The 2nd Official 2009 Australian Open Thread

[Hot Spenny]

Everyone hates losing Vulture, if they didn't they'd be something wrong with them. I think they're talking about his temperament 'on court', during play.

Yeah I know, but I remember that being related to the days where he was a bit of a brat on the court, that's all. I gotta find that video, it was quite funny!

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Fair enough Vulture.

 

[torq]

Andy Roddick is a funny dude when he cracks the sh*ts. This is the last bit of his media interview after losing to Federer...

Q. When it was 5‑2 in the first set, the umpire or chair engaged you when you carried on, and he said neither you nor him were going to win here. That didn't affect you at all?
ANDY RODDICK: What?

Q. When it was 5‑2 in the first set.
ANDY RODDICK: I was already down two breaks in that set.

Q. I get that.
ANDY RODDICK: Then get it.

Q. It was an unusual stage for the chair to engage you and carry on a dialogue after two breakpoints went against you.
ANDY RODDICK: Yeah, what do you want from me? The guy made a judgment call. I didn't agree with the judgment call. I made it known. I asked pointed questions that when he answered them they completely contradicted what he said before. What do you want me to say?

Q. Well, I guess you didn't beat yourself here, you were beaten by a better player.
ANDY RODDICK: Have you been here for the entire press conference?

Q. Yes.
ANDY RODDICK: I feel like I've gotten that point across.

Q. You handled that quite well. I'm impressed.
ANDY RODDICK: Thank you. You make a lot of statements and don't ask any questions.

 

[ashley12]

Your time might be better invested watching a sitcom rather than tennis.

Call of the thread...

 

[gaelictiogar]

Federer on song is simply beautiful to watch. He is so elegant, so graceful, he doesn't weem to sweat at all.

He can be a bit catty and moany but what of it? On song as he has been V Del Potro and Roddick he is one of the great sights in sport. I would love to see him get his 14th this weekend. His talent deserves it.

 

[Power King]

Your time might be better invested watching a sitcom rather than tennis.

^Personally, characters in tennis make it all the more exciting, as for any sport in my opinion. Emotion is a large reason as to why so many of us follow sport passionately.

Having said that, I don't mind if Federer shows relatively less emotion. That's part of his character in keeping quietly focused for most of his matches.

To vulture, it is well-known that Federer can be a bit of a bad loser on the tour to this day, however when he wins, how humble he is tends to overshadow this in the public's eye (or the public simply isn't aware of it).

And to the federer fanatics, an honest question. Using the logic of going for him because he is the best (or second-best now), does that mean you would always go for Tiger Woods in golf? In my opinion, wouldn't it just be boring to go for the guy that wins all the time? I never go for Federer, but it doesn't mean I can't appreciate his talent any less that someone who is a fan.

 

[mdc]

^Personally, characters in tennis make it all the more exciting, as for any sport in my opinion. Emotion is a large reason as to why so many of us follow sport passionately.

I'd say most people follow sports as a way to live out their failed childhood dreams through the success of others. Could be just me though.

And to the federer fanatics, an honest question. Using the logic of going for him because he is the best (or second-best now), does that mean you would always go for Tiger Woods in golf? In my opinion, wouldn't it just be boring to go for the guy that wins all the time? I never go for Federer, but it doesn't mean I can't appreciate his talent any less that someone who is a fan.

I personally don't "go" for anyone in tennis, I just like watching it.

In a roundabout sort of way though;
- I'd prefer to watch the best tennis possible
- As such, I'd prefer the players capable of the best tennis to win as often as possible
- And so, I probably "go" for Federer in that regard, as his best stuff is miles above.

Then again, the same goes for more inconsistent guys like Safin and Tsonga - they might not be consistently the best, but their best stuff is right up there, so I hope they do well and give us a chance to watch some great matches.

 

[JuddyBuddy]

Andy Roddick is a funny dude when he cracks the sh*ts.

Haha, thats what I like about Andy. Even when he gets angry he still mantains a sense of humour.

 

[Hot Spenny]

To vulture, it is well-known that Federer can be a bit of a bad loser on the tour to this day, however when he wins, how humble he is tends to overshadow this in the public's eye (or the public simply isn't aware of it).

Yeah I agree.. I just enjoyed that footage in particular, and it shows he is quite a bit a way from that day I would have thought. Still, I understand the bad loser tag.

 

[shammersting]

Does anyone give any chance of an upset tonight? Rafa is paying 1.12 to about $6 Verdasco... Rafa at times didn't look to convincing the other night but if he does win tonight I think he will beat Fed in final.

 

[krisholio14]

I'd say most people follow sports as a way to live out their failed childhood dreams through the success of others. Could be just me though.



I personally don't "go" for anyone in tennis, I just like watching it.

In a roundabout sort of way though;
- I'd prefer to watch the best tennis possible
- As such, I'd prefer the players capable of the best tennis to win as often as possible
- And so, I probably "go" for Federer in that regard, as his best stuff is miles above.

Then again, the same goes for more inconsistent guys like Safin and Tsonga - they might not be consistently the best, but their best stuff is right up there, so I hope they do well and give us a chance to watch some great matches.

The first part of your comment is a pretty cynical view, and not really accurate for the most part.

The second part has a lot more to do with why people watch sport, and not a lot of that has to do with failed dreams.

We can't all be top line sportsmen or women, and I don't think a whole lot of us are bitter about that. In fact, i'd say if you've played a sport competitively at any level, it helps you to appreciate and admire the players at the top all the more, because you know how hard it is to be that good, and how hard you have to work for it.

 

[XFactor1979]

is it just me who believes all nadal has to do is show up and he'll be facing off against roger federer - AGAIN in a couple days time on rod laver arena?

who do you think will win? nadal or federer, i want federer to win, nadal is merely a biff merchant. but its not going to be easy for roger because nadal hits the ball so hard it will disrupt federer's flow.

 

[mdc]

The first part of your comment is a pretty cynical view, and not really accurate for the most part.

The second part has a lot more to do with why people watch sport, and not a lot of that has to do with failed dreams.

We can't all be top line sportsmen or women, and I don't think a whole lot of us are bitter about that. In fact, i'd say if you've played a sport competitively at any level, it helps you to appreciate and admire the players at the top all the more, because you know how hard it is to be that good, and how hard you have to work for it.

Look, I think it's an interesting topic in itself, and I don't want to derail this thread too much. Let's just say I feel I could make a convincing case - though it certainly wouldn't be true for everyone.

 

[krisholio14]

Look, I think it's an interesting topic in itself, and I don't want to derail this thread too much. Let's just say I feel I could make a convincing case - though it certainly wouldn't be true for everyone.

It is true in some cases, thats why we have the Damir Dokics of this world.

But I certainly don't watch the amount of sport I do because I have some kind of insecurity about my own ability to play any sport at its highest level.

 

[CHBench]

Just you Xfactor.
Whats the bet Verdasco will play the match of his life against Nadal tonight, then in the Final get absolutley flogged by Federer.

 

[mdc]

But I certainly don't watch the amount of sport I do because I have some kind of insecurity about my own ability to play any sport at its highest level.

That's not really what I mean.

Let's leave it for now, I might start a separate thread about it eventually.

 

[Power King]

Just you Xfactor.
Whats the bet Verdasco will play the match of his life against Nadal tonight, then in the Final get absolutley flogged by Federer.

I hope this doesn't happen.

Has happened at the Australian Open too many times before.

Disappointing that the AO has only ever had a final reach 5 sets, once before.

 

[red+black]

Disappointing that the AO has only ever had a final reach 5 sets, once before.

17 times actually.

I assume you meant "at the Tennis Centre". Yet we now have a different surface, thus, at the current venue, on the current surface, the AO has never gone to 5 sets.

 

[aaronm46]

Verdasco better lose tonight as i am dying to see Fed-Nadal on something other than clay or grass

 

[Power King]

17 times actually.

I assume you meant "at the Tennis Centre". Yet we now have a different surface, thus, at the current venue, on the current surface, the AO has never gone to 5 sets.

^I assumed the stat I heard last night was in regards to the Melbourne Park.

Looking at wiki, we haven't had a 5-setter since 87-88, and before that the last time was in 77.

As a neutral viewer, I would prefer a climax to the event, rather than an anti-climax (4-setters can go either way, that is, close win or comfortable win).

I'm not sure when Rebound Ace started to be used. Plexi-cushion is only in its second year.

 

[SJ]

The 1988 Final was the first at Melbourne Park, Cash v Wilander. I'm not quite sure but I assume that therefore was the first year on Rebound Ace too.

 

[Golden Duck]

Matches have been rubbish this year, very one sided. Only half decent game was Gonzalez vs Gasquet.

 

[CHBench]

Not really a follower of doubles, especially of the mixed variety but since when have they played game point on deuce?
Thought that was only adaption to the legends matches.

 

[Xtreme]

Probably just a cheap way to speed things up for them. They made other adjustments over the years (including at grand slams) where the deciding 'set' may be designated as a sole tie break, rather than proper games. Do the men's doubles play full 5 sets ? or is that only relegated to davis cup these days ?​

 

[SJ]

Not really a follower of doubles, especially of the mixed variety but since when have they played game point on deuce?
Thought that was only adaption to the legends matches.

Yeah I didn't realise they had changed to that until I saw Tomic and Wejnart play the other day on Margaret Court. The two set match was over in 44 minutes - followed by the 4 hours 9 minutes five set Gonzales/Gasquet match.