tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 02 Jan 2009 04:33:19
From: Professor X
Subject: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye




 
Date: 03 Jan 2009 04:06:13
From:
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 3, 3:16=A0am, "john" <jli...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:495e70df$0$22116$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> > Sakari Lund wrote:
> >> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matt=
er,
> >>> but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-sette=
r
> >>> at USO q/f.
>
> >> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> >> it. Federer beat Gilles M=FCller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>
> > Ok - it's even worse then as it was 4th rd.
>
> If you like to count close matches as a near loss then how many times was
> Sampras had some of those matches before winning a slam quite a few,
> a five setter against Lendl in 1990 USO, =A0Corretja in 96 USO, =A0Ivanis=
evic
> in 98 Wimbledon final after Goran played a marathon 5 sets against Krajic=
ek,
> Korda in Wimbledon 97. =A0Base on the logic above Sampras was lucky to wi=
n
> 14 grand slams...

This came up before - Sampras went to five sets in 9 of his 14 slam
wins ...



 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 14:13:25
From: Rodjk #613
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 2:07=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 3, 1:38=A0am, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matte=
r,
> > >but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
> > >at USO q/f.
>
> > Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> > it. Federer beat Gilles M=FCller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>
> Bugs like these are what makes some of us here suspect whether Whimpy
> really is a bot script of some sort. I think there is a programmer
> there taking advantage of us. A troll agent if you will. :)

No, I have to disagree. Whisper has shown that he really is as
ignorant of tennis as he appears.

Rodjk #613


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 12:31:16
From:
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 7:38=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
> >but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
> >at USO q/f.
>
> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> it. Federer beat Gilles M=FCller in 3 sets in USO QF.

I presume he's talking about the Andreev match in the previous round



  
Date: 02 Jan 2009 22:52:24
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 12:31:16 -0800 (PST), gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:

>On Jan 2, 7:38 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
>> >but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>> >at USO q/f.
>>
>> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
>> it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>
>I presume he's talking about the Andreev match in the previous round

Of course, which is why I said it is not a big deal. But just a little
example maybe that he ignores what people say to him.


   
Date: 03 Jan 2009 08:32:43
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 12:31:16 -0800 (PST), gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Jan 2, 7:38 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
>>>> but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>>>> at USO q/f.
>>> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
>>> it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>> I presume he's talking about the Andreev match in the previous round
>
> Of course, which is why I said it is not a big deal. But just a little
> example maybe that he ignores what people say to him.


Off season is a killer in here.



 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 12:07:43
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 3, 1:38=A0am, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
> >but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
> >at USO q/f.
>
> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> it. Federer beat Gilles M=FCller in 3 sets in USO QF.

Bugs like these are what makes some of us here suspect whether Whimpy
really is a bot script of some sort. I think there is a programmer
there taking advantage of us. A troll agent if you will. :)


  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 23:58:37
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams

On 2-Jan-2009, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote:

> On Jan 3, 1:38 am, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't
> > >matter,
> > >but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
> > >at USO q/f.
> >
> > Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> > it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>
> Bugs like these are what makes some of us here suspect whether Whimpy
> really is a bot script of some sort. I think there is a programmer
> there taking advantage of us. A troll agent if you will. :)

Well it *would* be interesting if someone were to use rst as a Turing test!


   
Date: 04 Jan 2009 03:10:46
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
jdeluise wrote:
> On 2-Jan-2009, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 3, 1:38 am, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't
>>>> matter,
>>>> but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>>>> at USO q/f.
>>> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
>>> it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>> Bugs like these are what makes some of us here suspect whether Whimpy
>> really is a bot script of some sort. I think there is a programmer
>> there taking advantage of us. A troll agent if you will. :)
>
> Well it *would* be interesting if someone were to use rst as a Turing test!

It would be if there were *any* humans posting here! ;-)

--
Cheers,

vc


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 10:11:58
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 10:53=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 2, 4:44=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >On Jan 2, 2:07=A0pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
> > >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >>news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.co=
m...
>
> > >> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > >> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> > >> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> > >> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was =
a
> > >> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> > >> tiebreaker.
>
> > >> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> > >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> > >> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> > >> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more ser=
iously
> > >> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it =
was an
> > >> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider a=
nd
> > >> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a =
meal of
> > >> winning it from there.
> > >> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to=
try and
> > >> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until=
Murray
> > >> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that=
Murray
> > >> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo=
.
>
> > >Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
> > >in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
> > >little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
> > >with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
> > >year.
>
> > Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
> > experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
> > really will chip and charge more.
>
> Because he was doing it quite a bit at the end of last season as well.
> It worked quite well today except for the times when he chipped the
> return too short.
>
> I think Federer may recognise that his standard chipped backhand
> return is not going to be good enough anymore and he needs to do
> something different - in the USO final he ran around his backhand and
> hit some big forehand returns against some of Murray's weaker second
> serves. Chipping and charging is another approach which can work well
> if used wisely.

I think unless Murray is riding a steep upwards curve at the moment,
somehow improving vastly in the coming few weeks, Federer will still
win against him in a slam 5-setter situation, should that happen.
Things probably haven't changed a whole lot since last USO.

This year's AO is certainly a whole lot more interesting with Murray
coming of age.


  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 06:45:12
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Jan 2, 10:53 pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 4:44 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 2, 2:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>>>>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>>>>> On what do you base this opinion?
>>>>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>>>>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>>>>> tiebreaker.
>>>>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>>>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>>>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>>>>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>>>>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>>>>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
>>>>> winning it from there.
>>>>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
>>>>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
>>>>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
>>>>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>>>> Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
>>>> in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
>>>> little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
>>>> with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
>>>> year.
>>> Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
>>> experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
>>> really will chip and charge more.
>> Because he was doing it quite a bit at the end of last season as well.
>> It worked quite well today except for the times when he chipped the
>> return too short.
>>
>> I think Federer may recognise that his standard chipped backhand
>> return is not going to be good enough anymore and he needs to do
>> something different - in the USO final he ran around his backhand and
>> hit some big forehand returns against some of Murray's weaker second
>> serves. Chipping and charging is another approach which can work well
>> if used wisely.
>
> I think unless Murray is riding a steep upwards curve at the moment,
> somehow improving vastly in the coming few weeks, Federer will still
> win against him in a slam 5-setter situation, should that happen.
> Things probably haven't changed a whole lot since last USO.
>
> This year's AO is certainly a whole lot more interesting with Murray
> coming of age.


Murray will be much tougher for Fed to beat now given USO experience.
Anything short of Murray beating Fed in a slam will be disappointment
for him - he won't be merely satisfied to make final & 'do well'.




 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 10:08:24
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 10:44=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >On Jan 2, 2:07=A0pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
> >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com.=
..
>
> >> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> >> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> >> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> >> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> >> tiebreaker.
>
> >> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> >> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> >> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more serio=
usly
> >> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it wa=
s an
> >> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> >> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a me=
al of
> >> winning it from there.
> >> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to t=
ry and
> >> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until M=
urray
> >> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that M=
urray
> >> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>
> >Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
> >in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
> >little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
> >with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
> >year.
>
> Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
> experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
> really will chip and charge more.
>
> Anyway, sounds like Federer is doing just like he used to do at
> Kooyong, experimenting things. And of course he lost to Roddick at
> Kooyong, and then totally killed him at AO.
>

Yeah, that was brutal. I wouldn't wish that on Murray.



 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 08:53:29
From:
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 4:44=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >On Jan 2, 2:07=A0pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
> >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com.=
..
>
> >> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> >> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> >> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> >> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> >> tiebreaker.
>
> >> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> >> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> >> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more serio=
usly
> >> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it wa=
s an
> >> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> >> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a me=
al of
> >> winning it from there.
> >> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to t=
ry and
> >> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until M=
urray
> >> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that M=
urray
> >> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>
> >Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
> >in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
> >little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
> >with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
> >year.
>
> Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
> experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
> really will chip and charge more.
>

Because he was doing it quite a bit at the end of last season as well.
It worked quite well today except for the times when he chipped the
return too short.

I think Federer may recognise that his standard chipped backhand
return is not going to be good enough anymore and he needs to do
something different - in the USO final he ran around his backhand and
hit some big forehand returns against some of Murray's weaker second
serves. Chipping and charging is another approach which can work well
if used wisely.







  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 06:40:48
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 2, 4:44 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 2:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>>>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>>>> On what do you base this opinion?
>>>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>>>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>>>> tiebreaker.
>>>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>>>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>>>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>>>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
>>>> winning it from there.
>>>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
>>>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
>>>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
>>>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>>> Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
>>> in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
>>> little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
>>> with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
>>> year.
>> Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
>> experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
>> really will chip and charge more.
>>
>
> Because he was doing it quite a bit at the end of last season as well.
> It worked quite well today except for the times when he chipped the
> return too short.
>
> I think Federer may recognise that his standard chipped backhand
> return is not going to be good enough anymore and he needs to do
> something different - in the USO final he ran around his backhand and
> hit some big forehand returns against some of Murray's weaker second
> serves. Chipping and charging is another approach which can work well
> if used wisely.
>
>
>
>
>



Definitely. In big slam finals it will definitely annoy opponents if he
keeps coming in despite getting passed a lot. Of course he shouldn't
just blindly come in on anything, but should make the shot as awkward as
possible for his opponent, & work on his own instincts at the net.
Missing half is ok as long as he's resolute in his strategy & not defeatist.



 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 08:29:03
From:
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 2:07=A0pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com > wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> tiebreaker.
>
> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriousl=
y
> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was a=
n
> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal =
of
> winning it from there.
> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try =
and
> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murr=
ay
> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murr=
ay
> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.

Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
year.

Federer clearly wasn't giving it 100% for most of the match, trying a
lot of daft shots, including lots of forehand drop shots in strange
situations. Murray was taking it more seriously but not totally I
don't think. Murray should have finished it off easily in the third
but went off a bit while Federer got some reasonable play going.

The only concern for Federer was that in the tie-break it did look
like he was trying more (hard to be totally sure, but he did save 3
match points), but he missed 3 or 4 straightforward forehands when in
good positions.

I'd say that Federer was looking to get a decent match without getting
injured etc, and I don't think he was that keen to play again
tomorrow. No major surprises in his game, but he'll not win too many
regular matches serving as he did today.








  
Date: 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 2, 2:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>> On what do you base this opinion?
>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>> tiebreaker.
>>
>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>
>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>
>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
>> winning it from there.
>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>
> Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
> in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
> little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
> with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
> year.


I hope so. If he starts now he should in great shape for Wimbledon.
Remember even Mac won something like 50% of his net approaches, so he
just needs to shrug off all the passing shots as if nothing happened &
focus on next point.


>
> Federer clearly wasn't giving it 100% for most of the match, trying a
> lot of daft shots, including lots of forehand drop shots in strange
> situations. Murray was taking it more seriously but not totally I
> don't think. Murray should have finished it off easily in the third
> but went off a bit while Federer got some reasonable play going.
>
> The only concern for Federer was that in the tie-break it did look
> like he was trying more (hard to be totally sure, but he did save 3
> match points), but he missed 3 or 4 straightforward forehands when in
> good positions.


This has been a tendency for him in tight matches all career long.
Maybe he'll finally pull out one of these wins when needed most (15th
slam?).


>
> I'd say that Federer was looking to get a decent match without getting
> injured etc, and I don't think he was that keen to play again
> tomorrow. No major surprises in his game, but he'll not win too many
> regular matches serving as he did today.
>


Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
at USO q/f.

As he ages he really needs to develop a confident strategy of winning
quick points, even if it means losing many quick ones & boat load of
tune-ups along the way. Trying to guts it out from baseline with
younger & stronger guys is low %.




   
Date: 02 Jan 2009 21:38:01
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
>but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>at USO q/f.

Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.


    
Date: 03 Jan 2009 06:54:03
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
>> but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>> at USO q/f.
>
> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
> it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.


Ok - it's even worse then as it was 4th rd.


     
Date: 03 Jan 2009 14:16:02
From: john
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams

"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:495e70df$0$22116$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Sakari Lund wrote:
>> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 06:28:26 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Given he made 3 slam finals & 1 s/f last yr I'd say it shouldn't matter,
>>> but then he was lucky to advance past 3rd rd at AO & also had 5-setter
>>> at USO q/f.
>>
>> Not that it is a big deal, but this is maybe the 5th time I correct
>> it. Federer beat Gilles Müller in 3 sets in USO QF.
>
>
> Ok - it's even worse then as it was 4th rd.

If you like to count close matches as a near loss then how many times was
Sampras had some of those matches before winning a slam quite a few,
a five setter against Lendl in 1990 USO, Corretja in 96 USO, Ivanisevic
in 98 Wimbledon final after Goran played a marathon 5 sets against Krajicek,
Korda in Wimbledon 97. Base on the logic above Sampras was lucky to win
14 grand slams...




  
Date: 02 Jan 2009 18:44:10
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:

>On Jan 2, 2:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>
>> > On what do you base this opinion?
>>
>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>> tiebreaker.
>>
>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>
>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>
>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
>> winning it from there.
>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>
>Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
>in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
>little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
>with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
>year.

Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
really will chip and charge more.

Anyway, sounds like Federer is doing just like he used to do at
Kooyong, experimenting things. And of course he lost to Roddick at
Kooyong, and then totally killed him at AO.



>
>



   
Date: 03 Jan 2009 06:37:27
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:03 -0800 (PST), gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Jan 2, 2:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>>> On what do you base this opinion?
>>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>>> tiebreaker.
>>>
>>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>>
>>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>>
>>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
>>> winning it from there.
>>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
>>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
>>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
>>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>> Federer served-volleyed quite a lot but was mainly rolling his serves
>> in so this wasn't a great idea. His serve in general was hit with
>> little pace. He chipped and charged a lot on Murray's second serve
>> with some success - this looks like a tactic he will adopt more this
>> year.
>
> Why do you think he will do that more this year, if he was
> experimenting things in this match? It will be interesting if he
> really will chip and charge more.
>
> Anyway, sounds like Federer is doing just like he used to do at
> Kooyong, experimenting things. And of course he lost to Roddick at
> Kooyong, and then totally killed him at AO.
>


That was 2 yrs ago - long time in tennis when you hit your late 20's.

Chip 'n charge is a great tactical strategy for Fed. Yes he will lose
many points, but he will really annoy his opponents & force them to keep
coming up with great shots time after time - in critical moments they
will weaken & he can use his vast experience to get home.


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 17:10:50
From: TT
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
Professor X wrote:
> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye

Could be no more slams but he's still at least 4th best out there.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 06:16:56
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 8:07=A0pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com > wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> tiebreaker.
>
> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriousl=
y
> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was a=
n
> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal =
of
> winning it from there.
> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try =
and
> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murr=
ay
> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murr=
ay
> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.

How was the power on Murray's shots? Does the extra muscle help him?


  
Date: 02 Jan 2009 14:46:30
From: gg
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams

"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:62e8a566-c52b-43d8-8335-c2fd8e08f58a@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 2, 8:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com > wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> > On what do you base this opinion?
>
> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> tiebreaker.
>
> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>
> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>
> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal
> of
> winning it from there.
> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try
> and
> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until
> Murray
> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that
> Murray
> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.

How was the power on Murray's shots? Does the extra muscle help him?

He hit some big serves that mainly missed but in general looked a bit
passive. He did seem to hit some very good, pacy passing shots so maybe that
was a result of the bulking up. He definitely didn't look any slower round
the court, as some had feared. It was more impressive yesterday when he hit
a couple of very nice flat down the line forehands and his backhand down the
line was still big but inaccurate today.




   
Date: 02 Jan 2009 16:01:37
From: Vari L. Cinicke
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
gg wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:62e8a566-c52b-43d8-8335-c2fd8e08f58a@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 2, 8:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>>> On what do you base this opinion?
>> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
>> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
>> tiebreaker.
>>
>> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
>>
>> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
>>
>> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
>> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
>> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
>> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal
>> of
>> winning it from there.
>> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try
>> and
>> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until
>> Murray
>> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that
>> Murray
>> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
>
> How was the power on Murray's shots? Does the extra muscle help him?
>
> He hit some big serves that mainly missed but in general looked a bit
> passive. He did seem to hit some very good, pacy passing shots so maybe that
> was a result of the bulking up. He definitely didn't look any slower round
> the court, as some had feared. It was more impressive yesterday when he hit
> a couple of very nice flat down the line forehands and his backhand down the
> line was still big but inaccurate today.
>
>

Real question is what the effects of beating Federer are on his body. He
seems to have run pretty hard for the win.

If he can back up this exo "win" with a "win" over Nadal in the "Final",
that would be "something".

--
Cheers,

vc


    
Date: 02 Jan 2009 18:16:29
From: jdeluise
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams

On 2-Jan-2009, "Vari L. Cinicke" <cinicke@netscape.net > wrote:

> gg wrote:
> > "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:62e8a566-c52b-43d8-8335-c2fd8e08f58a@l33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> > On Jan 2, 8:07 pm, "gg" <hb...@hugj.com> wrote:
> >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
> >>> On what do you base this opinion?
> >> Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
> >> very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
> >> tiebreaker.
> >>
> >> I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:
> >>
> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm
> >>
> >> Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.
> >>
> >> Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more
> >> seriously
> >> than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was
> >> an
> >> exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
> >> spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a
> >> meal
> >> of
> >> winning it from there.
> >> My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to
> >> try
> >> and
> >> detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until
> >> Murray
> >> built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that
> >> Murray
> >> was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.
> >
> > How was the power on Murray's shots? Does the extra muscle help him?
> >
> > He hit some big serves that mainly missed but in general looked a bit
> > passive. He did seem to hit some very good, pacy passing shots so maybe
> > that
> > was a result of the bulking up. He definitely didn't look any slower
> > round
> > the court, as some had feared. It was more impressive yesterday when he
> > hit
> > a couple of very nice flat down the line forehands and his backhand down
> > the
> > line was still big but inaccurate today.
> >
> >
>
> Real question is what the effects of beating Federer are on his body. He
> seems to have run pretty hard for the win.
>
> If he can back up this exo "win" with a "win" over Nadal in the "Final",
> that would be "something".

You're right about that... I watched the last set and a half and Murray was
huffing and puffing on more than one occasion. I felt Federer looked like
the better player out there, but made a lot of unforgivable mistakes. I
felt Federer looked a bit bored out there when he wasn't smiling. I wonder
if that huge Rolex caused him any troubles, it sure was gaudy.


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 05:54:50
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams


gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 2, 12:33=EF=BF=BDpm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> On what do you base this opinion?

Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
tiebreaker.

I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm

Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.


  
Date: 02 Jan 2009 14:07:26
From: gg
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams

"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:9bd6a9e3-8278-41dd-a45f-cf4ff0980157@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...


gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 2, 12:33?pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye
>
> On what do you base this opinion?

Because Murray beat Federer in an exhibition, and presumably it was a
very straightforward win since the match went to a final set
tiebreaker.

I haven't seen the match live, BBC live text has commentary:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/7807375.stm

Hopefully there will be some clips up on U2B soon.



Seemed to me that Murray for the most part took it a little more seriously
than Federer. One of the few concessions Murray made to the fact it was an
exo was going for a spectacular finish to go up 5-1 in the decider and
spectacularly messing it up.That seemed to rattle him and he made a meal of
winning it from there.
My impression was Federer was coming in more than in a real match to try and
detect some patterns in Murray's play when net-rushed. I think until Murray
built his big lead neither really cared much who won, but after that Murray
was keen to avoid the embarrassment of blowing a lead even in an exo.




 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 15:23:57
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 04:33:19 -0800 (PST), Professor X
<suebokaian@hotmail.com > wrote:

>bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye

I think you need an update on Murray. Losing to Murray these days
doesn't mean you are out of top 10. Especially losing to Murray in an
exo. If he has lost.


 
Date: 02 Jan 2009 05:08:27
From:
Subject: Re: Fed to be out of top 10 by end of year... no more slams
On Jan 2, 12:33=A0pm, Professor X <sueboka...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> bye bye murray/nadal bunny, bye bye

On what do you base this opinion?