Matchups you want to avoid!

Been browsing the youtube for matches whilst I have been ill and there are some that I think made me more ill.

1) Murray vs Ferrer - My god please stop!
2) Anything with ferrer, granollers, monaco, matosevic, anderson, seppi, berlocq etc
3) From 2012 aus onwards Murray vs djokovic.
4) Berdych vs any other big hitter.
5) Nadal vs most spaniards

Over to you, what is your top 5?

1) Serena vs Everyone else
2) Nadal vs Gasquet
3) Djokovic vs Gasquet
4) Djokovic vs Ferrer
5) Berdych vs Nadal

It's really only Ferrer and Berdych who I have no real interest in watching.

?

1. Ferrer vs anyone
2. Berdych vs anyone

That's more like it missy!

A little harsh on Ferrer, Groucho... I like it when he plays Tipsarevic. And he normally has reasonably entertaining matches vs inconsistent shotmakers

Ferrer v 'The Big 4'.

Gilles Simon v anyone at all.

Nadal v anyone with a SHBH.

And I agree about Novak v Andy post AO12. I like both players individually but the match up hasn't been great recently. The Olympic match was alright.

Raonic v Isner
Gasquet v Berdych

Monfils vs Simon.

I watched one point once of one of their matches. (obviously that point lasted longer than it takes some players to complete a set).

Still brings me out in cold sweats now!

This has got me thinking....that Monfils Simon match I was referring to. Reminds me of Shane Warne's comment re Monty Panesar. He said that Panesar (after he was dropped) hadn't played 36 tests. He'd played one test 36 times. With Monfils and Simon..each point is the same..just at different times in the match!

Anyway...

What about a form of tennis where you play for a pre-determined period of time. An hour say. Each player takes it turns to serve for 5 mins or what ever. A minutes break inbetween (so there are 10 phases of play).

Who ever wins the most points - wins! Might help players play a little more attacking..if they need quick points.

lol just a thought. Could be a gimmick on the side. I think it would be quite close still.

For example...wasn't there a stat when Fed dominated for that 3 year spell. You'd have thought he would have wiped for the floor with everyone - which I suppose he did. But he only won 55% of points or something like that?

Anyway..sorry for going off topic!

Dw man im used to it :P

1) Nadal v Ferrer - Boring part 2
2) Murray v Ferrer - Boring part 1
3) Simon v Almagro - Who can choke first
4) Sharapova v Azarenka - Has me reaching for the mute button
5) Karlovic v Isner - Are you being served?

I was thinking about putting ferrer nadal and most of the time I do agree but outside slams they have had the odd decent match imo.

Nadal vs Anyone on Clay - (Apart from Djokovic)

HM Murdoch wrote:Ferrer v 'The Big 4'.

Gilles Simon v anyone at all.

Nadal v anyone with a SHBH.

And I agree about Novak v Andy post AO12. I like both players individually but the match up hasn't been great recently. The Olympic match was alright.

Agree with most of this. I would also add top 4 v virtually anyone outside top 20. It's too easy most of the time. Oh, and Isner v anyone apart from top 4.

Murray v Novak was great at AO2012, great at OG2012, good at USO2012 (I appreciate not many agree with this) a bit flat at AO2013 and, although a wonderful occasion, bizarrely lacking edge at W2013. So yes, it needs a bit of a break this one. Please can someone force Murray and Rafa to play each other? They've won 5 slams between them in 2 seasons and haven't played! Bizarre.

HM Murdoch wrote:Ferrer v 'The Big 4'.

Gilles Simon v anyone at all.

Nadal v anyone with a SHBH.

And I agree about Novak v Andy post AO12. I like both players individually but the match up hasn't been great recently. The Olympic match was alright.

I've actually re-watched the Wimby final twice and its far better than I originally thought - particularly in the middle part of the second set. It is only average, but not the terror some might think but I think you are just about right, they've both got such great returns that the server starts to lose confidence and the play suffers.

To quote the memorable Federer line after that Miami 2009 loss to Nole "His worst was better than mine" - place whichever player wins / loses in their match -ups and it sums up perfectly  

Oh and leave Giles alone   

The problem with Andy v Novak is that it seems rare that they both play well.

I didn't think either was great at USO12, Andy was below his best in AO13, Novak below his best at Wimbledon. Andy was very slow out of the blocks in Miami12 and I thought he just looked worn out in the WTF match.

The Olympic match was pretty good but it was slightly tainted for me in that I just knew that Novak was going to get broken at 6-5!

Shanghai last year was pretty good actually. Andy looked to be flying high from New York and Novak was starting to hit his top form that carried him through the end of last season.

Here is why people are not fond of the monfils simon matches. 2 points, 132 shots....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk_rhsDxUFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8iunyDh4ms

Raonic and Matosevic had a good match today which I was surprised about

LuvSports! wrote:Here is why people are not fond of the monfils simon matches. 2 points, 132 shots....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk_rhsDxUFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8iunyDh4ms

Are rallies an illustration of a boring match? My favourite Tennis always coincides with a return winner or a long rally, of more than 30 shots, that is ended by a worthy winner

The point Murray won to get 2-0 up in the 5th at last years US, is one of the best rallies you'll see, simply because (of the situation) you were holding your breathe with the suspense rising and couldn't quite believe how Andy could keep fighting back, fighting back etc and then deliver a sudden aggressive shot that resulted in a Novak error

Such rallies also show that not all error's are an indication of poor play

But I prefered Chrissie to Martina Nat, so what do I know!!

We see tennis "best rallies" as polar opposites. Passive boring play. No risk taking, shot making, creativity or variety, just who could outlast who.

Big rallies are generally only good to watch live, especially on bit points because it keeps the suspense going. In a highlight reel they tend to be quite dull,and you dont want too many of them.
Karlovic isner must be a big one to avoid

I find it interesting how isner has now gone from being 6'9 to 6'10 despite clearly being smaller than karlovic.

I can imagine Seppi vs Simon being very long, neither having a killer shot to finish rallies off early

Finally someone says SEPPI!

Johnyjeep wrote:Monfils vs Simon.

I watched one point once of one of their matches. (obviously that point lasted longer than it takes some players to complete a set).

Still brings me out in cold sweats now!

  

Perfectly spotted, anybody who watched that match and the point would have given up hope on tennis, such pathetic game, for a single point both players put the ball on exact centre court without moving the bum a little bit to attack, eventually Monfils got bored and tired and netted the ball. I for once thought they were practicing in the mid match.  

I even thought that was a fixed match the way neither of the player showed interest in the game, even defense was at its worst, but then given both players profile it could have been real.  

If your going to talk about match ups that make you Zzzzz... then of course long rallies in these matches will send you to sleep. But no need to give all long rallies a bad name.

How about this one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdjNghcCNPU

What made it good was that really it had no business being a long rally at all! I love the reaction of the crowd were some try to shush the over exited ones who think it's all over.

This is another good long rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N16ikBfue7c

There were like four or five points in the 2011 & 2010 USO final which I rank as the greatest moments in sports. Cant say that about the time Karlovic served like a million aces, and still lost.... Or the other time Karlovic served a thousand aces and lost, or the time Karlovic served a million unreturnables vs Federer and lost in three straight sets... Real marmalade tennis. Marketable though - I always watch to see him lose...

This is the 2 best clay courters of their time going at it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZZMuXBr_Hk

Nice link, Groucho. Will have a look at it when I get back to work on Monday... My data cap is nearing and I am gallantly trying to survive until month end.

JuliusHMarx wrote:This is the 2 best clay courters of their time going at it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZZMuXBr_Hk

Good grief that was awful! Maybe even as bad as Simon and Murray

Can't think of your own insults HE, and have to steal them from the comments on that youtube video?

I genuinely thought that was a training session, and a light one at that, until I saw the crowd. That was incredibly boring. They barely moved!

Borg won 6-1 6-1 6-3 no? Against a four time slam winner... If 606 had been around back then, no doubt young Julius would be highlighting the obvious lack of depth in men's tennis...

kingraf wrote:Borg won 6-1 6-1 6-3 no? Against a four time slam winner... If 606 had been around back then, no doubt young Julius would be highlighting the obvious lack of depth in men's tennis...

I wrote a letter to The Times.

HM Murdoch wrote:This is another good long rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N16ikBfue7c

Yup much better than the 54 stroke rally.

JuliusHMarx wrote:This is the 2 best clay courters of their time going at it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZZMuXBr_Hk

For sure Tennis of those era to this era is of big difference , two different sport alltogether.

It looked like the better version of Giles vs Monfils.

-----

Btw watch out for this funny interview guys, Nadal's response was so natural it ended up shaming the media for posting stupid questions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plbomcLe1rI

This is what called Genius match-up or eye catching tennis,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S4dQax0OwA

Federer comes up with a magic of running forehand cross court and Nadal comes up with a magical recovery, come on roll on those days back, such a treat to the eyes.  

invisiblecoolers wrote:This is what called Genius match-up or eye catching tennis,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S4dQax0OwA

Federer comes up with a magic of running forehand cross court and Nadal comes up with a magical recovery, come on roll on those days back, such a treat to the eyes.  

Sigh! Sometimes I don't know whether to be annoyed at the tennis gods for Federer being born too soon or Nadal being born too late... or just grateful that their careers overlapped at all.

Ha ha! about that Djokovic interview with Nadal's response. I have seen it before but it's interesting to watch it now. At the time what did Nadal have? 2 FO's? And Djokovic already looked hungry for a FO crown of his own and one that he was already boldly claiming he had a right to. Now Nadal has 8 (!) and Djokovic still hasn't knocked the "beatable" Nadal off his throne. Others can have their own view but there's no way they can convince me that Djokovic's season wasn't severely affected by his failure yet again to win his "holy grail". There are other stories in tennis of course but Nadal denying first Federer and now Djokovic a chance to hold this trophy is perhaps the most dramatic. The tension in matches involving Federer and Djokovic attempting to steal just one of these trophies from Nadal have been quite scary to watch. I'm not quite sure who I feel more scared for. Nadal for the scary task of playing to hold on (he has built such a high house of cards that despite being in the conversation as the best player ever it's height makes it precarious and it will make a dramatic fall)... or the other two for throwing everything and failing...

There was the same sort of tension at Wimbledon when Federer was clinging on there. 2006, 2007 and then the historical 2008.

Oops sorry for going off topic. I got a little nostalgic.

I loved Novak's comment about Rafa being beatable and I still love it now. We need more players with that kind of attitude.

It's no surprise that he's gone on to be the player with most success against Rafa.

And I'm pretty sure Rafa would respond differently today!

Agreed Murdoch.

I'd love more players before playing Rafa/Novak/Andy to say "I believe I'm good enough to beat him, and I intend to do it!"

Hell, why not throw in some insults too! Spice it up a bit.

Danny, yes, it would add some spice! It's for that reason that I'm looking forward to the first Janowicz v Novak match.

Young Jerzy has certainly had some things to say for himself recently!

JJ was great at Wimbledon. Moaning about the light when it was perfectly fine, just to annoy Andy (it worked too). Talking during rallies, which infuriated him! Shushing the crowd when they were cheering...

I loved it. I guess like Akexandra Burke, the bad boys are always catching my eye!

^ Danny_1982

I know why your favorite player is Murray.

Ha, Murray isnt a bad boy. I'd love him to barge into players at the net or make opponents wait for him. Sadly he's too polite.

... Apart from when he's screaming at himself for a mistake. I guess in those terms he can be quite raw.

I agree on Nadal vs Verdasco, however this was one of my favourite points I have ever seen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoB8fUIBYLQ

grosjean bennettau

I dont beleive in using insults... self confidence is one things but you beat your opponent with your tennis and your mental strength, not by being a bully or a d*ck, otherwise youve no place being there