Tennis 2012

[UK Redsox]

Bloody hell. Five pages on one tennis match.

Not only that, a men's tennis match.

This really is very un-H&V of you all.

I tried to watch but fell asleep. Only woke up to see the last couple of games.

[Brend'Watkins]

He did as well as he could.  He won a set and certainly would have done better had his % of first serves gone in.  Maybe next year.

[cdbearsfan]

Just think of the massive outpouring of emotion when he comes back next year to win the mixed doubles with Kirilenko.

[Pat McMahon]

One thing that struck me watching on Chinese tv was how impartial the crowd seemed to be. When I was not in front of the tv it was impossible to tell from the sound who had won a point as the crowd seemed equally excited for both players.

I know it's not really the style of British tennis crowds but if they had been more partisan it may have helped Murray a little more, though Federer is unbelievable.

[TopDeck113]

His chance came and went when he had break points in the second, but with Federer in that form, even if he'd gone 2 sets up I think it would have been case of could of won it rather than should of.

A friend of mine who knows far more about tennis than me always said Murray's grand slam chance would be at the Australian or the US Opens.  So that may well be his one and only tilt at a Wimbledon final.

[lovejoy]

Amazing how federer can be the best, get overtaken but then re-invent himself and come back to win. Greatest of all time.
Murray no4 in world but needs to be able to beat one or two the top3 to win a slam. Not as good as fed but no shame in that.

[timeoutbigbar]

Amazing how federer can be the best, get overtaken but then re-invent himself and come back to win. Greatest of all time.
Murray no4 in world but needs to be able to beat one or two the top3 to win a slam. Not as good as fed but no shame in that.

Not sure he 're-invented' himself.  He's always been a better grass court player than Djokovic so that wasn't that much of a surprise.  Had Nadal not played that nutter having the game of his life then I doubt Murray would have got to the final, or Federer would have won it.

[SoccerHQ]

Meh, Nadal's won 7 of his 11 grand slams at Roland Garros.

Great competitor and champion but I find it very difficult to truly warm to him tbh.

[PaulWinch again]

Federer is a better player than Nadal.

[Somniloquism]

Bloody hell. Five pages on one tennis match.

Not only that, a men's tennis match.

This really is very un-H&V of you all.

I tried to watch but fell asleep. Only woke up to see the last couple of games.

I have the same problem when I try to watch men's rounders.

[danlanza]

Bloody hell. Five pages on one tennis match.

Not only that, a men's tennis match.

This really is very un-H&V of you all.

I tried to watch but fell asleep. Only woke up to see the last couple of games.

I have the same problem when I try to watch men's rounders.

Same with womens beach volleyball ?

[usav]

Meh, Nadal's won 7 of his 11 grand slams at Roland Garros.

Great competitor and champion but I find it very difficult to truly warm to him tbh.

Agreed.

[lovejoy]

Amazing how federer can be the best, get overtaken but then re-invent himself and come back to win. Greatest of all time.
Murray no4 in world but needs to be able to beat one or two the top3 to win a slam. Not as good as fed but no shame in that.

Not sure he 're-invented' himself.  He's always been a better grass court player than Djokovic so that wasn't that much of a surprise.  Had Nadal not played that nutter having the game of his life then I doubt Murray would have got to the final, or Federer would have won it.

It's an interesting point you make. Fed has lost, what 3 games, in 10 years at Wimbledon. To say nadal would have beaten him given how Fed played against Djokovic is a stretch in my opinion.

[olaftab]

Good luck to Federer he has to dance with Serena tonight at the Championship dinner!

[timeoutbigbar]

Amazing how federer can be the best, get overtaken but then re-invent himself and come back to win. Greatest of all time.
Murray no4 in world but needs to be able to beat one or two the top3 to win a slam. Not as good as fed but no shame in that.

Not sure he 're-invented' himself.  He's always been a better grass court player than Djokovic so that wasn't that much of a surprise.  Had Nadal not played that nutter having the game of his life then I doubt Murray would have got to the final, or Federer would have won it.

It's an interesting point you make. Fed has lost, what 3 games, in 10 years at Wimbledon. To say nadal would have beaten him given how Fed played against Djokovic is a stretch in my opinion.

Purely based on the fact that Federer has some sort of mental block against Nadal that prevents him playing his natural game.  He seems to think he has to go for the more difficult shot on every point and thus makes too many mistakes.