The US Open is a complete joke!!! [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

The US Open is a complete joke!!!

Frooty_Bazooty
09-05-2004, 01:21 AM
Paul-Henri Mathieu just got completely fucked by the US Open. What is the deal with these ridiculous 5th set tiebreakers, they are a complete joke!!!

For Paul-Henri to be playing 4 hours 45 minutes and have everything decided by 1 or 2 points in a tiebreaker is a fucking disgrace, the US Open should be ashamed of themselves

the match was an absolute classic, the 26 minute, 9 deuce game at 5-5 was one of the best i have ever seen in my life and the least that BOTH players deserved was the match to be finished properly, not on some shitty tiebreaker. why is it that every other grand slam can manage to treat a grand slam properly and the US Open has to fuck up classic matches with this pathetic rule?

Tennis Fool
09-05-2004, 01:25 AM
I like the 5th set tiebreak. If we can't have 3-setters, than an ending tiebreak is OK by me. PHM should won after being 2 sets up.

joanbalcells
09-05-2004, 01:28 AM
at least Mathieu got to a tie-break. he clearly benefitted from a bad line call at 5-6 and breakpoint down to Sargsian.

but I agree that the tie-break in the final set is not ideal. having to break your opponent and hold at the end of a fifth set is much more of a challenge and helps to separate the players out when they're oh so close.

nevertheless, i think Sargsian was marginally better and wanted it fractionally more.

Frooty_Bazooty
09-05-2004, 01:30 AM
that wasnt a bad line call. they did hawk eye and it was just out

star
09-05-2004, 01:32 AM
Sargs did get a very bad call in there..... but Mathieu got some too.

I'm just glad Sargsian won.

but if it weren't this issue I'm sure there would be some other issue that would make the USO beyond the bounds of sporting, if not indeed, human decency. :lol:

croat123
09-05-2004, 01:33 AM
i agree. the tb takes away from 5 set thrillers

WyveN
09-05-2004, 01:46 AM
I dont really see a problem with a 5th set tiebreak. All the other sets are decided by tiebreaks where one player potentially gets very unlucky.

Goenitz_196
09-05-2004, 01:55 AM
I dont really see a problem with a 5th set tiebreak. All the other sets are decided by tiebreaks where one player potentially gets very unlucky.

So...isn't that the problem with a 5th set tie-break then?

Frooty_Bazooty
09-05-2004, 02:06 AM
all the others set arent definitely the last set though. but the 5th set will always end up with someone winning the match and this is why it should not end in a tiebreak!

Neely
09-05-2004, 02:20 AM
I agree with Frooty that IMO a tiebreak is really a poor way to end a match, especially of course a Grand Slam match in the fith set :o :banghead:

but the reasoning "everything is decided by 1 or 2 points in a tiebreaker" is also true for if they played an advantage set because there could also just one or two points decide.

I really hate that 5th set tiebreak rule, but that's how things are going in the US :shrug: I think the TV stations wanted the matches to be more calculable to avoid 15-13 sets :rolleyes:

Billabong
09-05-2004, 02:21 AM
I agree!

Neely
09-05-2004, 02:21 AM
BTW, so far we only talked about us fans, but anybody knows how the players like a 5th set tiebreak?

has anybody heard a quote or a statement from a player what they prefer? if yes, I would be interested if somebody could tell me because I'm curious how the players like it.

WyveN
09-05-2004, 02:39 AM
I have heard quotes that players prefer a 5th set tiebreak because if you get to 10-10 sort of scores then it is extremely difficult to recover for your next match but of course players used to play non tiebreak in each set.

Chloe le Bopper
09-05-2004, 02:42 AM
It's not as if the fifth set tiebreak rule has brought an end to 5 hours matches :p

Mind you, if PHM was up 2-0 sets, it's not the tiebreak that lost him the match...

Dirk
09-05-2004, 02:46 AM
sarge must be given his hard earned respect. Andre and him will have fun out there.

Rick V
09-05-2004, 02:55 AM
Yeah right - the 5th set tiebreaker rule cost him the match. Sure. I guess the fact that he choked his ass off after being up 2 sets had nothing to do with it after all.

Fee
09-05-2004, 03:06 AM
I've heard some players comment in the past (I apologize for not remembering who) that the 5th set tiebreak is part of the uniqueness of this particular Slam (like playing in the rain at RG). Some have said it's like sudden death overtime in tennis. That sounds to me like something an American player would say, for some reason. Personally, I go back and forth on this one, sometimes I like it and sometimes I just don't. Tiebreaks can sometimes come down to luck, instead of skill or strategy, and that's a bit frustrating. On the other hand, it puts you on the edge of your seat and brings definite excitement to the end of the match.

ae wowww
09-05-2004, 09:29 AM
typical irish... errr yea its the USO staffs fault isnt it mate :S!
thats the magic of a GS

TennisLurker
09-05-2004, 09:33 AM
I like the ffith set tie break

ae wowww
09-05-2004, 09:38 AM
it is unique to this tourney - thats why its incredible.

RonE
09-05-2004, 09:45 AM
BTW, so far we only talked about us fans, but anybody knows how the players like a 5th set tiebreak?

has anybody heard a quote or a statement from a player what they prefer? if yes, I would be interested if somebody could tell me because I'm curious how the players like it.

I am sure in 1996 Sampras very much appreciated the 5th set tie-break ;)

Angele
09-05-2004, 11:29 AM
I personally don't like the fifth set tiebreak. I think it's horrible that a match could be won or lost on one single bad line call. You can argue that if there's a bad line call at 30-40 it's the same but it's not because the players must have gotten to 30-40 somehow and more than likely it wasn't because of 5 bad line calls in a row. I just think it's a bad way to end a hard fought match but I guess timewise it's better :shrug:

*Ljubica*
09-05-2004, 12:20 PM
I personally don't like the fifth set tiebreak. I think it's horrible that a match could be won or lost on one single bad line call. You can argue that if there's a bad line call at 30-40 it's the same but it's not because the players must have gotten to 30-40 somehow and more than likely it wasn't because of 5 bad line calls in a row. I just think it's a bad way to end a hard fought match but I guess timewise it's better :shrug:

I agree - and I personally hate the 5th set tie break. I didn't see the Sargsian/Mathieu match, but it seems so wrong that two guys can be battling it out for 4-5 hours and then have to lose because of something that is basically just a sell-out to the TV companies :devil: :devil:

Frommage A Trois
09-05-2004, 02:05 PM
It's garbage, just for the TV companies, sure it's a unique factor of the US Open, though so is the former venue used to be a rubbish dump, plenty of planes going overhead, music in between the changeovers, stupid scheduling, so this is just another unique aspect of the tournament.

Mathieu didn't lose the match, because it was a 5th set tiebreaker, he lost it because he wasn't good enough to win the major points.

WyveN
09-05-2004, 02:23 PM
stupid scheduling



Actually I have to compliment the scheduling so far this year. All the top 4 seeds have been scheduled as the night feature match and have been spread around fairly.
I was certain Agassi would get night time "special treatment" in almost every match so that he could preserve his energy but it hasn't happened.
In 2002 Sampras got virtually every match at night and last year the scheduling was embarassing so perhaps they learnt a few lessons.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 02:28 PM
Actually I have to compliment the scheduling so far this year. All the top 4 seeds have been scheduled as the night feature match and have been spread around fairly.
I was certain Agassi would get night time "special treatment" in almost every match so that he could preserve his energy but it hasn't happened.
In 2002 Sampras got virtually every match at night and last year the scheduling was embarassing so perhaps they learnt a few lessons.

One year, doesn't change anything about scheduling, it needs to be over a period of time and this includes not starting 1st round matches on Wednesdays, there is no need for it, especially now that they have a bigger venue, they could still learn a lot of things from the other 3 events.

*Ljubica*
09-05-2004, 02:32 PM
Actually I have to compliment the scheduling so far this year. All the top 4 seeds have been scheduled as the night feature match and have been spread around fairly.
I was certain Agassi would get night time "special treatment" in almost every match so that he could preserve his energy but it hasn't happened.
In 2002 Sampras got virtually every match at night and last year the scheduling was embarassing so perhaps they learnt a few lessons.

According to our commentators, the reason Agassi has played some day sessions and not night ones is because he specifically asked the organisers for that, so they are not being that altruistic towards the other players :) As to why he wanted that schedule - I really have no idea, unless he wanted to get used to the heat of the day before the later rounds perhaps :confused: though the final starts later anyway doesn't it?

WyveN
09-05-2004, 02:34 PM
One year, doesn't change anything about scheduling, it needs to be over a period of time and this includes not starting 1st round matches on Wednesdays, there is no need for it, especially now that they have a bigger venue, they could still learn a lot of things from the other 3 events.

No doubt they can still improve in many many aspects but they have to start somewhere and so far the scheduling has been fair.
There are actually benefits to the Wednesday start although they overdo it for example it allows players that played the previous week an extra day to recover + can help out with injuries.
Atthe AO Moya was pleading for a Wednesday start to give him extra time to get over his injury in Sydney but he was shut down.

WyveN
09-05-2004, 02:37 PM
According to our commentators, the reason Agassi has played some day sessions and not night ones is because he specifically asked the organisers for that, so they are not being that altruistic towards the other players :) As to why he wanted that schedule - I really have no idea, unless he wanted to get used to the heat of the day before the later rounds perhaps :confused: though the final starts later anyway doesn't it?


Really?
Interesting to know, perhaps Andre is making a mistake because if it happens, the Agassi-Federer match will almost certainly be at night and that is probably the big test for him.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 02:39 PM
No doubt they can still improve in many many aspects but they have to start somewhere and so far the scheduling has been fair.
There are actually benefits to the Wednesday start although they overdo it for example it allows players that played the previous week an extra day to recover + can help out with injuries.
Atthe AO Moya was pleading for a Wednesday start to give him extra time to get over his injury in Sydney but he was shut down.

As much as I like Moya it was actually a Tuesday start he wanted and his match was meant to be played on Monday, if it was a Tuesday start then yes, but I wouldn't have bent the rules in this case.

All I am saying after seeing and witnessing their crap after all these years. I am awaiting for more improvements, before I think they have done any better.

Neely
09-05-2004, 02:55 PM
except Wednesday 1st round matches, what is always a bit strange to me also, they are really doing well :clap2: ... and they had no rain so far which is probably the most important reason why everything is going so well this year!

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 02:58 PM
except Wednesday 1st round matches, what is always a bit strange to me also, they are really doing well :clap2: ... and they had no rain so far which is probably the most important reason why everything is going so well this year!

It will always be the richest Slam, but the tackiest as well. Very true about the lack of rain has helped cover any possible foibles from the organisation aspect.

star
09-05-2004, 03:05 PM
The U.S. Open will never be able to make enough changes for people like MRIT to like it. I really don't care.

The U.S. Open has been terrific this year. There have been great matches. USA has done a marvelous job in letting us see at least part of all the great matches. The tennis is live. It's exciting. The weather is perfect (and this is so unusual for the USO). I have no complaints whatsoever.

Anyway, I think it is stupid to complain about the slams. I could whine about things about the AO and Wimbledon, and I suppose I could dredge up something even to complain about at RG. But, the bottom line is that all four of these tournaments are overwhelmingly great. It's the long term view I take. All four of them have long traditions and unique character. I like the differences. I don't have to have things just one way. It's ok with me if Wimbledon has it's quirky ways. It's ok with me if the AO is boiling hot and has that weird roof dealy. I like them BECAUSE they are different. I don't want everything to be the same.

star
09-05-2004, 03:06 PM
:lol: I just realized that MRIT is really Mr. It. :)

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 03:10 PM
:lol: I just realized that MRIT is really Mr. It. :)

Thank you star I have realised that you are true star that always shines over the horizon.

So as long as the US Open is shown live, and the other Slams are not shown live is that a good thing?

star
09-05-2004, 03:13 PM
NO! It's not a good thing. I really dislike the taping.

I am happy I am getting the USO live. I guess, I'm not like you. I don't like something less just because I didn't get it before.

I'm delighted I'm getting live tennis. I want live tennis from RG. And I can't quite figure out why that's not done. I also am grrrrrrrrrrr at the East Coast domination of television in the U.S. which means that Wimbledon is delayed for me, but is live on the East Coast, just because of some stupid morning show.

NONE of that diminishes my delight that the USO is being show live umptiump hours every day! :yippee: :yippee:

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 03:19 PM
NO! It's not a good thing. I really dislike the taping.

I am happy I am getting the USO live. I guess, I'm not like you. I don't like something less just because I didn't get it before.

Never had a problem with tennis coverage. I get all the Slams live irrespective of global time differences, which is something that I am very thankful for and no I don't believe in the Slams should be homogenous. I wouldn't change the venue, just because planes are going overhead, or a moronic crowd booing Rafter after he retired from a match. :)

star
09-05-2004, 03:41 PM
No, what you would do, is to collect all the moments you didn't like and keep them near and dear to your heart so that you can dredge them up year after year to disparage the tournament you don't like, instead of concentrating on what you do like and what is terrific about the present tournament. :)

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 03:58 PM
No, what you would do, is to collect all the moments you didn't like and keep them near and dear to your heart so that you can dredge them up year after year to disparage the tournament you don't like, instead of concentrating on what you do like and what is terrific about the present tournament. :)

Thank you Dr.Star that was an outstanding and thoughtful analysis as always, but actually I am very well balanced when it comes to that, yes that includes matches that I have seen, better being there live, it just adds to the feelings that a TV and a video can't some great and some horrible and nothing gets priority in the memory recall.

Perfect example 96 US Open Corretja/Sampras it was a painful, fantastic and unforgettable at the same time, and no I didn't hate the tournament because of the result or the venue. There have been many memorable moments from places I don't like and that's not just tennistically. :)

star
09-05-2004, 04:01 PM
I haven't missed that you find no fault with yourself. :)

WyveN
09-05-2004, 04:07 PM
No, what you would do, is to collect all the moments you didn't like and keep them near and dear to your heart so that you can dredge them up year after year to disparage the tournament you don't like

Sort of like you and Sampras? That is the only way someone could become so bitter as to be "disgusted" by someone they don't know.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 04:08 PM
I haven't missed that you find no fault with yourself. :)

I know my faults, but since what you know about me is as much as I know about you, then the comments aren't very relevant.

You made an incorrect call and got pulled up on that, so if you deem that think that I can't find fault with myself, then go right ahead.

Tennis Fool
09-05-2004, 04:11 PM
Rosset, just admit you don't like Americans.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 04:15 PM
Rosset, just admit you don't like Americans.

Man, that's one of the funniest things I have ever heard.

I will answer your question from another thread. Yes, I have been in the US before and have lived there for a year, and just because I don't like the US Open automatically means I dislike Americans?

Any other ethnic groups and nations I don't like that I am aware of, could you please tell me?

*Ljubica*
09-05-2004, 04:21 PM
It will always be the richest Slam, but the tackiest as well. Very true about the lack of rain has helped cover any possible foibles from the organisation aspect.

Don't worry my friend Marc - I heard on the TV just now that the rain is coming :umbrella: - tomorrow or Tuesday at the latest they say. Actually, as far as I remember it was mainly the second week that was affected last year too, though my memory is fading with age so I may be wrong. And of course you know I agree with you 100% on everything you say here :worship:

Tennis Fool
09-05-2004, 04:24 PM
Man, that's one of the funniest things I have ever heard.

I will answer your question from another thread. Yes, I have been in the US before and have lived there for a year, and just because I don't like the US Open automatically means I dislike Americans?

Any other ethnic groups and nations I don't like that I am aware of, could you please tell me?

Well, sometimes words speak louder than replies to TF's questions. Everytime a thread mixes tennis with the US, it seems you have something negative to say.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 04:25 PM
Yes, it was the second week and really I don't want to see the rain come down, but a part of me does, just to see how they handle the situation and if possible switch the final to a Monday, if they lose too much play, as long as they can complete the 3rd round matches, then the fun might begin.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-05-2004, 04:33 PM
Well, sometimes words speak louder than replies to TF's questions. Everytime a thread mixes tennis with the US, it seems you have something negative to say.

I answered your question and if you think that way and conclude that I hate Americans, then that's your choice, it must be hard on all my American friends, when I hate them, just because of their nationality.

As I said before stated the reasons why I don't like the US Open and yes there have been quite a few American players I have liked and like, any more assumptions.

Tennis Fool
09-05-2004, 06:15 PM
What American players, past or present, have you liked?

JennyS
09-05-2004, 07:44 PM
I agree with Frooty that IMO a tiebreak is really a poor way to end a match, especially of course a Grand Slam match in the fith set :o :banghead:

but the reasoning "everything is decided by 1 or 2 points in a tiebreaker" is also true for if they played an advantage set because there could also just one or two points decide.

I really hate that 5th set tiebreak rule, but that's how things are going in the US :shrug: I think the TV stations wanted the matches to be more calculable to avoid 15-13 sets :rolleyes:

If they really wanted the US Open to be TV friendly, wouldn't they make the men's matches best of three sets to make them shorter?

I think final set tiebreaks are unfair. We never would have had the classic 21-19 Andy/Younes 5th set.

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-06-2004, 08:48 AM
What American players, past or present, have you liked?

Here is the list:
Aaron Krickstein
Jimmy Arias
Todd Martin
Jeff Tarango
John McEnroe
Tim Wilkinson
Brian Sheldon
Mal Washington (play, not commentary)
Paul Annacone
James/Thomas Blake
Amer Delic
Michael Russell

I hope this list is sufficient enough for you?

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 09:21 AM
I never realised that there are people that think the US Open is a complete joke.

Space Cowgirl
09-06-2004, 09:35 AM
I'm enjoying it so far, there have been some classic matches. The only thing that annoys me is that the crowd is so loud a lot of the time. Don't they realise that there is a match on? It shows such disrespect for the players :mad:

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 09:37 AM
The only thing that annoys me is that the crowd is so loud a lot of the time. Don't they realise that there is a match on? It shows such disrespect for the players :mad:

It's New York, you can't expect a quiet and respectful crowd in New York.

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 09:41 AM
Anyway, I think it is stupid to complain about the slams. I could whine about things about the AO and Wimbledon, and I suppose I could dredge up something even to complain about at RG.

If you want something to complain about the AO, try that the mens semis are not played on the same day, that's unique and stupid, though not as stupid as Super Saturday.

G O
09-06-2004, 10:14 AM
It's New York, you can't expect a quiet and respectful crowd in New York.


I agree. I think it should be in Paris.

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 10:17 AM
I agree. I think it should be in Paris.

How is the trolling going? It's good to see you have made a comeback.

Btw, where is Paris?

Lalitha
09-06-2004, 10:19 AM
If you want something to complain about the AO, try that the mens semis are not played on the same day, that's unique and stupid, though not as stupid as Super Saturday.

I agree. Super sunday is the mother of all the stupid concepts. After the SF's the player has less than 24 hrs for him to prepare the finals.

G O
09-06-2004, 10:33 AM
How is the trolling going? It's good to see you have made a comeback.

Btw, where is Paris?


Speaking of comebacks...

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 10:34 AM
Speaking of comebacks...

Fortunately for you it's only brief, and you forgot to answer my question.

WyveN
09-06-2004, 12:04 PM
Fortunately for you it's only brief, and you forgot to answer my question.

Isn't Paris in Texas somewhere? or was it Nebraska?

Layla
09-06-2004, 12:08 PM
Isn't Paris in Texas somewhere? or was it Nebraska?

It's Texas. Great movie, btw! :worship:

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 12:10 PM
Isn't Paris in Texas somewhere? or was it Nebraska?

Thanks for that, it was appreciated for sure.

Though I am surprised there weren't some Americans who thought the 1980 Olympics were in Moscow, Idaho instead of the one in Russia.

pinky
09-06-2004, 12:15 PM
Here is the list:
Aaron Krickstein
Jimmy Arias
Todd Martin
Jeff Tarango
John McEnroe
Tim Wilkinson
Brian Sheldon
Mal Washington (play, not commentary)
Paul Annacone
James/Thomas Blake
Amer Delic
Michael Russell

I hope this list is sufficient enough for you?

Tarango!?
Damn i didn't know this guy got even one fan :)
The guy was crazier on the court than Big Mac without the talent :/

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 12:17 PM
Tarango!?
Damn i didn't know this guy got even one fan :)
The guy was crazier on the court than Big Mac without the talent :/

I have actually met Tarango on quite a few occasions and off the court he is fine, he suffered majorly from white line fever when he got on the court, and had to use antics to cover a lack of talent.

Marc was probably there at the famous doubles match when Tarango and Rosset teamed up.

poundcatt
09-06-2004, 12:28 PM
When you think about it. an entire match could have hinged on a bad call in the first game of the first set, for a bad call could here coujd have meant that someone might have won in straight sets instead of taking it to 5 and then losing. There is always an element of luck, or bad luck in a tennis match...whether it's from a bad call or a ball boucing out of bounds because it hit a leaf that had blown into the court.

*Ljubica*
09-06-2004, 12:34 PM
[QUOTE=rassklovn]I have actually met Tarango on quite a few occasions and off the court he is fine,

So have I and I agree - he's actually a real gentleman and very, very amusing to talk to - I enjoy his company a lot.

pinky
09-06-2004, 01:15 PM
[QUOTE=rassklovn]I have actually met Tarango on quite a few occasions and off the court he is fine,

So have I and I agree - he's actually a real gentleman and very, very amusing to talk to - I enjoy his company a lot.

Doh, i was clearly wrong then, he got several fans :)

But you have to admit he didn't really shine on the court!
Good to know he was better off the court.

About that double with Rosset, i remember reading he got Rosset to hit a ball as far as possible out of the court and they got a warning for it, were there other things that happened then? :)

WyveN
09-06-2004, 01:18 PM
Though I am surprised there weren't some Americans who thought the 1980 Olympics were in Moscow, Idaho instead of the one in Russia.

:haha:

I am sure GO learned something new from your post

Layla
09-06-2004, 01:21 PM
:haha:

I am sure GO learned something new from your post

http://www.mainzelahr.de/smile/froehlich/stuhl.gif

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 01:22 PM
Doh, i was clearly wrong then, he got several fans :)

But you have to admit he didn't really shine on the court!
Good to know he was better off the court.

About that double with Rosset, i remember reading he got Rosset to hit a ball as far as possible out of the court and they got a warning for it, were there other things that happened then? :)

Tarango is actually quite bright and can put a sentence together, though there is the element of madness in his game, he was quite funny on the court in some ways, and a big prick in most others, but other than that cool.

He took the piss out of Muster at the French Open, by mocking his walk around the court and grunting like him even louder, it worked for a set, then Muster crushed him.

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 01:23 PM
:haha:

I am sure GO learned something new from your post

It seems silly now that they boycotted their own Olympics in Moscow Idaho in 1980.

WyveN
09-06-2004, 01:36 PM
It seems silly now that they boycotted their own Olympics in Moscow Idaho in 1980.


And GO was thinking USA boycotted to give the other nations an opportunity to win a few medals.

Jeff's antics were fun to watch, especially seeing him in the stadium where you can pick up a lot of the little controversial "tricks" he uses that you miss out on tv.

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 01:41 PM
And GO was thinking USA boycotted to give the other nations an opportunity to win a few medals.

Yes, that was benevolent of them to do so.

Jeff's antics were fun to watch, especially seeing him in the stadium where you can pick up a lot of the little controversial "tricks" he uses that you miss out on tv.

He had plenty of them for sure. I remember seeing Rudi Berger at the AO 2000 and he told me oh no! I have to umpire a match between Tarango and Ilie. I just laughed and there were plenty of antics in that match.

Just wish Tarango had more talent to get better results.

WyveN
09-06-2004, 01:46 PM
Just wish Tarango had more talent to get better results.

Yes, he would have been a real crowd favourite I feel if he was better known. Lack of press conferences involving him is also dissapointing as all of his were interesting and very honest.

rassklovn
09-06-2004, 01:50 PM
Yes, he would have been a real crowd favourite I feel if he was better known. Lack of press conferences involving him is also dissapointing as all of his were interesting and very honest.

Well that interview thread had some great one-liners especially the fact that girls get cramp about Paul Goldstein at Wimbledon. I will try and dig some up and revive that tennis journalist thread. The US Open usually has some very silly questions.

PerezRoldan
09-07-2004, 02:52 AM
Here is the list:
Aaron Krickstein
Jimmy Arias
Todd Martin
Jeff Tarango
John McEnroe
Tim Wilkinson
Brian Sheldon
Mal Washington (play, not commentary)
Paul Annacone
James/Thomas Blake
Amer Delic
Michael Russell

I hope this list is sufficient enough for you?

Not a bad list for someone who allegedly dislikes Americans. Definitely some interesting ones on that list. I remember Arias and Krickstein the 1st kids from the Bollettieri production factory, hard forehands and good movement, though no volleys.

I remember Jimmy Arias doing some commentary and he was very funny. I remember the Acapulco tournament, someone had lost early, he said it's not bad, he can stick around and go for a holiday and he called Calleri "Hands of Stone" when it came down to the touch shots.

Tarango, was definitely out there and I wonder if he will continue his love affair with the ATP?

Marc Rosset is Tall
09-07-2004, 03:17 AM
Well I forgot to add Derrick Rostagno to that list of American players that I liked.

rassklovn
09-08-2004, 08:33 AM
Rostagno was one of the few Americans that could actually speak a second language fluently. He had a good attacking game, and that moment when Becker got that net cord on his match point at the US Open was something that I won't forget.

Vladimir Poutine
09-10-2004, 09:37 AM
The joke will be on the USTA this year, if they don't get an American winner in the women's event.

They must be crying about the fact that Andre and Ducky are not playing on Super Saturday.

*Ljubica*
09-10-2004, 09:39 AM
The joke will be on the USTA this year, if they don't get an American winner in the women's event.

They must be crying about the fact that Andre and Ducky are not playing on Super Saturday.

I think they will get a womens' champion, but it's still funny that Andre and Duckboy are out...........this tournament becomes less boring by the minute :)

Richard Cranium
09-10-2004, 01:33 PM
I wonder how much money the USTA will lose considering that there are no American men in the semi finals, then again as has been the propaganda for so long that women's tennis is a bigger deal in the US and I suppose they will spend some of their money on promoting that side of the tournament.

PerezRoldan
09-11-2004, 03:58 AM
I wonder how much money the USTA will lose considering that there are no American men in the semi finals, then again as has been the propaganda for so long that women's tennis is a bigger deal in the US and I suppose they will spend some of their money on promoting that side of the tournament.

:haha: they must be really spitting chips at how this US Open has turned out for sure. All Russian women's final and the semi finals.

I wonder at the presentations will they get the names right and the joy of the faces seeing the trophy passed to somebody besides Roddick and Agassi will be worth it.

MisterQ
09-11-2004, 05:18 AM
A lot of Schadefreude going around! ;)

Mrs. B
09-11-2004, 11:52 AM
A lot of Schadefreude going around! ;)

Schadenfreude ist die schönste Freude. ;)

MisterQ
09-11-2004, 03:06 PM
Schadenfreude ist die schönste Freude. ;)

Klar! :lol:

makro120
09-11-2004, 03:45 PM
I think america is less important to tennis than europe, I mean 60-70% of all tournaments are played in europe, 2 of the 4 grand slams and 5 of the 9 master series. I think tennis would definetly survive without the US. I also think tennis is in better shape than ever it was before with asian players entering the tour and the whole package of russians and east europeans (specialy in WTA), not to forget the uncountable amount of south americans. It definetly has become a more global sport, tennis has never been more competitive and entertaining as it is today.

rassklovn
09-11-2004, 03:58 PM
It definetly has become a more global sport, tennis has never been more competitive and entertaining as it is today.

Some people just don't want to see that or at best acknowledge that side of things.

Richard Cranium
09-12-2004, 11:11 AM
Some people just don't want to see that or at best acknowledge that side of things.

Very true.

Good to see the foible from the organisers announcing that Svetlana Kuznetsov won the championships. I don't think too many men in the world are called Svetlana.

*Ljubica*
09-12-2004, 12:47 PM
I think america is less important to tennis than europe, I mean 60-70% of all tournaments are played in europe, 2 of the 4 grand slams and 5 of the 9 master series. I think tennis would definetly survive without the US. I also think tennis is in better shape than ever it was before with asian players entering the tour and the whole package of russians and east europeans (specialy in WTA), not to forget the uncountable amount of south americans. It definetly has become a more global sport, tennis has never been more competitive and entertaining as it is today.

I totally agree makro120 :worship:

FryslanBoppe
09-12-2004, 01:42 PM
makro120, excellent points.

I wonder what the TV ratings will be for the finals of the US Open which totally caters to TV networks.

¿esquímaux?
09-12-2004, 02:38 PM
:lol: @ "Super Saturday" :tape:

Well I am American, and I LOVED the variety that this year's open had. I was delighted to see duckiewuckie get a dose of his own medicine :eek: (luvz ya Andy :kiss: ), I was elated when Crapriati's "good umpire" days ran out :tape:, and I was ecstatic when my delicate little buttercup Kuzzie won the women's singles title :worship::worship::worship: It was all faaaaantastic and I loved every minute of it; except when Chanda and the Zibster lost :fiery::fiery::kiss:

FryslanBoppe
09-12-2004, 02:47 PM
esqui, I thought you just loved anything human with a pulse.

To be fair, this Super Saturday had plenty of variety, but I wonder how it well rated though.

¿esquímaux?
09-12-2004, 03:16 PM
esqui, I thought you just loved anything human with a pulse.


...and anything with webbed feet that quacks :drool:;)

FryslanBoppe
09-12-2004, 03:28 PM
...and anything with webbed feet that quacks :drool:;)

quack quack.

FryslanBoppe
09-13-2004, 06:44 AM
I can't believe that they can't start a final on time, and the whole presentations took longer than the match did.

G O
09-13-2004, 09:01 AM
I can't believe that they can't start a final on time, and the whole presentations took longer than the match did.



Are you crazy? Are you nuts? Jesus folks..you wanna cut into the Raiders Steelers game? Ya'll must be insane, this is NFL season baby! DA RAIDAZZZ! :worship: Nobody messes with my Raiders! :devil: I don't see why you making a scene here frybo (aka swedish lover)..it's the oppener of the NFL season and you pissin and moanin about them starting the match late :rolleyes: Gimmie a break, Roger and Lleyton can wait a few.

I read your brainy comeback on the tennis-x topic. Sorry if I insulted you and others. I really didin't mean what I said. You not a loser if you read those pathetic articles at Tennis-x...your just dumb and bored. Why would anyone go there for news?

Go Raiders...Raider Nation :worship:

*Ljubica*
09-13-2004, 09:14 AM
I'm tempted to ask what the hell is NFL and who are the Raiders :angel: But guess American TV networks forget there is a whole wide world out here that has never heard of either :)

PerezRoldan
09-13-2004, 09:16 AM
I can't believe that they can't start a final on time, and the whole presentations took longer than the match did.

You are surprised by this, it has been going on for years. At the same time showing the NFL on one network and the tennis on another would be too radical.

G O , how is your comedic routine going?

G O
09-13-2004, 09:28 AM
I'm tempted to ask what the hell is NFL and who are the Raiders :angel: But guess American TV networks forget there is a whole wide world out here that has never heard of either :)


You don't know the Oakland Raiders? What? How bout the Cowboys? You gotta know them? Everyone knows the Dallas Cowboys right?

You complain about America not givin a crap forieng sports but you don't what the hell NFL is? :rolleyes:

jtipson
09-13-2004, 09:37 AM
You don't know the Oakland Raiders? What? How bout the Cowboys? You gotta know them? Everyone knows the Dallas Cowboys right?

You complain about America not givin a crap forieng sports but you don't what the hell NFL is? :rolleyes:

I think it's your version of rugby, isn't it? ;)

PerezRoldan
09-13-2004, 09:41 AM
I think it's your version of rugby, isn't it? ;)

Rugby with helmets and extra padding. :)

G O
09-13-2004, 10:07 AM
Rugby with helmets and extra padding. :)


Rugby is childs game compared to NFL. If those rugby guys played with NFL guys many of them would be seriously hurt, maybe perminently.

PerezRoldan
09-13-2004, 10:11 AM
Rugby is childs game compared to NFL. If those rugby guys played with NFL guys many of them would be seriously hurt, maybe perminently.

You are absolutely joking, so I will just treat that claim with an absolute grain of salt. If NFL players are so tough, why do they need helmets and the extra padding? Tackling technique is different and could you please produce evidence when this is the case that they are tougher in the NFL, when they play much less games a year, and need all that crap?

makro120
09-13-2004, 10:21 AM
Oh please, you can't expect the rest of the world to care about a game which is an imitation of an international game. But hey, basketball is an american sport liked in the whole world, if you only come up with a sport with some class and which is original we like it.

G O
09-13-2004, 10:24 AM
You are absolutely joking, so I will just treat that claim with an absolute grain of salt. If NFL players are so tough, why do they need helmets and the extra padding? Tackling technique is different and could you please produce evidence when this is the case that they are tougher in the NFL, when they play much less games a year, and need all that crap?


You obvioulsy biased or just want to argue. Either way I'm not in the mood. You boring and totally wrong.

Anyone who's watches Rugby and NFL can see which one is the more dangerous sport. I watch both so I can this. This is lame, I'm not going to argure with you over this :rolleyes:

Auscon
09-13-2004, 10:33 AM
Rugby is childs game compared to NFL. If those rugby guys played with NFL guys many of them would be seriously hurt, maybe perminently.

I think I speak for every non-american and every american who's ever seen a game of rugby when I say 'lol' :)

Dont get me wrong, american footballs ok in my book...I usually watch the superbowl each year, and with all the money that gets put into its video game versions, Maddens one of my fav sports games, but in terms of physicality and the brutal nature of the sport, 'gridiron' is very weak in comparison

And when compared with AFL, its weak in every sense :)

G O
09-13-2004, 10:47 AM
But I'll argure with you.:O:

Spoken from someone who plays NFL video games and "usually" watches the superbowl each year.

I want to correct what I said. I didn't mean that the rugby guys are weak. No way! If fact if THEY played NFL, THEY would be doing alot of damage out there, but they wouldn't be doing shit without the helmets! You need helmets in NFL.

Well I get foxsportsworld network and get to see rugby year round and it's a joke what your saying. NFL players where helmets because if they don't they will literally die! That's what I we were saying.

In terms of physicality, rugby beats NFL, but NFL all in all is more dangerous. People who don't watch NFL love to joke about the helmets and padding, but if they didn't where that stuff many guys would be seriously hurt possibly dead.

*Ljubica*
09-13-2004, 10:50 AM
You don't know the Oakland Raiders? What? How bout the Cowboys? You gotta know them? Everyone knows the Dallas Cowboys right?

You complain about America not givin a crap forieng sports but you don't what the hell NFL is? :rolleyes:

I'm afraid I follow real football, as played all over Europe, South America, Africa and Asia - not a sport that is only popular in one part of the world. Ask me about Arsenal, Real Madrid or even River Plate and I will happily talk about it for hours :)

G O
09-13-2004, 10:59 AM
I'm afraid I follow real football, as played all over Europe, South America, Africa and Asia - not a sport that is only popular in one part of the world. Ask me about Arsenal, Real Madrid or even River Plate and I will happily talk about it for hours :)


No Raiders? :sad:

Did you know the greatest athlete in the world plays in the NFL? See you guys probably think I watch NFL because it's American (bad word) but you couldn't be more wrong. I watch NFL because they and "real football" have the best athletes in all of sports.

RexEverything
09-13-2004, 11:31 AM
No Raiders? :sad:

Did you know the greatest athlete in the world plays in the NFL? See you guys probably think I watch NFL because it's American (bad word) but you couldn't be more wrong. I watch NFL because they and "real football" have the best athletes in all of sports.

Don't you think it's a bit difficult to say what the "best" athletes are? IMO there are too many aspects one could consider when describing an athletes abilities.

G O
09-13-2004, 11:39 AM
Yes, I think it is difficult. In Football (NFL) you will find all these traits, same is true with "real football". This doesn't mean an athlete such as Roger Federer couldn't make it in both and still be a star.

I have seen the closest thing yet to the "ideal athlete", he's in the NFL and plays QB for Atlanta.

RexEverything
09-13-2004, 11:44 AM
Yeah, I heard of that guy, Michael Vick. But what makes him such an outstanding athlete in your opinion?

Auscon
09-13-2004, 11:47 AM
But I'll argure with you.:O:

Spoken from someone who plays NFL video games and "usually" watches the superbowl each year.

I want to correct what I said. I didn't mean that the rugby guys are weak. No way! If fact if THEY played NFL, THEY would be doing alot of damage out there, but they wouldn't be doing shit without the helmets! You need helmets in NFL.

Well I get foxsportsworld network and get to see rugby year round and it's a joke what your saying. NFL players where helmets because if they don't they will literally die! That's what I we were saying.

In terms of physicality, rugby beats NFL, but NFL all in all is more dangerous. People who don't watch NFL love to joke about the helmets and padding, but if they didn't where that stuff many guys would be seriously hurt possibly dead.

I've seen plenty more nfl than the superbowl, only in the last 5/6 years has it been the only time I've really gotten to see gridiron

I used to defend gridiron to my friends when I was a kid, and was all into gridiron/basketball/baseball, but ive been singing a different tune for a long time

So ok, I'll hear it out, just explain to me why its so much more dangerous that they need helments/padding etc

G O
09-13-2004, 12:12 PM
Yeah, I heard of that guy, Michael Vick. But what makes him such an outstanding athlete in your opinion?


This guy is the reason I watch NFL. Vick and Federer are my prototypes for the "ideal athlete".

Both Vick and Federer are about the same "natural" size. Federer is listed around 6'1 177 and Vick 6'0 215. I say natural size because about 20lbs of Vick's wieght is muscle added to compete in the NFL. So I would guess he's around 195. This is significant because too heavy (over 200lbs) and too tall (over 6'2) results in decreases in speed and agility. If Vick were to drop down to closer to his natural weight while keeping some of that muscle he's be scary.

Vick's one of the fastest men in the NFL. Many NFL receivers and QB's have world-class speed, Vick is one of them. But sprinter speed isn't what makes him special, it's his muscle twitch and balance. Roger's muscle twitch (rate of muslce contraction) is not nearly the speed of Vick's but Roger has other skills that Vick may not possess. If Vick played tennis he would look like a drug-saturated version of Lleyton Hewitt if you follow me.

Both Vick and Federer have excellent flexiblity and body awareness. I think Roger is more of a "loose" mover than Vick. Roger moves with the least amount of voluntary muscle tension than many of the worlds top athletes thus the "whippy, lazy" look.

Both guys are 6'0ft and over yet move like their little guys. Very important trait. If you watch roger he doesn't bend his knees, but rather dips the hips, there's a huge difference! Vick does this too.

Iv'e seen guys who are taller but slower, shorter and quick but not enough strengh, what Vick and Federer have is a nice balance of many qualities of the ideal athlete. And everything they do seems to look better than everyone else.

G O
09-13-2004, 12:25 PM
I've seen plenty more nfl than the superbowl, only in the last 5/6 years has it been the only time I've really gotten to see gridiron

I used to defend gridiron to my friends when I was a kid, and was all into gridiron/basketball/baseball, but ive been singing a different tune for a long time

So ok, I'll hear it out, just explain to me why its so much more dangerous that they need helments/padding etc


Well, I'm not going to get too deep into this because people will start to complain it's not tennis, but I'll touch on some things.

For one, in rugby there's less open field hitting. Open field shots where a receiver has the ball and is struck down by two or more defenders running full blast at you (sometimes head first) make it an ugly sport.

Probably the main reason american football is more dangerous than rugby is the fact that the ball carrier has to hold on to the ball when he sees five guys about to decapite him. In rugby the ball carrier has the option of passing it before getting killed.

Those a couple reasons.

Auscon
09-13-2004, 12:52 PM
They hold and get it plenty in Rugby.....and its because of the option to pass that makes the game more freeflowing, which simply means guys are getting hit alot more often, and when youve got plenty of guys bearing down on you, youve gotta hold onto that ball because far more often than not, that option to pass isnt there.....otherwise your either going to be the villain and turn it over, or send a hospital pass to a teammate, which I'm sure plenty of quarterbacks have had their wide receivers hit the dirt for

Although, plenty of times its probably been the helmets themselves that have lead to injury....well, that and an opponents busy fingers grabbing the facemask while your on the run

The rugby scrum doesnt help the health of the guys either....if that pack starts to rise up, and your one of the front rowers, if people dont pull off youve got a very good chance of having your spine snapped...happened to one of our guys during the World Cup this year, but no padding or helmets can stop those possibilities of damage

Have you ever had the chance to see Australian Rules Football? In my opinion its much more dangerous than Rugby, and a hellova lot better to watch

Fondueischguät
09-13-2004, 02:24 PM
Auscon, those are very good counterarguments and well backed up, though AFL has got a lot softer in recent years, than in the old days.

RonJeremy
09-13-2004, 03:26 PM
Interesting debate about the respective merits of NFL and rugby/AFL.

Back to the topic I wonder how bad the TV ratings where for Super Saturday and the men's final?

At least the USTA guy was close with the Kuznetsov mistake, while still not in the league of Christine Henin-Hardenne, then while calling Svetlana a man isn't very good, and his patronising tone to Hewitt just after he was chopped by Federer, and they didn't give the players enough time to speak.

The tournament wasn't a complete joke, though the finals were funny for their own reasons.

Auscon
09-13-2004, 03:32 PM
Auscon, those are very good counterarguments and well backed up, though AFL has got a lot softer in recent years, than in the old days.

the games gotten alot faster, and when you consider the amount of injuries teams have these days, if the high levels of biff from the old days were still around, there would probably be more players injured than not :)

Although I'm sure theres plenty of guys out there who would love to get stuck into it like the old days (ie Brown, Mooney), with cameras watching over ever patch, they just dont get the light of day :)

Auscon
09-13-2004, 03:35 PM
while calling Svetlana a man isn't very good, and his patronising tone to Hewitt just after he was chopped by Federer, and they didn't give the players enough time to speak.


While I was just able to roll my eyes at the stupid mistake with Kusnetsovas name, it did piss me off when he was talking to/about Lleyton....he sensed it a bit of that from the crowd too, which is why he quickly added in "oh im a great fan, love the tenacity" etc

RonJeremy
09-13-2004, 03:37 PM
While I was just able to roll my eyes at the stupid mistake with Kusnetsovas name, it did piss me off when he was talking to/about Lleyton....he sensed it a bit of that from the crowd too, which is why he quickly added in "oh im a great fan, love the tenacity" etc

I am not Hewitt's biggest fan, but that was poor from that guy and Hewitt doesn't deserve to be patronised and I can't stand these people who try and hog the limelight at the expense of the finalists.

misyou25
09-13-2004, 04:00 PM
it is a joke- federer won against lleyton

RonJeremy
09-13-2004, 04:02 PM
it is a joke- federer won against lleyton

The only joke is the majority of your posts.

makro120
09-14-2004, 12:25 AM
I don't like very much sports where everyone has to have an ideal body, length and muscles and all that. i like variation, in tennis and futebol that is what you get. Also I want skills to be part of the game and not only muscles, Federer's strength lies in his excelent skills with the ball, his vision of the game, his sensitive hands..

Ronaldinho, who is currently the best futebol player in the world, also just like Federer has a very good athletic body and runs very smooth on the pitch, but it is his extraordinary vision and touch on the ball which makes him the best.

In football one of the greatest players of all time was a 1.68 metres short, crafty built little man from Argentina named MAradonna. He would not have a chance in NFL, but in football his out of this world skills with the ball made him stand above everyone else and I think he could make it in tennis, even if tennis demands an ideal length between 1.75 and 1.95.

Many may watch sports because of the amazing athletes and to see how far you can reach with a human body (hopefuly without drugs).

I see sports to see artists, people who can make games look so beautiful, so smooth. That is why Ronaldinho and Federer are my favorite athletes at the moment, I even forget nationality in these questions, I go for them even when they face swedes.

I have seen NFL a couple of times (finals with those terrible, terrible breaks, cheerleaders, commercialism, Janet JAckson breast, crazy american nationalism, proud to be american blahblahblah, MTV) and the only thing I couldn't find was artistery within the pitch with ultra powerfull athletes running against each other and braking bones.