• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Tennis thread

People don't root for Chelsea. People didn't root for Germany when they had a great side and we were winning everything, in fact, people hated their pragmatic approach.

Where I am - many people do! In the UK it's different but elsewhere Chelsea have massive followings from the fanboys whose stars they 'bought'
 
Where I am - many people do! In the UK it's different but elsewhere Chelsea have massive followings from the fanboys whose stars they 'bought'

Well I would expect them to have a large following in continents like Africa because of players such as Drogba. You and Leeds do have a point, a lot of people root for the "winners", but you'll find just as many who despise the way that Chelsea won the CL.
 
Federer is as good as ever......every time he wins a slam people say he's the same player.

He just had his period of dominance when the depth wasn't as good and then Nadal came along.

Murray and Djokovic are both 25, born one week apart!!!

Del Potro is 23 so they have a few years playing eachother.

Then the likes of Dimitrov, Raonic and Janowicz are coming through.
 
If he was going to do it he would have broken top 20 by now....he's had 3-4 years on tour already.

Aint got the temperment IMO
 
Federer is as good as ever......every time he wins a slam people say he's the same player.

He just had his period of dominance when the depth wasn't as good and then Nadal came along.

Murray and Djokovic are both 25, born one week apart!!!

Del Potro is 23 so they have a few years playing eachother.

Then the likes of Dimitrov, Raonic and Janowicz are coming through.

the is a young english lad in chichester only 11 years old but is coming through strong, think he will be our first english wimbledon winner!! i hope, better then winning the lottery haha
 
I read something about the next young British players coming through (Edmund, Broady etc) and they mentioned how there wasnt any 18 year olds in the worlds top 200 at the min and the average age of the break-thru players was rising.

Basically preparing excuses in case are current batch don't make headline in next couple years
 
Good lad!!!

Is he in the LTA programme?

Britain has some great juniors, Golding and Broady look excellent and obviously we now have Robson and Watson on the womens side.
 
I read something about the next young British players coming through (Edmund, Broady etc) and they mentioned how there wasnt any 18 year olds in the worlds top 200 at the min and the average age of the break-thru players was rising.

Basically preparing excuses in case are current batch don't make headline in next couple years

Nah - that's true.

Same on the womens side, Robson is the higest ranked teenager in the world and she's 51 in the world aged 19.

Murray was exceptional at being a top 10 player at 20.......Nadal as well.

Generally players are fully mature at 24+

Golding and Broady have both won junior slams? They have a s agood a chance any anyone
 
Good lad!!!

Is he in the LTA programme?

Britain has some great juniors, Golding and Broady look excellent and obviously we now have Robson and Watson on the womens side.

He is, we never been to roehampton but i take him to a lot of comeptitions round this wayy, everything they say about tennis parents is true. They are a mental lot very stuck up and clicky. I tend to sit in the car when he is not playing, not knowing a huge amount about tennis i never say anything but general encouragment.

At the club he plays at they have a coach who use to be pro, german fella, does not look like a tennis player but they assured me he used to play pro.
 
What about Nadal's gamesmanship when it comes to taking 30-45 seconds to serve? Djokovic can be petulant at times too. Admittedly Federer can be a bad loser at times.

Exactly, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Federer have all had their moments. Nadal's time wasting can be appalling at times. Djokovic can be petulant. Unless Murray is winning easily he is always petulant. After the game he is gracious in defeat or in victory but his on court behaviour leaves a lot to be desired. That is the main reason people don't warm to him and why people prefer the grace and elegance (on court) of Federer.

As for the silly comment made by Leeds about Djokovic owning Federer, I can't say I agree (no surprise there!). Roger beat him at Wimbledon, and beat him comfortably in another tournament too recently (I forget which one) and Djokovic has had a couple of easy wins too. The rest of the times they have been incredibly evenly matched, with matches being decided by one or two points. In the final on Monday that match could have gone either way. At the US Open in 2011, Federer had match points and Djokovic hung on for dear life before eventually prevailing.

Maybe Leeds' main beef with Roger is that with the exception of the Olympic final, Roger has tinkled all over Leeds' little bitch Murray in the important matches.
 
Exactly, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray and Federer have all had their moments. Nadal's time wasting can be appalling at times. Djokovic can be petulant. Unless Murray is winning easily he is always petulant. After the game he is gracious in defeat or in victory but his on court behaviour leaves a lot to be desired. That is the main reason people don't warm to him and why people prefer the grace and elegance (on court) of Federer.

As for the silly comment made by Leeds about Djokovic owning Federer, I can't say I agree (no surprise there!). Roger beat him at Wimbledon, and beat him comfortably in another tournament too recently (I forget which one) and Djokovic has had a couple of easy wins too. The rest of the times they have been incredibly evenly matched, with matches being decided by one or two points. In the final on Monday that match could have gone either way. At the US Open in 2011, Federer had match points and Djokovic hung on for dear life before eventually prevailing.

Maybe Leeds' main beef with Roger is that with the exception of the Olympic final, Roger has tinkled all over Leeds' little bitch Murray in the important matches.

I see you put the word ''Important'' in there cos Murray is actually 10-9 up on head to heads with Federer.
 
Yes, his overall record is marginally better, but like I say, with the exception of the Olympic final Roger has won all of their 5 set encounters.
 
:)

It's on Sky+ for sure......

I love Federer's play, he's just a massive c*nt.

Legend of the game though, behind Nadal....

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=F324

Nah, Federer is better. I do put some stock into heads to heads, but it's not the be all and end all. I mean Murray has a better head to head record against Federer and no one would seriously argue he's better than Fed. Nadal has only been dominant in one of the slams whereas Federer won 3 of them in the same year 3 times.
 
Back