree... I thought PSALT posted the post above you at first glance. Just wondering, why don't you guys (PSALT and N_E_A) get avatars?
Benchwarmer1
at least one of them...
PSALT
no desire to.
leftys_rock
Just plop a Lindsay picture in there PSALT!
PSALT
leftys_rock wrote:
Just plop a Lindsay picture in there PSALT!
I might some time, but I don't want to get mixed up with Dave!
leftys_rock
Then plop a Roddick picture in!
stevos14
Or a Masha one??
PSALT
no to Roddick, I like him but am far from being a big enough of a fan to do that, and I will not even comment in the Sharapova suggestion
leftys_rock
PSALT wrote:
no to Roddick, I like him but am far from being a big enough of a fan to do that, and I will not even comment in the Sharapova suggestion
For Lindsay, how about this one?
PSALT
leftys_rock wrote:
PSALT wrote:
no to Roddick, I like him but am far from being a big enough of a fan to do that, and I will not even comment in the Sharapova suggestion
For Lindsay, how about this one?
if I did one I would need to look around.
leftys_rock
Do you have any picture in particular that you want made into an avvy?
PSALT
leftys_rock wrote:
Do you have any picture in particular that you want made into an avvy?
nope, I would need to look.
leftys_rock
You can let one of us WTAworlders know and we'll ask Craig or TeaMMashA to make it.
PSALT
leftys_rock wrote:
You can let one of us WTAworlders know and we'll ask Craig or TeaMMashA to make it.
you sure? I could see them not making me one out of spite for not liking Sharapova.....
leftys_rock
PSALT wrote:
leftys_rock wrote:
You can let one of us WTAworlders know and we'll ask Craig or TeaMMashA to make it.
you sure? I could see them not making me one out of spite for not liking Sharapova.....
TeaMMashA and Craig don't mind, they don't really care. Just making avvys for fun.
Tennis fan
Hey PSALT! I Don't care of you get an Avatar or not, but don't stop using interesting quotes in your sig. I liked you last one about Baghdatis and Cyprus and REALLY like the current one.
Where do find them? they They are real gems!
Tennis fan
leftys_rock wrote:
PSALT wrote:
leftys_rock wrote:
You can let one of us WTAworlders know and we'll ask Craig or TeaMMashA to make it.
you sure? I could see them not making me one out of spite for not liking Sharapova.....
TeaMMashA and Craig don't mind, they don't really care. Just making avvys for fun.
Hi Lefty's,
If I send you a pic can you make me an avvy?
leftys_rock
Preferably womens, but i'll see what Craig and TeaMMashA can do.
PSALT
Tennis fan wrote:
Hey PSALT! I Don't care of you get an Avatar or not, but don't stop using interesting quotes in your sig. I liked you last one about Baghdatis and Cyprus and REALLY like the current one.
Where do find them? they They are real gems!
Tennis-X.Com, it's hard though because there is a limit on letters you can have in your signature. so I can only use short quotes.
x.doublea
PSALT wrote:
Tennis fan wrote:
Hey PSALT! I Don't care of you get an Avatar or not, but don't stop using interesting quotes in your sig. I liked you last one about Baghdatis and Cyprus and REALLY like the current one.
Where do find them? they They are real gems!
Tennis-X.Com, it's hard though because there is a limit on letters you can have in your signature. so I can only use short quotes.
PSALT, you can always put the quotes as an image and just post the image... that's what I do.
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
PSALT wrote:
Tennis fan wrote:
Hey PSALT! I Don't care of you get an Avatar or not, but don't stop using interesting quotes in your sig. I liked you last one about Baghdatis and Cyprus and REALLY like the current one.
Where do find them? they They are real gems!
Tennis-X.Com, it's hard though because there is a limit on letters you can have in your signature. so I can only use short quotes.
PSALT, you can always put the quotes as an image and just post the image... that's what I do.
\
wouldn't it be hard to change quotes often then?
x.doublea
No, not really. You would just need to modify the PNG, export it as a JPEG or a GIF, and you'd be set.
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
No, not really. You would just need to modify the PNG, export it as a JPEG or a GIF, and you'd be set.
do you forget I know nothing about computers? I didn't understand a word you just said.....
x.doublea
Ok... do you want me to make one for you?
Not_Even_Amateur
I hate being blue! I want my red back! Anyway, I would love a Mauresmo avatar if anyone would be so kind as to make me one ...don't know how to set them up or anything so it would be best if someone could help me. Anyway I will post my request in that special topic.
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
Ok... do you want me to make one for you?
yeah, that's fine. lol
x.doublea
PM me your quote, please, PSALT, or just post it here.
Tennis fan
PSALT wrote:
x.doublea wrote:
No, not really. You would just need to modify the PNG, export it as a JPEG or a GIF, and you'd be set.
do you forget I know nothing about computers? I didn't understand a word you just said.....
That was funny!
PSALT
x.doublea wrote:
PM me your quote, please, PSALT, or just post it here.
"I'm not fighting with myself. Oh, my God. That's how I am. You know the story of the hippo? The hippo comes to the monkey and said, listen, I'm not a hippo. So, he paints himself like a zebra. He said but he's still a hippo. He said but look at you, you're painted like a zebra but you are a hippo. So then he goes, you know, like I want be a little parrot. So, he put the colors on him and he comes to the monkey and said but, sorry, you are a hippo. So, in the end, you know, he comes and said I'm happy to be a hippo. This is who I am. So, I have to be who I am and he's happy being a hippo."
-- Marat Safin, happy to be a hippo.
beachjm
On the women's side I'd say Wimbledon 'cause of the great final. It was nice to see Mauremso come through in the clutch and prove all her doubters wrong. For the men you could make a case for anyone. Baghdatis stole the show Down Under, Nadal outplayed Fed in Paris, Fed-Nadal final at Wimbledon was a lot closer than I thought it would be, and I'm not a Roddick fan but he added a lot of interest by making it to the final against Fed and putting in a good effort. Probably go with the USO because of all the special moments surrounding Agassi, Blake, Roddick, Federer, and some of the surprises with guys like Becker, Youzhny, and Davydenko.
WooblesWobble
I thought the Aussie Open was the tops with the emergence of Baghdatis being a huge suprise. it was very entertaining.
the US open
Just wondering, why don't you guys (PSALT and N_E_A) get avatars?
