Tennis anyone? (Wimbledon thread)

If there's one here I haven't found it and I apologize.

Very very very happy to see Mauresmo defeated JHH this morning. Has there been another tennis player with JHH's skills and absolutely no personality in recent years? No charm. No reason to root for her. The antics she pulled at the Australian were utter bullshit.

Big men's match tomorrow. Federer has to win, no exceptions, he HAS to win.

And Andy Roddick is finished as a consistent top tier player.

 

Agree on most counts, noles, but I'm not much of a Mauresmo fan, either. The women'sd game is bottoming out again.
Selena Roberts had a very good Henin-Hardenne column Wednesday about her  personalitiy issues.

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/07/05/sports/tennis/05roberts.html

Tomorrow is the big one. Federer-Nadal has the makings of a rivalry for the ages.

 

Nadal is 6-1 against Federer lifetime, beat him at the French. They have never played on grass, a surface that supposedly favors Federer.
If Federer is one of the all-time greats -- as it appears he will be -- he needs to prove it tomorrow.

 

Federer = Tiger.

Nadal = Mickelson.

If either were American, we'd care.

 

Sorry, Bat. head-to-head does not support the Tiger-Phil comparision...and Nadal won rather easily after a shaky first set in Paris.

 

As they said Nadal has a major mental edge over Federer, who very well could be the greatest tennis player of any era. Federer's money surface is grass and this is basically where he's supposed to squash Nadal, who is still more of a clay-court specialist despite his improving game on grass and hard courts. The winner of this is basically the top tennis player in the world, polls withstanding.

But for Federer, it's a mental thing. Nadal has gotten the best of him and defeated him rather easily in the French finals. He's got to prove that he's better.

 

I don't know. Lefty's won more majors than Tiger in the last couple years.

But reverse the two or not, either way, those 2 are the top of tennis. And a nation yawns.

 

Two things are at work here.

1. Federer has been annointed --- by many, many people (myself included) --- as the greatest player ever.

Losing on his best surface and falling to 1-7 lifetime against Nadal would arguably make him only the second-best player of his era.

That's quite a lot of damage to his legacy (in many people's minds).

2. I sense an uncomfortable comparison between Federer and Bjorn Borg brewing.

Both magnificently gifted players. Beautiful to watch. Dominated Wimbledon. Each had an Achilles' heel in the Grand Slams, though. Borg couldn't win the U.S. Open. Federer can't get it done at the French.

McEnroe broke through Borg's invincibility --- beat him at Wimbledon in 1981 --- to the point where Borg abruptly quit the game at age 26.

Not saying Federer will do the same, but there is a McEnroe-like threat out there in Nadal.

I hope tomorrow's match is a classic.

 

I've already got my alarm set to get up and watch it live. I haven't done that since Sampras' last Wimbledon win.

 

The one thing that it will display, glaringly, is how women and men compete so differently, just by the very nature of our personalities. It actually doesn't matter what sport it is, or what level it is.

Henin-Hardenne and Mauresmo's nerves were right out there, raw as could be, as much as they tried to maintain their poker faces. Yet beyond the choking moments, the tennis was classic, with so many points being won at the net it was hardly recognizable as the women's game of the last decade or so. Beautiful stuff by two extremely talented athletes, but nerve-wracking as hell to watch.

With Federer and Nadal, the dynamic should be so much different, both playing to win instead of, on some level, not to lose. Nerves will very likely not be a factor. They should bring out the best in each other. The tennis should be equally, but differently, brilliant, but more of a joy to watch than torturous.

The joy on Mauresmo's face, the relief, the emotion pouring out, given what it means to her and how hard it was to get there, how daunting the mental game was, will trump the emotions of whoever wins the men's final tomorrow.


And, on another note, the doubles dudes are playing some incredible points out there. Men's doubles at Wimbledon might be the worst tennis of all to watch, because it just goes too fast. But there's some quality stuff goin' on.

 

I see Bob Bryan and Venus Williams are in the mixed doubles finals. That's a pretty formidable team, Venus is an excellent doubles player.

I would love to see a nice, beautiful five-setter that goes about three hours. Last five-set men's final was probably...Ivanesevic-Rafter?