Wimbledon 2010!

Blue_Food

Blue_Food

Well-known member
Well, that was a hell of an opening day!

SPOILERS:







When it looked like Federer was going to be heading home before the second round, I honestly feared that he might pull a Borg, and never come back.

The Djokovic match was pretty damn epic; another two-down comeback, and the latest finish in Wimbledon history (although they’ve only had the roof up for a year!)

Of the three top-five male seeds that played today, Roddick seemed to be the only one who managed to get through without any whiff of potential underpant-soiling.

Anyone have thoughts, analysis, or predictions for the tournament so far?

Who would you like to see in the finals?
 
I'm excited too! We'll have to see if Barry chimes in. He's a fuzzy ball fan too (and a Federer fan).

Will write more later.
 
Looks like it'll be Murray/Nadal in the semis in the bottom half, while it'll be Federer and the winner of Roddick/Djoko in the top half. I'd favor Roddick.

Perhaps another 5-set final is in the offing.

Astounding tournament so far.
 
Man... I thought Nadal was headed for the exit today. Down 2 sets to 1, calling for the trainer, and getting snippy with the referee are usually a combination for heading for the exit -- at least, it always was with Agassi, I always knew an hour before he lost, that he'd already lost, whenever he got grumpy. But Nadal seems to have used it.

How crazy is this, both Federer and Nadal pushed to 5-set matches by unseeded players in the first week...

And regarding Isner/Mahut -- while it was epic and we'll never see that again, I don't think we ever SHOULD see that again. What purpose does it serve for those guys to play to 70-68 in the fifth, only for Isner to be so physically destroyed that he can't even walk because his feet are solid blisters? He was blown off the court in 1:15 in his third round match. I'm with Johnny Mac on this, Wimbledon should (has to) implement a tiebreak in the fifth. Maybe not at 6/6, but by 10/10 it's time to let the players finish up and get off the court.

Predictions? No predictions this year. Too crazy. TOO crazy. For the first time in a decade the tournament looks pretty wide open. Only prediction i'd say is: whoever has to play Soderling is not going to be happy... Ferrer, then Nadal, have both got to be dreading those matches...
 
Last edited:
I agree on the tiebreak rule for the fifth. Isner was a shell of himself in his next match.

I’m rooting for Federer. That’s not a prediction, I just love watching him play when he’s at the top of his game.

Ironically, this tile-able wallpaper has many of the people mentioned in the last two posts.
tennis-cartoons.jpg
 
You did indeed. It's really manifesting this tournament, when all the major men's players are struggling and Soderling's storming through the bracket like a 9-foot Godzilla.

Soderling's record against Ferrer is pretty darn good, Soderling leads 5-2 in head-to-head. Ferrer's two wins were both on Clay, and that was in 2007 and 2008. Their most recent was the 2009 French and Soderling won a close match in 4 sets.

Nadal's record against Soderling is 4-2; Soderling has beaten him on Hard and Clay, but lost their only prior meeting on Grass. But, Soderling has won two of their last three meetings. But, Nadal won their most recent meeting, and it wasn't even close.

I wonder what the Vegas bookies are making of all this... I've never been shy about making bold predictions, but I seriously have no idea how this is all going to shake out.
 
As for the near-upsets, well, champions stick it out and dig deeper while challengers choke. Falla absolutely choked. And while Roddick is more than a mere challenger, he choked in the finals second set tiebreak last year, shanking away a 5-2 lead, else he would have won. Fed held on.

In any case, every time I think I'm going to watch a relatively short match and plan to do things afterward, they always turn out to be five-set marathons. :)
 
I'm wondering about Roddick... could it really be his year? Maybe? I mean, he did make it to the finals last year, and a five-setter at that... and with the way Fed and Nadal are looking vulnerable...

...

...

...

Well, grab some popcorn and let's see how this one plays out.
 
This is definitely the most interesting W we've had for a while.

You know, you gotta kinda pull for Roddick. Attitude counts for a lot.
 
I think that's pretty much right. I suppose the same could be said for Henin on the women's side (if not in quite the same way), though I'm pulling for Clijsters.
 
Barry_Green said:
And regarding Isner/Mahut -- while it was epic and we'll never see that again, I don't think we ever SHOULD see that again. What purpose does it serve for those guys to play to 70-68 in the fifth, only for Isner to be so physically destroyed that he can't even walk because his feet are solid blisters? He was blown off the court in 1:15 in his third round match. I'm with Johnny Mac on this, Wimbledon should (has to) implement a tiebreak in the fifth. Maybe not at 6/6, but by 10/10 it's time to let the players finish up and get off the court.
Click to expand...

I'll take it one further. I'm questioning the need for five sets in Grand Slams.
 
Only prediction i'd say is: whoever has to play Soderling is not going to be happy... Ferrer, then Nadal, have both got to be dreading those matches...

I'm wondering about Roddick... could it really be his year? Maybe? I mean, he did make it to the finals last year, and a five-setter at that... and with the way Fed and Nadal are looking vulnerable...
Click to expand...
Wow -- absolutely *everything* in these statements turned out to be dead wrong! :) Nadal and Federer were on fire, Roddick lost, and Soderling struggled. And Andy Murray emerges as the only guy who hasn't lost a set so far...
 
Exactly... who, other than you, foresaw Clijsters manhandling Henin? Who would have expected that Maria would take a set off Serena?

It's crazy, but it's fun.
 
Back to the earlier point, I think five-setters should be reconsidered. What does it really add? Of late, it's just made matches go on for hours and hours, in some cases destroying people for later matches (not even addressing Isner/Mahut).

The women never play five sets; it doesn't seem to diminish anything on that side. Plus, adding in the constant complaint that women's prize money is (or used to be) less than that of the men's side, it really seems like it's not such a good idea to have the men play longer matches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top