Tweet
With all the withdrawals, looking good for Federer or one of the future generation players. Am I missing something, or shouldn't the draw be corrected to have Roger and Rafa at opposite ends? Seems not to have happened...
-
Last edited by gzhpcu; 08-26-2017, 11:13 PM. -
Once a draw is out, it's tricky to redo everything, you simply try to spread the seeds out. Here is an explanation of from an old NYT article.Originally posted by gzhpcu View Post
Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca RatonComment
-
Gentlemen...a word of advice from good old don_budge. Forget about the draw. It is what it is. It would actually be more constructive to go back to the video I posted of the great John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl to discuss the shortcomings of the modern game of tennis with the oversized bazookas. It's a sneaky way of promoting the latest darling...Alexander Zverev. I doubt though that even this manipulation will get him through in two weeks of best of five. A different universe.
All of the withdrawals are a thing of the past...the rearview mirror. Now the games begin and to the victor will go the spoils. At the end of the day it is only hindsight. It doesn't matter. The trophy will be viewed twenty years from now only defined by who won and maybe...just maybe...by who lost in the finals.
Andy Murray pulling out at the last second is another blemish on his character. It's become a large stain at this point. Probably one of the worst examples of a number one player ever. But it is fitting. This is how far the game has fallen. How far it has been dumbed down. By pulling out he has now done the draw a huge disfavor and in the process his profession. He has defied everything that was tennis etiquette...a word that no longer exists as the modern tennis brain trust rewrite history. By destroying the past they control the future.
The New York Times is a very poor source for information. On anything really. I hardly think of it as more than "Fake News"...right in there with CNN. They all parrot off one another. The article on Gail Monfils was pathetic. About ten thousand words too long about a bit player in the game of tennis. I didn't make it halfway through it. It was boring. Trying to drum up interest in an era where athletes are considered entertainers. I call Gail "The Amazing Mr. Monfils" in that vein. Speculation as to what might have been if he concentrated on being the best he could be. Instead of concentrating on being the number one hot dog in the game. I haven't read the article on Roger Federer and probably will not. Even though Roger being who he is. Who cares if he is slow to take it back and quick to finish. The New York Times will not change that reality because they say so. Consider the source...an important aspect of discernment.
Come on Roger. Injured back or not. There are drugs to render you superhuman throughout this fortnight. If you use them...use them judiciously.Comment
-
Here...watch this while waiting for the action at the 2017 U. S. Open.
Here read all about it in a "brief four page thread" that I started on this match.
https://www.tennisplayer.net/bulleti...-s-open-finals
Originally posted by don_budge View PostEvery point in this epic was a masterpiece. That is not to say there weren't mistakes and mishits. But taken as a whole the match must nearly be described point by point. I had to watch the match several times to come up with the words to describe the action. The points were like single brushstrokes that make up a great masterpiece. It reminded me of the moment only a couple of months ago when I stood at the very top of the Eiffel Tower in Paris looking down at that classic and old traditional city in Europe. Each building from that height looked like a single brush stroke and put them all together you had the wonderful visual whole that makes up the city of Paris. Like a beautiful painting every single brush stroke adds up to make up the whole.
The individual buildings on the ground were masterpieces of architecture as well. You walk along the streets admiring the craftsmanship and beauty from the ground level in the micro view as opposed to the macro view from the top of the Eiffel tower.
The same as this match. Such an intricate tapestry of tennis and all of its nuances. The variety of strokes...the variety of tactics. The infinite number of possibilities...permutations and combinations. Then there is the complexity of the players and their emotions and their tactical acumen and their individual interpretation of THE GAME. THE GAME OF TENNIS as it was meant to be played.
In tennis, in art and in life there is a balance. Even the universe is somehow balanced although theoretically. Equal parts positive and negative. Perhaps the human race has an equal balance as well...the summation of all of our actions and intents equal parts good and evil. But one thing is very clear to me and there is absolutely no way around it because in this very case for once and for all I am right...the game of tennis has been compromised by the actions of the very human hands that invented it. That precious balance that the game had and endured for so many years was compromised by an overabundance of speed in the game. It's simple. What was lost was tennis that was played like on this September afternoon between the last of the great rivalries in tennis...John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg.
Pat Summerall in the opening remark..."I wonder how much of an effect that will be...the fact that McEnroe played later last night than Borg did."
Tony Trabert quick to discount the obvious..."Oh I don't think any Pat...if the adrenalin doesn't take care of that nothing will. They are in shape beyond..."
It's old school philosophy. None of the modern day wimpiness. No pussyfooting.
Originally posted by don_budge View PostThe Draw Sheet for the 1980 U. S. Open...
Here is the singles draw for the 1980 U. S. Open...Björn Borg had tough come from behind wins in the quarters and the semis. He faced a booming left handed serve with Roscoe Tanner in the quarters which should have served him well in his preparation for John McEnroe. He came from two sets down against Johan Kriek in the semis to get to the finals.
McEnroe for his part defeated Ivan Lendl in the quarters and then gutted out a tough five set win over Jimmy Connors in the semis. A great match in its own right...I considered writing about this one.
Keep in mind that Johnny Bad Boy also played in the doubles. He and his partner Peter Fleming lost in a tough, tough final against Stan Smith and Bob Lutz in five sets. In all he played 16 additional sets of tennis that two weeks at the Open. Considering that he played Connors the night before and got off of the court around 8 PM or so it is rather remarkable that he performed at the extremely high level that he did. Perhaps he wasn't given the credit that he deserved in some respects. No wonder he "appeared" to be ornery at times.
Side note: See the name Francisco Gonzales in the doubles draw...Johan Kriek's partner. I lost to him in 1977 in a dual college match with Ohio State. He had a win over Connors at some point. I have played some pretty good competition...just in case you were wondering. But I have always considered myself to be a better teacher than a player. I started rather late...14 years old was the first time that I touched a racquet and we didn't have indoor courts until I was 18 years old in my town. But enough about me. Let the match roll...Action!
Comment
-
Granted, but if the number 2 seed exits, the nr 3 seed should take his place.Originally posted by klacr View PostComment
-
Nobody to my knowledge has ever accused the ITF or the USTA of being "too" intelligent. Too as in overly. Not that there aren't some intelligent people involved...but there is little evidence to suggest it.Originally posted by gzhpcu View Post
But...guess what? There is a silver lining in every cloud according to you know who. To me of course. Guess who is in the bottom half of the draw as a qualifier? If you guessed Denis "The Menace" Shapovalov you are absolutely correct. Didn't he just beat Fafa in Montreal? I think that he did. This kid is just itching to explode and the timing of this event could not have been better. He is coming off a tremendous confidence booster in Montreal and his position in the draw is how should I say...interesting.
He has been positioned in the bottom half in the quarter with Marin Cilic. It looks to me as if Marin has been moved to the spot that Andy Murray had originally. So perhaps they have adjusted the bottom half somewhat. There are a bunch of seasoned hard players in his quarter besides Marin but who's to say. "The Menace" is there to spoil there day. He doesn't know the meaning of "I cannot" yet. The sky is the limit. He is dreaming...the stuff children do. Anything is possible. Let's keep an eye on things...ok?Comment
-
Nick "The Jerk" Kyrgios also has a great draw out to the point where he may meet Roger Federer in the round of sixteen. Dominic Thiem also appears to have a bit of opening to gather some steam. Perhaps the depleted draw will make this thing interesting afterall. The silver lining.Comment
-
That's late to start tennis and reach such a good level. You were just in the nick of time in that case. In my experience if a child comes to the game beyond the age of 15 they rarely reach a good level. It's just a tad late...the boat missed. I was 12 or 13 when I started. By aged 14 I was playing every day for two hours at least. I drove my parents and neighbours mad by volleying endlessly against the garage wall; the main reason why I became a good volleyer. But enough about me. Let the games begin.I started rather late...14 years old was the first time that I touched a racquet and we didn't have indoor courts until I was 18 years old in my town. But enough about me. Let the match roll...Action!
StottyComment
-
Apparently Stan Smith started playing tennis at age 17.Comment
-
That matchup may very well happen. Nick certainly has the game. I really think he is the most talented tennis player I have seen since Fed, but I would be shocked if he reaches anywhere close to his potential career wise. Fed, as massively talented as he is, did that. Not many do.Originally posted by don_budge View PostComment
-
Emotionally this is potentially a very tough draw for Roger Federer. A round of 16 match with Nick Kyrgios could be a huge drain on his resources and then he would still potentially have Nadal to deal with. It's going to be interesting. The depleted draw should give a lot of players a sense of belonging. klacr is thinking his boy Tomas Berdych is one of the them. He could very well be. The Sleeper?Originally posted by stroke View Post
The key for Federer is to get off of the court ASAP. The first couple of rounds are going to be real important. He doesn't want to get bogged down.Comment
-
The women. Don't forget the fair sex. Maria Sharapova versus Simona Halep, the number two seed, first round. Sharapova leads head to head...6-0.Comment
-
who says I care about the draw? Just linking an article that might explain it better.Originally posted by don_budge View Post
I'm wise enough to k now that if you wanna win a grand slam you are going to have to beat all comers, no matter where you or they started in the draw. I'm smarter than I look.
Will be at the US Open for a day and an evening session. Should be a blast. A little less conversation a little more action please. Let's get this tourney going!
Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton
Comment
-
Who cares?Originally posted by klacr View Post
Have a great time! PARTY...PARTY...PARTY! They repositioned Marin Cilic afterall. My post was a general posting. You're a smart kid. Just killing time. Denis "The Menace" Shapovalov up against another young tough cookie tonight. 9 PM here in Sweden. Right after NAVY CSI. Perfect day I would say. Walked the doggie three times so far. I will walk him again before bed time. That little boy of mine...PUNTZIE. He's my number one seed.
A day at the Open. An evening session to boot. Did I ever tell you about my day and evening session in 1984? Aaron's father gave me a coaching pass. I was face to face with Jack Nicholson at one point. Cheryl Tiegs too. John McEnroe came in just after beating Connors in five scintillating sets. It was the greatest day of tennis ever...so said Bud Collins. Go for it klacr...you only are young once.Comment
-
Yes that would make sense. It unbalances the draw otherwise. I don't why Murray entered. He's been limping since Wimbledon and hasn't even looked like being fit for the US.Originally posted by gzhpcu View PostStottyComment
Comment