I don't - Murray beat him at Queens last year. Won't be easy - but Murray has to be favorite.
Can't see anyone but Nole winning the final - but we could get our first male singles finalist since 1938 (a mere 74 years ago). Surely after all Tim and Andy's (plus Roger Taylor in the 1970s) semi final defeats it has to change this year!
On the TV they said the head to head is 5-1 in Murray's favour??????
PS Roger Taylor - what a player - 8 in the world at his best.
I don't - Murray beat him at Queens last year. Won't be easy - but Murray has to be favorite.
Can't see anyone but Nole winning the final - but we could get our first male singles finalist since 1938 (a mere 74 years ago). Surely after all Tim and Andy's (plus Roger Taylor in the 1970s) semi final defeats it has to change this year!
It would be absolutely brill if he made the final. He has had tough matches and Tsonga is an obstacle, but not insurmountable. Would love Fed to beat Djok and for Murray to play him in the final. I can dream:D
Oh bugger, Murray won. I had hoped that Ferrer could repeat his French Open victory, but my head was telling me that Murray would be too strong on grass.
Pleased that Tsonga won, as I think Tsonga has a better chance of beating Murray on grass, providing he's serving and volleying really well. Could this be Tsonga's year? He missed out in the semi-final last year, and I reckon it's 50-50 between him and Murray this year.
Luckily for Murray, Ferrer took his foot off after first set.
If Murray would just back up his deepest groundstrokes with net approaches he'd radically improve. That and maintain a consistent high level when up against a tough player as opposed to also-rans.
Interestingly, in the clips I can find, Connors did in fact stay back, so ignore those finals above with him in them:eek:>snip>
Get on Youtube to watch some of those other finals, Kid!:D
End of old timer post (can't do a fist - too much arthritis)
LOLOLOL
I know the feeling.
That's one good thing about no roof. I used to DVD all the old classic matches they showed during rainbreaks to keep. Also helped by ESPN who have shown a fair few goodies.
My cup ran over when i managed to get Passarell/ Gonzales from 1967 (? think it was that year). So disillusioned watching it back. No chairs/wooden raquets/no tie breaks- I remember it as totally absorbing and, of course the longest match ever played until 2 years ago.
It was totally boring, pitta-patta tennis compared with todays' power houses. I much prefer watching the game now, though that was the norm back then, so I didn't appreciate how much tennis would evolve.
Does this post make sense? It sort of does in my head, but not reading it through.
That's one good thing about no roof. I used to DVD all the old classic matches they showed during rainbreaks to keep. Also helped by ESPN who have shown a fair few goodies.
My cup ran over when i managed to get Passarell/ Gonzales from 1967 (? think it was that year). So disillusioned watching it back. No chairs/wooden raquets/no tie breaks- I remember it as totally absorbing and, of course the longest match ever played until 2 years ago.
It was totally boring, pitta-patta tennis compared with todays' power houses. I much prefer watching the game now, though that was the norm back then, so I didn't appreciate how much tennis would evolve.
Does this post make sense? It sort of does in my head, but not reading it through.
Oh well, add senility to the arthritis
..
Makes sense to me, I remember these players also:D Did you enjoy Andys match?
That's one good thing about no roof. I used to DVD all the old classic matches they showed during rainbreaks to keep. Also helped by ESPN who have shown a fair few goodies.
My cup ran over when i managed to get Passarell/ Gonzales from 1967 (? think it was that year). So disillusioned watching it back. No chairs/wooden raquets/no tie breaks- I remember it as totally absorbing and, of course the longest match ever played until 2 years ago.
It was totally boring, pitta-patta tennis compared with todays' power houses. I much prefer watching the game now, though that was the norm back then, so I didn't appreciate how much tennis would evolve.
Does this post make sense? It sort of does in my head, but not reading it through.
Oh well, add senility to the arthritis
..
Hi Tally,
Watch some of those clips I put above. They are not pitta-patta at all.
The difference in the TV pictures detracts from the enjoyment / appreciation.
But if you put the modern clothes and racquets on those Connors / Mac / Borg matches, they would look almost the same.
As we know, the improvements in racquets and strings have enbaled today's players to put significantly more work on the ball.
Hope your knees are OK - mine are not so bad at the moment.
Oh dear:eek: He has quite a few superstitious quirks, and I would have thought he'd have noticed that in each of the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 when he played Queen's, he then went on to reach the Wimbledon final (didn't play Queen's or Wimbledon in 2009 through injury).
He maybe getting a whole lot more money playing Halle, but does it compensate for the hex it places on his Wimbledon progress:rolleyes:
Luckily for Murray, Ferrer took his foot off after first set.
If Murray would just back up his deepest groundstrokes with net approaches he'd radically improve. That and maintain a consistent high level when up against a tough player as opposed to also-rans.
I and most of us missed that:eek: He played like a demon to the last point IMO. As I would expect from a player of his calibre. You are doing both of them a dis-service.
Oh dear:eek: He has quite a few superstitious quirks, and I would have thought he'd have noticed that in each of the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 when he played Queen's, he then went on to reach the Wimbledon final (didn't play Queen's or Wimbledon in 2009 through injury).
He maybe getting a whole lot more money playing Halle, but does it compensate for the hex it places on his Wimbledon progress:rolleyes:
This is true, I think he has signed a deal to play Halle in 2013 and 14. It wouldn't suprise me if he bought his way out of it and went back to Queen's next year, we shall see.
Comments
William Hill:
Nole 4/6
Fed 7/2
Andy 9/2
Tsonga 10/1
On the TV they said the head to head is 5-1 in Murray's favour??????
PS Roger Taylor - what a player - 8 in the world at his best.
It would be absolutely brill if he made the final. He has had tough matches and Tsonga is an obstacle, but not insurmountable. Would love Fed to beat Djok and for Murray to play him in the final. I can dream:D
Bet on the other 3 and be guaranteed a profit if Nole doesn't win.
Pleased that Tsonga won, as I think Tsonga has a better chance of beating Murray on grass, providing he's serving and volleying really well. Could this be Tsonga's year? He missed out in the semi-final last year, and I reckon it's 50-50 between him and Murray this year.
Couldn't agree more.
If Murray would just back up his deepest groundstrokes with net approaches he'd radically improve. That and maintain a consistent high level when up against a tough player as opposed to also-rans.
I know the feeling.
That's one good thing about no roof. I used to DVD all the old classic matches they showed during rainbreaks to keep. Also helped by ESPN who have shown a fair few goodies.
My cup ran over when i managed to get Passarell/ Gonzales from 1967 (? think it was that year). So disillusioned watching it back. No chairs/wooden raquets/no tie breaks- I remember it as totally absorbing and, of course the longest match ever played until 2 years ago.
It was totally boring, pitta-patta tennis compared with todays' power houses. I much prefer watching the game now, though that was the norm back then, so I didn't appreciate how much tennis would evolve.
Oh well, add senility to the arthritis
..
He said it`s down to his daughters playing golf
http://www.espn.co.uk/tennis/sport/story/158452.html
Makes sense to me, I remember these players also:D Did you enjoy Andys match?
Interesting piece, Tissy.
When I watched my juniors play matches, I did the same.
Hi Tally,
Watch some of those clips I put above. They are not pitta-patta at all.
The difference in the TV pictures detracts from the enjoyment / appreciation.
But if you put the modern clothes and racquets on those Connors / Mac / Borg matches, they would look almost the same.
As we know, the improvements in racquets and strings have enbaled today's players to put significantly more work on the ball.
Hope your knees are OK - mine are not so bad at the moment.
very rare appearance by him, usually likes to stay behind the scenes.
I guess signing with 19 Management must have its uses
The last time he lost at Wimbledon in round 2 was in 2005, also the year he last played at Halle.
Hes back at Halle next year
Oh dear:eek: He has quite a few superstitious quirks, and I would have thought he'd have noticed that in each of the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 when he played Queen's, he then went on to reach the Wimbledon final (didn't play Queen's or Wimbledon in 2009 through injury).
He maybe getting a whole lot more money playing Halle, but does it compensate for the hex it places on his Wimbledon progress:rolleyes:
I and most of us missed that:eek: He played like a demon to the last point IMO. As I would expect from a player of his calibre. You are doing both of them a dis-service.
This is true, I think he has signed a deal to play Halle in 2013 and 14. It wouldn't suprise me if he bought his way out of it and went back to Queen's next year, we shall see.
Fuller's been outing himself quite a lot recently, he was at the Canadian Grand Prix with Hamilton a few weeks back