USO day five fri 2/9/11

First topic message reminder :

Hello



The title says it all...

I'm looking forward to Nalby-Luby.

The Nadull should have a cakewalk against Mahut - unless it goes to five sets and they have a marathon tiebreaker

Roddick-Sock: A battle of the new and old Americans. Also a clash of the big servers

Murray-Hasse: I think this could be tough for Murray if Hasse hits the zone.

Ferrer-Blake: Battle of the golden oldies.

Lots of good matches.



emancipator - intergalactic tennis correspondent.

Supporting Murray should come with a health warning. He may not play the most exciting tennis but his matches keep you on the edge of your seat. Glad he didn't give up but needs to cut out sets like the second.

Cracking match but no good for my ticker. These mental lapses he has are what holds him back and will prevent him winning a slam unless he redresses it but he found a way to win after such a woeful start and for that deserves credit.

Now I watched this match with the US unbiased if you will commentary team of ex-tennis pro Mal Washington who often said Andy is too good a player not to win a slam like many others have. Talent-wise I agree but Andy needs to work on these mental blocks as they destroy his game. It is like he is not only battling his opponents but his mind as well.

Andy Murray and Robin Haase.

I have to say I really liked Murray's expression at the end - he looks as if he has made a bit of a leap in maturity recently. There was none of the tearful relief that we saw after he came through in 5 sets against Wawrinka in W 2009, just steely purpose in those eyes at the end. He looked focused and up for it in the fifth too, and seemed to have eliminated those awful periods where he lambasts himself, his box, smashes his knuckles against his raquet etc.

Okay so he didn't play well at first and I have to say that I thought he was a goner at the beginning of the third, but the way he came through, particularly holding his nerve and composure in the fifth as Haase started just swinging again was top class.

He won while not being near his best, and that is exactly what a player has to be able to do to win a major. I can't see past Novak or Rafa this year, but you never know how a draw might open up!

Talent wise Andy has it and a great repertoire of shots and improvisation but he really really needs to work on these mental lapses that blight his matches. They have cost him in the past and they will cost him again though he seems to control his emotions a lot better now. Still he won but as he says must up his game.

Well I think he will take confidence from coming through this banana skin, and that is what I saw in his eyes at GSM, coming towards the net.

He said in his on court interview that he was trying to stay in the point, which was also apparent I think in the fifth when it was getting a little nerve wracking, and he identified the problem at first with not moving well enough to get to the ball on time, so he knows what he has to do.

I think this win will send a message out as well, that you can get Murray on the ropes but that doesn't mean he will roll over, or is that me being too optimistic?

My worry is the second serve. I know it's always been an issue for Murray, and I'm not sure if it's something in his head or poor placement or because the courts are so slow but it seems to be sitting up and saying 'hit me' even more than it usually does.

Murray can come back from a dodgy performance though, he's done it many times before. If he gets through to play Nadal then I'm pretty sure his level of performance will be much higher than tonight.

Well he does seem mentally stronger in times of peril but it is still apparent he has these mental blocks in matches and no it isn't choking or bottling it. He has shown has plenty of bottle to fightback today despite him being off-form. It is these mental blocks he has where he is almost fighting with his mind to work out his issues whilst trying to battle his opponent at the same time and it clearly handicaps him. Who knows that may prevent him ever winning a slam and so needs addressing.

Probably a bit optimistic. Had that been one of the top three it would have been all over in three. After such a poor second set it is very rarely they let you back in.

Haase played 2 magnificent sets of tennis, before fading away phisically. Until he was 100% there wasn't much Murray could do, Haase was simply hitting the ball better than him.

Murray: far less impressive today.

Calder106 wrote:Probably a bit optimistic. Had that been one of the top three it would have been all over in three. After such a poor second set it is very rarely they let you back in.

Yes but as we saw tonight Andy is a Jeckyll And Hyde type character. He went from playing rank stuff to sublime stuff just like that and expect a better all-round performance next up. Another thing i that he had played Haase before and Haase won so perhaps that was niggling in the back of his head (like it does never having won a slam) it must play tricks with your mind.

Danny_1982 wrote:My worry is the second serve. I know it's always been an issue for Murray, and I'm not sure if it's something in his head or poor placement or because the courts are so slow but it seems to be sitting up and saying 'hit me' even more than it usually does.

Murray can come back from a dodgy performance though, he's done it many times before. If he gets through to play Nadal then I'm pretty sure his level of performance will be much higher than tonight.

I agree with you Danny - the serve is a worry and certainly unless he can find consistency with his first serve and rack up his second, the top players will not be merciful.

His level is always several notches higher playing Nadal, and, like you, I would expect to see far more scintillating tennis if they do get to meet.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well he does seem mentally stronger in times of peril but it is still apparent he has these mental blocks in matches and no it isn't choking or bottling it. He has shown has plenty of bottle to fightback today despite him being off-form. It is these mental blocks he has where he is almost fighting with his mind to work out his issues whilst trying to battle his opponent at the same time and it clearly handicaps him. Who knows that may prevent him ever winning a slam and so needs addressing.

I do agree with you too Craig, and that is why I was relieved to see his steely reaction at the end today. I wish he would work with a sports psychologist to be able to deal with negative emotions when things aren't swinging his way - but he has pooh poohed that idea. I don't think it is courage he lacks, but sometimes I have wondered whether it is desire. I remember reading in 'Serious' John McEnroe's account of W 1980 (I think that is the right year) - Mac looked like the match might be his but when he looked across the net he was taken aback to see how much 'Borg wanted it' because Mac thought that Borg would not be as hungry as him. He said that once he got over the disappointment of losing, he knew that what he had to do to beat Borg the following year was to be even hungrier than his rival. I think this year Novak was hungrier than Rafa at W, and I didn't think I would ever see that - between those two, I think the trophy will go to the person who wants it more than anything this year.

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:Haase played 2 magnificent sets of tennis, before fading away phisically. Until he was 100% there wasn't much Murray couldn't do, Haase was simply hitting the ball better than him.

Murray: far less impressive today.

Yes absolutely - Haase was fantastic, just up for it completely. Murray not anywhere near his best, but he came through. While being delighted with result, really feel for Haase - he gave it his all and it is such a shame that such a talented and entertaining player has spent so much time out with two knee operations and other injuries - it is difficult to see how he can withstand the physical rigours of the tour, given this, long term, but hope we will see many more matches like this from him.

Anyway, after the exhaustion of cheering Murray to victory I'm off to my bed. Night all

Craig, do you think Murray's celebrating of a fluke netcord at 5-4 30-30 in the last set, was a bit arrogant/disgusting of him, not even apologizing? Of course, had that been Djokovic/Fed you'd have crucified him...

I noticed that Josiah. Would have liked to see him apologise. As they were both close to the net and he was smiling maybe they exchanged some words. It's not normally something that he can be critised for. In the game against Mardy Fish in Cinci I remember him apologising a couple of times when getting net cords.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Craig, do you think Murray's celebrating of a fluke netcord at 5-4 30-30 in the last set, was a bit arrogant/disgusting of him, not even apologizing? Of course, had that been Djokovic/Fed you'd have crucified him...

And did you see him not apologising? All I saw was him having a grin and sure saw him hold his racket up. Now I was watching with your unbiased US commentators and they never mentioned he never apologised so I assume he did or they would have refered to it. Haase's reaction as well at end wasn't the reaction of one who was peeved with Murray so I think you are looking for something that isn't there to meet your own ends.

I think that must have been sorted at the time otherwise it would have soured things - it was a horriffic piece of luck at the most critical moment; it may well have turned the match (Haase wins the next point - which he did - holds and take a tb). I reckon Murray covered it.

The bit I really still don't admire about Murray is so much celebration of an opponents unforced error. Maybe if it's set point then fine because you're celebrating the set not the error, but it's very frequent.

Big worry for me is Djokovic's shoulder he started rubbing it and stretching it in the third set and promptly dropped his serve back twice in a row to berlocq. He again seemed to start arming serves in during the third set.

bogbrush wrote:The bit I really still don't admire about Murray is so much celebration of an opponents unforced error. Maybe if it's set point then fine because you're celebrating the set not the error, but it's very frequent.

this has been his trade mark for a while now. I guess it's a sequel from the Brad years. This is why i always had problem supporting him....but looks like I am not the only one. Some might see this as a details but it's an important one to me.

A big smile and celebrating the net fluke is also out of order.

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:The bit I really still don't admire about Murray is so much celebration of an opponents unforced error. Maybe if it's set point then fine because you're celebrating the set not the error, but it's very frequent.

this has been his trade mark for a while now. I guess it's a sequel from the Brad years. This is why i always had problem supporting him....but looks like I am not the only one. Some might see this as a details but it's an important one to me.

A big smile and celebrating the net fluke is also out of order.

Your hero Roger Federer just did the same after an unforced error from Cilic (fist pump and a clearly audible 'Come on'). So lets here you berate Federer for that please.

Nope - No response CC !



But that's Tenez all over innit ?

Your hero Roger Federer just did the same after an unforced error from Cilic (fist pump and a clearly audible 'Come on'). So lets here you berate Federer for that please.

yeah we should do it by a ratio, berate a player everytime they utter "come on" from an unforced error so everytime Rog gets berated we'll have to berate Murray 20 times. Deal!

Ah so point proved that Federer is no angel and so blows out of the water Fed fans blasting Murray for doing this as Fed probably showed him the way in Fed school of sportsmanship.

Hi CC !!! WELCOME BACK to 606

Yup seems that way yummy mummy.

Seeing as the majority of tennis posters here are from 606, the opinions are bound to be the same.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Your hero Roger Federer just did the same after an unforced error from Cilic (fist pump and a clearly audible 'Come on'). So lets here you berate Federer for that please.

i have just started to wtch so I did not see the incident. However I have been watching Federer for more than 10 years and he has always apologised on lucky shots before. But anyway if he didn't this time, that's not good. Bad boy Roger, bad boy!

Tenez wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Your hero Roger Federer just did the same after an unforced error from Cilic (fist pump and a clearly audible 'Come on'). So lets here you berate Federer for that please.

i have just started to wtch so I did not see the incident. However I have been watching Federer for more than 10 years and he has always apologised on lucky shots before. But anyway if he didn't this time, that's not good. Bad boy Roger, bad boy!

Fine and I'll keep remind you as long as you harp on about Andy in such ways. Seems only fair after all.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Tenez wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Your hero Roger Federer just did the same after an unforced error from Cilic (fist pump and a clearly audible 'Come on'). So lets here you berate Federer for that please.

i have just started to wtch so I did not see the incident. However I have been watching Federer for more than 10 years and he has always apologised on lucky shots before. But anyway if he didn't this time, that's not good. Bad boy Roger, bad boy!

Fine and I'll keep remind you as long as you harp on about Andy in such ways. Seems only fair after all.

Sure if you think Roger and Andy have comparable behaviour on the court, "fair enough"!

Fine and I'll keep remind you as long as you harp on about Andy in such ways. Seems only fair after all.

But Andy is such a pleasant, calm, normal chap, as can be seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NhZbgx1vOg

Yes JM very popular amongst his fellow tennis compatriots ooooh and what a cracker of a bird he has as well eh?

And btw you can criticise Fed as much as you like. I am a fan of his tennis not him. One is swiss, the other a brit, I don;t care much about their behaviour. I just think it;s a bit lazy to compare Federer, who has been an example of behaviour for more than a decade with Murray's winning ugly style but that 's your problem, not mine.

Not a problem for me being a Murray supporter - a Murray supporter and proud.

When is Djokovic on tonight? And Fed under the cosh here. He'll need to up his game. Good match this.

Not a problem for me being a Murray supporter - a Murray supporter and proud.

Only because of his nationality, not his tennis, I just wish people would admit this rather than walking on egg shells

And am I allowed to claim you only hate him for his nationality?

Nope love his ability to return the impossible shot and the gritty battling displays he can pull out when all looks lost.

You are a Scot, as are Yummy and SL, funny you all love him and want me to believe it aint because of him being Scot? How many non-Scots or even non-Brits like his tennis?

Plenty of them judging by the ovations he gets around the world and yes there are English people on here and other tennis forums who are Murray fans not embittered like some I know.

It's fanboys like you 3 that make it even better for me when Andy is sent packing, atleast there will be proper tennis debate when he is eliminated

Plenty of them judging by the ovations he gets around the world

Yea right, even lower ranked players like Tsonga and Delpo get far more diverse fans than Murray has

Fanboys? No I think not. Your only means of debating is via insults whilst I tell things as they are and yes even about Andy Murray as can be seen in that thread.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:You are a Scot, as are Yummy and SL, funny you all love him and want me to believe it aint because of him being Scot? How many non-Scots or even non-Brits like his tennis?

I HATE to disallusion you JM But I was Born and Bred in Cheshire, England.



Have you ever been there? We are a farming community which is why my husband

and I left the Rat Race and bought a small-holding in Scotland !



You want to chill and try the *Good Life* - seems like you need it

CaledonianCraig wrote:Yes JM very popular amongst his fellow tennis compatriots ooooh and what a cracker of a bird he has as well eh?

Actually I think, and I speak as a girl, that both Kim Sears and Mirka Federer look like lovely, happy attractive young women.

Okay Mirka might be a little bit less 'pin up' than Kim, but I think that probably speaks volumes for Federer's values that he has someone girl next door like on his arm that he loves and he doesn't feel the need to compete with players who sport models on theirs - you know anyone in his position with his money could!

You really, really let yourself down big, big time with the comment above Craig I thought that kind of tribalism was best left on different forums!

PS It's pretty contemptible to label women 'birds'

Oooodh dear here we are the pc brigade. A crime to call a woman a bird?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Oooodh dear here we are the pc brigade. A crime to call a woman a bird?

Craig... this is not q question being PC, just being respectful. Do you know the genders of all the posters you engage with on this forum?

It is not a term I use often to be honest (if at all) but thought it was a term that the posters it was aimed at would suit. Apologies for any offence caused.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Oooodh dear here we are the pc brigade. A crime to call a woman a bird?

Oh dear, and you continue to let yourself down. As laver pointed out to you, it is not a crime but it is not very respectful just a bit boorish and neanderthal

It was certainly not very nice at all the way you employed it in your original post. If you had just said 'Kim is a cracking bird', it may not have been my choice of noun, but you know it takes all types etc. But your implication that Andy Murray is somehow a superior being to Roger Federer because look at 'the bird' on his arm, is totally demeaning to the woman in question, and to another woman by your insiduous implication. It reduces both women's status to little more than shiny possessions like a big house or new car. As I say, loving a perfectly attractive girl next door type, and not being swayed by the many temptations would seem to indicate that Roger Federer is a much, much better man than you. Ironically you also demean yourself by posting the tripe you did above, but as you are blissfully unaware of this, perhaps it is a little cruel of me to point it out.

I don't why I am bothering to respond to the next idiocy in your post - but anyway, I think you will find that Blake, Fish, Haas, Roddick have all spoken of their friendship with Federer in the past, among others - you know the guys who were there when he started the tour, plus the Swiss guys have a good friendship. It is not surprising to find Andy Murray's muckers are the guys who are around his age and who began the rise up the rankings at roughly the same time.

What all of this has to do with any of us is another thing altogether - really it the only thing that concerns us is the quality of play and the conduct of the player on court.

CaledonianCraig wrote:It is not a term I use often to be honest (if at all) but thought it was a term that the posters it was aimed at would suit. Apologies for any offence caused.

I hadn't seen this when I posted my last Craig. As I said above, it is not the term that caused offence (though I think you will find most intelligent women dislike it) but the way you employed it and your implications.

I don't know why I am very offended on someone else's behalf, but I am, on behalf of all nice ordinary attractive much loved wives and girlfriends everywhere!