tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49
From: mimus
Subject: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
Dokic-Mauresmo

Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers moving!
(the problem isn't in her feet.)

Wejnert-Bartoli

Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?

Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in the
semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .

Kirilenko-Stosur

Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a crowd-pleaser.

Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but no
Zheng . . . .

http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf

As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have battled
their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter), while the
Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got flattened 1-6 2-6 in
the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda Czink, also in the
quarters.

http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.





 
Date: 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <o6edncJMVI6nRMLUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@giganews.com >,
tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:

> Dokic-Mauresmo
>
> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
> moving!
> (the problem isn't in her feet.)

No. But then, neither is Mauresmo's. Should be an interesting match.

>
> Wejnert-Bartoli
>
> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?

Bartoli is a *lot* more match-tough than Dokic these days, despite being
in a slump. I'd expect Bartoli to wallop Wejnert.

>
> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch
> in the
> semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>
> Kirilenko-Stosur
>
> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
> crowd-pleaser.
>
> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
> no
> Zheng . . . .

She's just quit the Chinese federation, though you'd think that would make
her want to play somewhere to celebrate.

>
> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/m
> ds.pdf
>
> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
> battled
> their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter), while
> the
> Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got flattened 1-6
> 2-6 in
> the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda Czink, also in
> the
> quarters.

Good to see Groenefeld working her way back, also Sprem.

wg


  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 19:39:13
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg wrote:

> In article <o6edncJMVI6nRMLUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>
>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>
>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>
> No. But then, neither is Mauresmo's. Should be an interesting match.

I guess it'll come down to whose confidence is the most brittle . . . .

>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>
>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>
> Bartoli is a *lot* more match-tough than Dokic these days, despite being
> in a slump. I'd expect Bartoli to wallop Wejnert.

Bartoli is kinda brittle, too.

>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch
>> in the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>
>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>
>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>> crowd-pleaser.
>>
>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>> no Zheng . . . .
>
> She's just quit the Chinese federation, though you'd think that would make
> her want to play somewhere to celebrate.

What does that mean? is she going to have to defect to Australia, like
everyone else?

>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/m
>> ds.pdf
>>
>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda
>> Czink, also in the quarters.
>
> Good to see Groenefeld working her way back, also Sprem.

Can you try to pry the Petrova story out of someone? I emailed Octagon's
Katerina Stecova about it a few days ago (I believe she's Nadia's agent,
although if not that would explain the non-response I've gotten, although
I realize it's a bad time of year to get anything like that done, too).

They really ought to put something on Nadia's official website, at least.

A single story on a French website that she's out of the hospital and back
on track doesn't get it, especially considering the dire diagnosis that
was so widely reported . . . .

Makes you wonder if that wasn't a misdiagnosis.

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.



   
Date: 04 Jan 2009 12:10:57
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com >,
tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:

> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg wrote:
>
> > In article <o6edncJMVI6nRMLUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
> >
> >> Dokic-Mauresmo
> >>
> >> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
> >> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
> >
> > No. But then, neither is Mauresmo's. Should be an interesting
> > match.
>
> I guess it'll come down to whose confidence is the most brittle . .

Well, Mauresmo is ranked 24; Dokic is ranked 179. And Mauresmo has a lot
of game.


> . .
>
> >> Wejnert-Bartoli
> >>
> >> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
> >> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
> >
> > Bartoli is a *lot* more match-tough than Dokic these days,
> > despite being in a slump. I'd expect Bartoli to wallop Wejnert.
>
> Bartoli is kinda brittle, too.

Not that brittle: Bartoli d. Wejnert 6-1,6-2.

wg


    
Date: 04 Jan 2009 14:22:47
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:10:57 -0600, wendyg wrote:

> In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com>,
> tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg wrote:
>>
>>> In article <o6edncJMVI6nRMLUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
>>> tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>
>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>
>>> No. But then, neither is Mauresmo's. Should be an interesting
>>> match.
>>
>> I guess it'll come down to whose confidence is the most brittle . .
>
> Well, Mauresmo is ranked 24; Dokic is ranked 179. And Mauresmo has a lot
> of game.
>
>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>
>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>
>>> Bartoli is a *lot* more match-tough than Dokic these days,
>>> despite being in a slump. I'd expect Bartoli to wallop Wejnert.
>>
>> Bartoli is kinda brittle, too.
>
> Not that brittle: Bartoli d. Wejnert 6-1,6-2.

Doesn't bode well for Dokic . . . .

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.



     
Date: 04 Jan 2009 19:54:49
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <_OOdncz-TZ7kkfzUnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@giganews.com >,
tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 12:10:57 -0600, wendyg wrote:
>
> > In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article <o6edncJMVI6nRMLUnZ2dnUVZ_g2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
> >>> tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
> >>>>
> >>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of
> hers >>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
> >>>
> >>> No. But then, neither is Mauresmo's. Should be an interesting
> >>> match.
> >>
> >> I guess it'll come down to whose confidence is the most brittle
> . .
> > Well, Mauresmo is ranked 24; Dokic is ranked 179. And Mauresmo
> > has a lot of game.
> >
> >>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
> >>>>
> >>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
> >>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
> >>>
> >>> Bartoli is a *lot* more match-tough than Dokic these days,
> >>> despite being in a slump. I'd expect Bartoli to wallop Wejnert.
> >>
> >> Bartoli is kinda brittle, too.
> >
> > Not that brittle: Bartoli d. Wejnert 6-1,6-2.
>
> Doesn't bode well for Dokic . . . .

I don't expect Dokic to beat Mauresmo, but you can't tell from her matches
against Wejnert. For one thing, there's the whole question of how people's
games match up. Mauresmo is a completely different player from almost
everyone else on the tour now - I don't imagine Dokic has played anyone
like her since her fall from the top ranks.

For another thing, Wejner's match against Bartoli was the first she'd ever
played at the WTA level.

wg



   
Date: 04 Jan 2009 09:47:56
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com >,
tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:

> Can you try to pry the Petrova story out of someone? I emailed

I'd need to be at a tennis tournament, I think, to be able to do that.

> Octagon's
> Katerina Stecova about it a few days ago (I believe she's Nadia's
> agent,
> although if not that would explain the non-response I've gotten,
> although
> I realize it's a bad time of year to get anything like that done,
> too).

Yes, a tough time with the AO coming up and the holidays just over.

>
> They really ought to put something on Nadia's official website, at
> least.

Would be nice.

>
> A single story on a French website that she's out of the hospital
> and back
> on track doesn't get it, especially considering the dire diagnosis
> that
> was so widely reported . . . .
>
> Makes you wonder if that wasn't a misdiagnosis.

More, I suspect, that with viral meningitis you don't know how it's going
to go until it's gone.

wg


    
Date: 04 Jan 2009 14:20:22
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 09:47:56 -0600, wendyg wrote:

> In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com>,
> tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
>
>> Can you try to pry the Petrova story out of someone? I emailed
>
> I'd need to be at a tennis tournament, I think, to be able to do that.

Aw, c'mon, you've got more cred, as a sometime tennis journalist, than
"mimus of rec.sport.tennis" (especially if they check and see "mimus of
alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk") . . . .

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.




     
Date: 04 Jan 2009 19:54:49
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <_OOdnc3-TZ51lvzUnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@giganews.com >,
tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 09:47:56 -0600, wendyg wrote:
>
> > In article <M9idncZ1WO-7mP3UnZ2dnUVZ_r3inZ2d@giganews.com>,
> > tinmimus99@hotmail.com (mimus) wrote:
> >
> >> Can you try to pry the Petrova story out of someone? I emailed
> >
> > I'd need to be at a tennis tournament, I think, to be able to do
> > that.
>
> Aw, c'mon, you've got more cred, as a sometime tennis journalist,
> than
> "mimus of rec.sport.tennis" (especially if they check and see
> "mimus of
> alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk") . . . .

Well, I guess the off-season is over...

wg


 
Date: 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com >
wrote:

>Dokic-Mauresmo
>
>Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers moving!
>(the problem isn't in her feet.)

That's actually a match Dokic can win...

>Wejnert-Bartoli
>
>Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>
>Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in the
>semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>
>Kirilenko-Stosur
>
>Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a crowd-pleaser.
>
>Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but no
>Zheng . . . .
>
>http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>
>As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have battled
>their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter), while the
>Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got flattened 1-6 2-6 in
>the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda Czink, also in the
>quarters.

Quarters in qualifying?


  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <8kmvl4p44l2s1s1h4mbaoev58hrv1joot2@4ax.com >,
sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:


> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Dokic-Mauresmo
> >
> >Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
> moving!
> >(the problem isn't in her feet.)
>
> That's actually a match Dokic can win...

I'd call that optimistic of you.

wg


   
Date: 05 Jan 2009 23:01:13
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:

>In article <8kmvl4p44l2s1s1h4mbaoev58hrv1joot2@4ax.com>,
>sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:
>
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Dokic-Mauresmo
>> >
>> >Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>> moving!
>> >(the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>
>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>
>I'd call that optimistic of you.

It was close...


    
Date: 05 Jan 2009 16:59:58
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <e8t4m4tilgprb3k2p79a48f6mjh3irpl5l@4ax.com >,
sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:

> It was close...

From the scoreboard, it was notable how neither of them could hold serve
worth a damn after the first two games.

wg


     
Date: 05 Jan 2009 18:07:33
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:59:58 -0600, wendyg wrote:

> In article <e8t4m4tilgprb3k2p79a48f6mjh3irpl5l@4ax.com>,
> sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:
>
>> It was close...
>
> From the scoreboard, it was notable how neither of them could hold serve
> worth a damn after the first two games.

Nerves of steel!

Even though Amelie won, Jelena ought actually to take more away from it,
since it was very very close, even with her making all those UEs (31).

Cut those in half (at least) and she's stomping Mauresmo.

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.



    
Date: 05 Jan 2009 16:31:47
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:01:13 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:

> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:19:40 -0600, wendyg@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>
>> In article <8kmvl4p44l2s1s1h4mbaoev58hrv1joot2@4ax.com>,
>> sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>
>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>
>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>
>> I'd call that optimistic of you.
>
> It was close...

Ooh, two tie-breaks.

And considering Dokic's _31_ unforced errors in the two sets, showing
she's far from match-form yet, a good omen overall for her.

(33 winners, too.)

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.




  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:

> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>
>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>
> That's actually a match Dokic can win...

HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:

I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova does
well frying Mauresmo.

I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against Dokic.

>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>
>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>
>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>
>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>
>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>> crowd-pleaser.
>>
>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but no
>> Zheng . . . .
>>
>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>
>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda
>> Czink, also in the quarters.
>
> Quarters in qualifying?

Do you have some problem with that?

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.




   
Date: 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com >
wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>
>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>
>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>
>HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>
>I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova does
>well frying Mauresmo.

I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a
problem with everyone last year.

>I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against Dokic.
>
>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>
>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>
>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>
>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>
>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>
>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but no
>>> Zheng . . . .
>>>
>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>
>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian Melinda
>>> Czink, also in the quarters.
>>
>> Quarters in qualifying?
>
>Do you have some problem with that?

I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still
after that?




    
Date: 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:

> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>
>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>
>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>
>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>
>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>
> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
> with everyone last year.

Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .

>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>> Dokic.
>>
>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>
>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>
>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>
>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>
>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>
>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>
>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>
>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>
>> Do you have some problem with that?
>
> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
> that?

Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :

http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf

Must be a larger field than is usual for qualies, if what you say is true.

(I don't normally pay attention to such things, but I'm desperate, I guess.)

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.




     
Date: 04 Jan 2009 15:14:56
From: Ted S.
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus wrote:

>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round
>> and 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of
>> quarters in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played
>> at least one match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and
>> final still after that?
>
> Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . .
> :
>
> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf
>
>
> Must be a larger field than is usual for qualies, if what you say is
> true.

I think it's more of a problem of using standardized draw sheets. The
third round of a 32-player event would be the quarterfinals, and since
most of the events have 32-player qualifying tournaments, the computer
system used by the WTA and ITF shows the third qualifying round as a
quarterfinal. See, for example, Corina Dentoni's activity page at the
ITF:
<http://www.itftennis.com/womens/players/activity.asp?player=100049433 >

She reached the third (final) round of qualifying at Estoril last April,
which is listed as QF. At Wimbledon qualifying, however, the last
qualifying round is listed as 32.

--
Ted Schuerzinger
tedstennis at myrealbox dot com
If you're afraid of the ball, don't sit in the front row. --Anastasia
Rodionova


     
Date: 04 Jan 2009 22:15:39
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com >
wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>
>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>
>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>
>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>
>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>
>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>> with everyone last year.
>
>Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .

No, because they were pretty much her last matches of the year, she
lost to everyone before those :-)


     
Date: 04 Jan 2009 22:14:07
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com >
wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>
>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>
>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>
>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>
>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>
>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>> with everyone last year.
>
>Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .
>
>>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>>> Dokic.
>>>
>>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>>
>>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>>
>>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>>
>>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>>
>>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>>
>>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>>
>>> Do you have some problem with that?
>>
>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
>> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
>> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
>> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
>> that?
>
>Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :

OK, that's misleading. I looked at the draw, it is standard 32 draw.
But you can't call it quarters, because they don't play it until the
end, if you know what I mean. If you look at the top, Groenefeld has
beaten Kutuzova and Goerges and her 3rd match is against Coin. If she
wins that, she is in the main draw. They don't play it until the end,
because four players qualify, they don't need to find the "winner".

>
>http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf
>
>Must be a larger field than is usual for qualies, if what you say is true.
>
>(I don't normally pay attention to such things, but I'm desperate, I guess.)



      
Date: 04 Jan 2009 15:21:07
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:14:07 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>>
>>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>>
>>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>>
>>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>>
>>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>>> with everyone last year.
>>
>> Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .
>>
>>>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>>>> Dokic.
>>>>
>>>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>>>
>>>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>>>
>>>> Do you have some problem with that?
>>>
>>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
>>> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
>>> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
>>> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
>>> that?
>>
>> Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :
>
> OK, that's misleading. I looked at the draw, it is standard 32 draw. But
> you can't call it quarters, because they don't play it until the end, if
> you know what I mean. If you look at the top, Groenefeld has beaten
> Kutuzova and Goerges and her 3rd match is against Coin. If she wins
> that, she is in the main draw. They don't play it until the end, because
> four players qualify, they don't need to find the "winner".

Ah, I figured there was just the one wild-card at stake.

There's no prize-money involved? nuthin' for expenses?

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.



       
Date: 04 Jan 2009 22:34:31
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:21:07 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com >
wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:14:07 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>>>
>>>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>>>
>>>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>>>
>>>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>>>> with everyone last year.
>>>
>>> Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .
>>>
>>>>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>>>>> Dokic.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have some problem with that?
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>>>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
>>>> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
>>>> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
>>>> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
>>>> that?
>>>
>>> Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :
>>
>> OK, that's misleading. I looked at the draw, it is standard 32 draw. But
>> you can't call it quarters, because they don't play it until the end, if
>> you know what I mean. If you look at the top, Groenefeld has beaten
>> Kutuzova and Goerges and her 3rd match is against Coin. If she wins
>> that, she is in the main draw. They don't play it until the end, because
>> four players qualify, they don't need to find the "winner".
>
>Ah, I figured there was just the one wild-card at stake.

No, no, no, now you are confusing things. Or actually I think that AO
wild-card thing has confused you. Normally qualifying and wild-cards
are two different things. There is a qualifying draw, where players
qualify to the tournament, in this case 4 players. Then there are
wild-cards that the organizers can give to anyone they want.

>There's no prize-money involved? nuthin' for expenses?

There is prize money, if you look at your own link to the qualifying
draw (which seems to be missing from this post), there is the prize
money in the bottom.



        
Date: 04 Jan 2009 19:54:49
From:
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
In article <cv62m4pqq2ou2flp4benbi784dh535fbml@4ax.com >,
sakari.lund@welho.com (Sakari Lund) wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:21:07 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >There's no prize-money involved? nuthin' for expenses?
>
> There is prize money, if you look at your own link to the qualifying
> draw (which seems to be missing from this post), there is the prize
> money in the bottom.
>

And also ranking points, though not many.

wg


        
Date: 04 Jan 2009 15:44:39
From: mimus
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:34:31 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:

> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:21:07 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:14:07 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>>>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>>>>> with everyone last year.
>>>>
>>>> Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .
>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>>>>>> Dokic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>>>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>>>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>>>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>>>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>>>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>>>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>>>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>>>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>>>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>>>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have some problem with that?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>>>>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
>>>>> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
>>>>> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
>>>>> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
>>>>> that?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :
>>>
>>> OK, that's misleading. I looked at the draw, it is standard 32 draw. But
>>> you can't call it quarters, because they don't play it until the end, if
>>> you know what I mean. If you look at the top, Groenefeld has beaten
>>> Kutuzova and Goerges and her 3rd match is against Coin. If she wins
>>> that, she is in the main draw. They don't play it until the end, because
>>> four players qualify, they don't need to find the "winner".
>>
>> Ah, I figured there was just the one wild-card at stake.
>
> No, no, no, now you are confusing things. Or actually I think that AO
> wild-card thing has confused you. Normally qualifying and wild-cards
> are two different things. There is a qualifying draw, where players
> qualify to the tournament, in this case 4 players. Then there are
> wild-cards that the organizers can give to anyone they want.

Oh, right, slip of the fingers there (I'll blame my fingers, anyway).

Although the AO didn't help by putting one-a _their_ wild-cards up for
grabs in a, an, er, a "non-qualifying" tourney . . . .

>> There's no prize-money involved? nuthin' for expenses?
>
> There is prize money, if you look at your own link to the qualifying
> draw (which seems to be missing from this post), there is the prize
> money in the bottom.

Boy, losing in the first round only bags you $265? that wouldn't cover the
air-fare:

http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf

--

Take a deep breath, take a walk, cool off, plot a bit, and serve again.



        
Date: 04 Jan 2009 22:37:50
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Brisbane Women's First Round Sizzlers
On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:34:31 +0200, Sakari Lund
<sakari.lund@welho.com > wrote:

>On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:21:07 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 22:14:07 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:18:03 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 19:48:08 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:49:53 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 23:38:36 +0200, Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 16:31:49 -0500, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dokic-Mauresmo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Woohoo! Dokic had better get and keep those "heavy feet" of hers
>>>>>>>> moving! (the problem isn't in her feet.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's actually a match Dokic can win...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HmMmm, I dunno, in spite of Mauresmo's recent Cibulkova problem:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just chalk that up as a matchup problem, something that Cibulkova
>>>>>> does well frying Mauresmo.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know she lost a few times to Cibulkova, but I think she had a problem
>>>>> with everyone last year.
>>>>
>>>> Could be that Cibulkova shook her, could be, could be . . . .
>>>>
>>>>>> I wouldn't think Mauresmo would have any confidence-problem against
>>>>>> Dokic.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wejnert-Bartoli
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let's see if young Aussie hope Wejnert gives the powerful if
>>>>>>>> less-than-orthodox Bartoli the fits she gives Dokic, eh?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Going by seeds etc., Dokic would have to get through Mauresmo and
>>>>>>>> Ivanovic, and Wejnert through Bartoli and Kanepi, to get a rematch in
>>>>>>>> the semis, so I think we can rule that what would undoubtedly be a
>>>>>>>> crowd-thriller out this time around . . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kirilenko-Stosur
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Russian glamour versus the home-team here should make for a
>>>>>>>> crowd-pleaser.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Speaking of crowd-pleasers, where's Zheng nowadays? I see Peng, but
>>>>>>>> no Zheng . . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/mds.pdf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for the qualifying, top seed Groenefeld and unseeded Sprem have
>>>>>>>> battled their ways into the quarters (each has had a three setter),
>>>>>>>> while the Great Big Hope of Uzbekistan, Akgul Amanmuradova, got
>>>>>>>> flattened 1-6 2-6 in the first round by unknown-to-me Hungarian
>>>>>>>> Melinda Czink, also in the quarters.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quarters in qualifying?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you have some problem with that?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't understand what that means. In qualifying there are usually 3
>>>>> rounds, sometimes I think 2. They are called 1st round, 2nd round and
>>>>> 3rd round (or final round or whatever). I have never heard of quarters
>>>>> in qualifying. Also, you are saying that they have played at least one
>>>>> match to get to quarters. Is there quarters, semis and final still after
>>>>> that?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I was counting backward, final, semifinals, quarterfinals . . . :
>>>
>>> OK, that's misleading. I looked at the draw, it is standard 32 draw. But
>>> you can't call it quarters, because they don't play it until the end, if
>>> you know what I mean. If you look at the top, Groenefeld has beaten
>>> Kutuzova and Goerges and her 3rd match is against Coin. If she wins
>>> that, she is in the main draw. They don't play it until the end, because
>>> four players qualify, they don't need to find the "winner".
>>
>>Ah, I figured there was just the one wild-card at stake.
>
>No, no, no, now you are confusing things. Or actually I think that AO
>wild-card thing has confused you. Normally qualifying and wild-cards
>are two different things. There is a qualifying draw, where players
>qualify to the tournament, in this case 4 players. Then there are
>wild-cards that the organizers can give to anyone they want.
>
>>There's no prize-money involved? nuthin' for expenses?
>
>There is prize money, if you look at your own link to the qualifying
>draw (which seems to be missing from this post), there is the prize
>money in the bottom.

Here:

http://www.brisbaneinternational.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/qs1.pdf

1st round losers $265
2nd round losers $460
Finalist $860
Qualifier is not listed anything, because it depends on how long they
go in the main draw.

End of lesson.