Australian Open 2012 - Day 1

amritia3ee wrote:Must say Tenez, this has been your best article so far.

Henman Bill wrote:

amritia3ee wrote:Must say Tenez, this has been your best article so far.

Most innocent article of the week, and you still have to have a go!

Mad for Chelsea wrote:anyone up? watching Watson vs Azarenka right now, Heather's just had a very comfortable first hold of serve, encouraging start.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:excellent, company

If you could combine Heather's movement with Laura's shotmaking we'd have a world-beater...

legendkillar wrote:Reading through some of the predictions from the BBC 'pundits'

Murray seems to be their favourite. So much emphasis on the Lendl effect. None of them plumping for Nadal. Raonic is heavily tipped as an outsider. Overend very much impartial to British success. Very blinded.

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Reading through some of the predictions from the BBC 'pundits'

Murray seems to be their favourite. So much emphasis on the Lendl effect. None of them plumping for Nadal. Raonic is heavily tipped as an outsider. Overend very much impartial to British success. Very blinded.

Even by the standards of the BBC, that was a pretty shabby article.

Jonathan Overend: "Expect Lendl to make an instant impact"

Jeremy Bates: "the x-factor that is Ivan Lendl, which has just added that five per cent of focus to his game, makes Murray my pick"

Yet Andy Murray himself said in an interview this week: "I'm not going to get the benefits from having Ivan this week, I'm going to see it in six months, 12 months' time, you know, when all the things we work on start falling into place.”


Andy's not going to be putting himself under pressure by admitting he might get some benefit, is he? He's many things but not daft!! I actually think if the made the final, Lendl could make that crucial difference - simply because Murray now has a constant in his team who went through even more troughs than him. Remember, last years opening few games of last years final was a nervy affair from both - as is always the case with two friends playing and has been with Nole/Andy, whoever gets the initial upper hand wins - Andy was mm's (literally) from doing that and contrary to what a lot of people say is that distance from his first Slam. I think it will either be a disaster (out in the last 16) or a win

And if the Beeb crew are writing off Nadal, they are correct to do so based on his form since the US Open. I fail to understand what else anyone would expect, to constantly back a player not playing well would be poor journalism

The Beeb often get things wrong and I cannot stand their Wimby coverage - but they seem on the money here, from what I've just read

banbrotam wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Reading through some of the predictions from the BBC 'pundits'

Murray seems to be their favourite. So much emphasis on the Lendl effect. None of them plumping for Nadal. Raonic is heavily tipped as an outsider. Overend very much impartial to British success. Very blinded.

Even by the standards of the BBC, that was a pretty shabby article.

Jonathan Overend: "Expect Lendl to make an instant impact"

Jeremy Bates: "the x-factor that is Ivan Lendl, which has just added that five per cent of focus to his game, makes Murray my pick"

Yet Andy Murray himself said in an interview this week: "I'm not going to get the benefits from having Ivan this week, I'm going to see it in six months, 12 months' time, you know, when all the things we work on start falling into place.”


Andy's not going to be putting himself under pressure by admitting he might get some benefit, is he? He's many things but not daft!! I actually think if the made the final, Lendl could make that crucial difference - simply because Murray now has a constant in his team who went through even more troughs than him. Remember, last years opening few games of last years final was a nervy affair from both - as is always the case with two friends playing and has been with Nole/Andy, whoever gets the initial upper hand wins - Andy was mm's (literally) from doing that and contrary to what a lot of people say is that distance from his first Slam. I think it will either be a disaster (out in the last 16) or a win

And if the Beeb crew are writing off Nadal, they are correct to do so based on his form since the US Open. I fail to understand what else anyone would expect, to constantly back a player not playing well would be poor journalism

The Beeb often get things wrong and I cannot stand their Wimby coverage - but they seem on the money here, from what I've just read

legendkillar wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Reading through some of the predictions from the BBC 'pundits'

Murray seems to be their favourite. So much emphasis on the Lendl effect. None of them plumping for Nadal. Raonic is heavily tipped as an outsider. Overend very much impartial to British success. Very blinded.

Even by the standards of the BBC, that was a pretty shabby article.

Jonathan Overend: "Expect Lendl to make an instant impact"

Jeremy Bates: "the x-factor that is Ivan Lendl, which has just added that five per cent of focus to his game, makes Murray my pick"

Yet Andy Murray himself said in an interview this week: "I'm not going to get the benefits from having Ivan this week, I'm going to see it in six months, 12 months' time, you know, when all the things we work on start falling into place.”


Andy's not going to be putting himself under pressure by admitting he might get some benefit, is he? He's many things but not daft!! I actually think if the made the final, Lendl could make that crucial difference - simply because Murray now has a constant in his team who went through even more troughs than him. Remember, last years opening few games of last years final was a nervy affair from both - as is always the case with two friends playing and has been with Nole/Andy, whoever gets the initial upper hand wins - Andy was mm's (literally) from doing that and contrary to what a lot of people say is that distance from his first Slam. I think it will either be a disaster (out in the last 16) or a win

And if the Beeb crew are writing off Nadal, they are correct to do so based on his form since the US Open. I fail to understand what else anyone would expect, to constantly back a player not playing well would be poor journalism

The Beeb often get things wrong and I cannot stand their Wimby coverage - but they seem on the money here, from what I've just read

Not backing a past champion and 10 time Slam winner is not poor journalism? I think it is poor for anyone not to consider him!!!

On the money? Because they back Murray based on Lendl and not previous form?

It is poor all round!

I fail to see anyone who actually thinks it is good.

banbrotam wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

HM Murdoch wrote:

legendkillar wrote:Reading through some of the predictions from the BBC 'pundits'

Murray seems to be their favourite. So much emphasis on the Lendl effect. None of them plumping for Nadal. Raonic is heavily tipped as an outsider. Overend very much impartial to British success. Very blinded.

Even by the standards of the BBC, that was a pretty shabby article.

Jonathan Overend: "Expect Lendl to make an instant impact"

Jeremy Bates: "the x-factor that is Ivan Lendl, which has just added that five per cent of focus to his game, makes Murray my pick"

Yet Andy Murray himself said in an interview this week: "I'm not going to get the benefits from having Ivan this week, I'm going to see it in six months, 12 months' time, you know, when all the things we work on start falling into place.”


Andy's not going to be putting himself under pressure by admitting he might get some benefit, is he? He's many things but not daft!! I actually think if the made the final, Lendl could make that crucial difference - simply because Murray now has a constant in his team who went through even more troughs than him. Remember, last years opening few games of last years final was a nervy affair from both - as is always the case with two friends playing and has been with Nole/Andy, whoever gets the initial upper hand wins - Andy was mm's (literally) from doing that and contrary to what a lot of people say is that distance from his first Slam. I think it will either be a disaster (out in the last 16) or a win

And if the Beeb crew are writing off Nadal, they are correct to do so based on his form since the US Open. I fail to understand what else anyone would expect, to constantly back a player not playing well would be poor journalism

The Beeb often get things wrong and I cannot stand their Wimby coverage - but they seem on the money here, from what I've just read

Not backing a past champion and 10 time Slam winner is not poor journalism? I think it is poor for anyone not to consider him!!!

On the money? Because they back Murray based on Lendl and not previous form?

It is poor all round!

I fail to see anyone who actually thinks it is good.

LK. I've not seen the full text of the review, so maybe put in the context you're correct. If they are saying Nadal has no chance, then that's a bit silly. If they are saying that Nadal is a slight 4th or even 5th favourite (behind Tsonga) then that's reasonable

Personally, I think if you beat Rafa (and I said it the other day) you've a pretty good chance of winning!!

Tenez wrote:Some nice shots from Federer and his opponent but I am still a bit concerned about his back, especially towards the end.

He was lacking rhythm too but that is down to the pace played by his opponent and first round.

. Everything fine, moving okay, twingefree?

ROGER FEDERER: Twinge means pain?



Q. Yes. Everything good?

ROGER FEDERER: Yeah. I mean, I expected otherwise honestly I would've been worried and I would have mentioned something. I'm not keeping secrets about that stuff.

But I've been feeling fine for three, four days now. Been able to practice full out. Today was fine. It was just tough against a guy who hits big and flat from both sides and takes a lot of chances.

In some ways, for the first match, it was a bit more how do you say intense, where I felt a lot of pressure. Because in Abu Dhabi they were exhibitions, and then in Doha, the first match with Davydenko was somewhat straightforward.

Then after that I got injured. So everything was a bit on a relaxeder [sic] mode maybe, or then trying to come through with injury or the matches were too easy, you know.

Here I really tried to put in an effort to every point play as hard as I could first to see how the back felt, try to get into it, hopefully win, and then see how I feel tomorrow.

I'll get a lot more information tomorrow, but I'm sure I'll be fine.