Ultimate question : your opinion about USO 03 semi-final [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Ultimate question : your opinion about USO 03 semi-final

freeandlonely
09-13-2010, 02:54 AM
I swear this is the last time this case I ask.

(1)A.Agassi
(3)J.C.Ferrero
Ferrero 6-4 6-3 3-6 6-4

(4)A.Roddick
(13)D.Nalbandian
Roddick 6-7(4) 3-6 7-6(7) 6-1 6-3




Roddick 6-3 7-6(2) 6-3

SheepleBuster
09-13-2010, 02:55 AM
I swear this is the last time this case I ask.
Roddick hit a shot on match point that was clearly out but the challenge system was not there. Nalbandian got screwed.

fed invented god
09-13-2010, 03:03 AM
one of the biggest thefts ever, not only because off the match point, but also regarding the level of play

pray-for-palestine-and-israel
09-13-2010, 03:06 AM
what you dont mention is how much of a bitch fat dave turned into

handing the match to roddick even tho it was still his to win

he has no one to blame but himself

and if his other final appearance is anything to go by, its probably a good thing he didnt make the final

LaFuria
09-13-2010, 03:07 AM
David was robbed.

He hasn't been the same since. :sad:

cutesteve22
09-13-2010, 03:13 AM
Roddick didn't deserve the champion

DartMarcus
09-13-2010, 03:14 AM
Non-Fedal thread? :eek: :worship:

FaceyFacem
09-13-2010, 03:15 AM
Roddick hit a shot on match point that was clearly out but the challenge system was not there. Nalbandian got screwed.

which point, like what was the exact score? i don't remember this being a controversy, but would be curious to see

youtubed it but not sure which the controversy is about

thanks!

SheepleBuster
09-13-2010, 03:19 AM
which point, like what was the exact score? i don't remember this being a controversy, but would be curious to see

youtubed it but not sure which the controversy is about

thanks!

It's 7 years ago my man. I don't remember which point. Maybe point #163?

tennis elbow
09-13-2010, 03:39 AM
Roddick hit a shot on match point that was clearly out but the challenge system was not there. Nalbandian got screwed.

Actually it was David who hit a passing shot that smacked the line on match-point and had it called out, thus robbing him of the match... there wasn't hawk-eye back then, but CBS had several cameras positioned around the court and had been providing until this point with different angles to the shots... weirdly enough, they never showed any other angle to this match point but the one opposite to the play,even though they had a camera placed facing that line, and quickly ignored Nalby's complain... by the way he reacted, Roddick also looked to know the ball was in...

SheepleBuster
09-13-2010, 03:45 AM
Actually it was David who hit a passing shot that smacked the line on match-point and had it called out, thus robbing him of the match... there wasn't hawk-eye back then, but CBS had several cameras positioned around the court and had been providing until this point with different angles to the shots... weirdly enough, they never showed any other angle to this match point but the one opposite to the play,even though they had a camera placed facing that line, and quickly ignored Nalby's complain... by the way he reacted, Roddick also looked to know the ball was in...

Yes. That's why I put an asterisk next to Roddick's win. He is a no slam wonder.

tennis elbow
09-13-2010, 04:00 AM
Yes. That's why I put an asterisk next to Roddick's win. He is a no slam wonder.

there was a great pressure on the USTA at that time to find the next great American champion after Agassi and Sampras, and the Press did believe Roddick was going to be a multiple Slam winner.. That year US Open schedule was ravaged by ongoing rains, and the USTA shamefully tweaked the schedule to benefit Roddick and harm his opponents... they would reserve the dry courts to Roddick's matches and even practice sessions while postponing other players' matches indefinitely, and as a result of that, Roddick had already finished his 4th round match while the Spaniards (Ferrero was considered his main opponent and the American Press had a special disgust for the so-called "claycourters" then) and South Americans were still waiting to finish their second round match... I do not think the USTA would have got away with this scheme today, but at that time, there wasn't a player that could deliver on both clay and fast courts like we have today in Nadal, and the English speaking Media had a special dislike for whomever could not perform on the US Open or Wimbledon...

guptaji
09-13-2010, 04:04 AM
Actually it was David who hit a passing shot that smacked the line on match-point and had it called out, thus robbing him of the match... there wasn't hawk-eye back then, but CBS had several cameras positioned around the court and had been providing until this point with different angles to the shots... weirdly enough, they never showed any other angle to this match point but the one opposite to the play,even though they had a camera placed facing that line, and quickly ignored Nalby's complain... by the way he reacted, Roddick also looked to know the ball was in...

Both of you are wrong:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI

It wasn't NEARLY as dramatic as you guys recall. Roddick responded to M.P. with an ace. At 7-7, Nalbandian's passing shot was called out by someone in the crowd, and not by the linesman - which distracted him and he lost the point.

freeandlonely
09-13-2010, 04:13 AM
what you dont mention is how much of a bitch fat dave turned into

handing the match to roddick even tho it was still his to win

he has no one to blame but himself

and if his other final appearance is anything to go by, its probably a good thing he didnt make the final


Yes I seriously give much credit to Roddick like Federer have mentiond enough times.
Yes so far Roddick is only behind Federer, Nadal, Hewitt, and Safin achievement-wise this generation while Djokovic is above Nalbandian and yes you can also put JMDP, Murray, Davydenko above Nalbandian if you like.
Yes Nalbandian should blame himself to hell.
Yes Nalbandian has beers, racing cars, fishes, hamburgers and everything in front of him, which is why Nadal can't believe he still has no slam, also part of why, Safin, who has fucking talent and only two slams.
But no. Nalbandian is not Gaston Gaudio, who, is in super-bipolar-mode to beat Coria, which is by far the best tragedy than any single one William Shakespeare could have ever imagine in his life.
But no. I'm talking about truth.

Winston's Human
09-13-2010, 04:40 AM
there was a great pressure on the USTA at that time to find the next great American champion after Agassi and Sampras, and the Press did believe Roddick was going to be a multiple Slam winner.. That year US Open schedule was ravaged by ongoing rains, and the USTA shamefully tweaked the schedule to benefit Roddick and harm his opponents... they would reserve the dry courts to Roddick's matches and even practice sessions while postponing other players' matches indefinitely, and as a result of that, Roddick had already finished his 4th round match while the Spaniards (Ferrero was considered his main opponent and the American Press had a special disgust for the so-called "claycourters" then) and South Americans were still waiting to finish their second round match... I do not think the USTA would have got away with this scheme today, but at that time, there wasn't a player that could deliver on both clay and fast courts like we have today in Nadal, and the English speaking Media had a special dislike for whomever could not perform on the US Open or Wimbledon...

You are incorrect about players waiting to finish their second round matches while Roddick played his fourth round match. In fact, Roddick's Friday night match with Ljubicic was the last-played second round match.

bleu_cheese
09-13-2010, 05:25 AM
I feel like there is a lesson to be learned here about remembering the past...but I forgot what it was.

scarecrows
09-13-2010, 05:34 AM
a tragedy that Agassi lost to that mug

General Suburbia
09-13-2010, 05:52 AM
Actually it was David who hit a passing shot that smacked the line on match-point and had it called out, thus robbing him of the match... there wasn't hawk-eye back then, but CBS had several cameras positioned around the court and had been providing until this point with different angles to the shots... weirdly enough, they never showed any other angle to this match point but the one opposite to the play,even though they had a camera placed facing that line, and quickly ignored Nalby's complain... by the way he reacted, Roddick also looked to know the ball was in...
It's amazing how people make shit up and post them as facts. None of these things happened.

Roddickominator
09-13-2010, 08:40 AM
lmao @ this thread

People literally making things up out of thin air because they like Nalbandian or dislike Roddick. Never in doubt for MTF though.

BlueSwan
09-13-2010, 09:04 AM
Non-Fedal thread? :eek: :worship:
I suppose we could argue that if Fat Dave had won this match, Federer would have ended 2003 as number 1 instead of Roddick, equalling Sampras' 6 years as year-end #1 and eclipsing his overall weeks-at-#1 record.

So there...

holagirl56
09-13-2010, 10:47 AM
:lol:

bless this thread

*bunny*
09-13-2010, 11:18 AM
there was a great pressure on the USTA at that time to find the next great American champion after Agassi and Sampras, and the Press did believe Roddick was going to be a multiple Slam winner.. That year US Open schedule was ravaged by ongoing rains, and the USTA shamefully tweaked the schedule to benefit Roddick and harm his opponents... they would reserve the dry courts to Roddick's matches and even practice sessions while postponing other players' matches indefinitely, and as a result of that, Roddick had already finished his 4th round match while the Spaniards (Ferrero was considered his main opponent and the American Press had a special disgust for the so-called "claycourters" then) and South Americans were still waiting to finish their second round match... I do not think the USTA would have got away with this scheme today, but at that time, there wasn't a player that could deliver on both clay and fast courts like we have today in Nadal, and the English speaking Media had a special dislike for whomever could not perform on the US Open or Wimbledon...
JCF had to play four days in a row from R4 to the final because of the rain in the second week and the unfair USTA decisions to first dry the main courts where Americans were playing.
Ferrero finished the suspended R4 match against Todd Martin (a five setter) on Thursday; beat Hewitt in QF on Friday; beat No. 1 Agassi in SF on Saturday (thereby securing the top spot in the rankings the following week); and faced Roddick in the final on Sunday. By then poor Juan Carlos had nothing left in the tank. He was seeded #3 but didn't have a chance to play on the Ashe until SF! :(

Yeah I think Nalbandian was robbed of the place in the final, but I don't agree with those who seem to think Nalby would have been a lock for the title if he reached the final. The result could have gone either way had JCF and Nalby met in the final because they were equally tired. JC might even have had an edge; he had already won a slam and he was playing lights out tennis, both on clay and hard courts!

Puschkin
09-13-2010, 11:20 AM
JCF had to play four days in a row from R4 to the final because of the rain in the second week and the unfair USTA decisions to first dry the main courts where Americans were playing.

This! I'll never forget how annoyed I was at the time about the scheduling.

San Rosso
09-13-2010, 11:21 AM
That's not how it happened, first of all it was not at match point, they were tied (he got one match point which Roddick aced away) at 6-6 or 7-7 and there was some guy in the crowd calling Nalbandian's ball out that's why he was distracted and missed the ball after that, that's why Roddick got set point and won the set.

tennishero
09-13-2010, 11:32 AM
nalbandian also hit the line on break point in the 5th set, but it was called out, allowing roddick to serve for the match.

it wasnt just one point, it was many. nalbandian was put off his game by the constant bad calls and :retard: crowd.

kooties
09-13-2010, 11:39 AM
Yes I seriously give much credit to Roddick like Federer have mentiond enough times.
Yes so far Roddick is only behind Federer, Nadal, Hewitt, and Safin achievement-wise this generation while Djokovic is above Nalbandian and yes you can also put JMDP, Murray, Davydenko above Nalbandian if you like.
Yes Nalbandian should blame himself to hell.
Yes Nalbandian has beers, racing cars, fishes, hamburgers and everything in front of him, which is why Nadal can't believe he still has no slam, also part of why, Safin, who has fucking talent and only two slams.
But no. Nalbandian is not Gaston Gaudio, who, is in super-bipolar-mode to beat Coria, which is by far the best tragedy than any single one William Shakespeare could have ever imagine in his life.
But no. I'm talking about truth.

:worship: That's almost heya-like.

LoveFifteen
09-13-2010, 01:07 PM
:rolls: @ all the bullshit and total nonsense in this thread. If Nalbandian were so great and Roddick were so pathetic, Nalbandian would have more of everything than Roddick: more Slam finals, more titles, more wins, more prize money.

The only thing he has more of is fat rolls. :shrug:

Nalbandian used to be one of my favorite players, but he wasted his talent, something he has loads more of than Roddick. Shame on him for being so lazy and undisciplined. He should have achieved loads more than Roddick. Instead, history won't even remember him.

freeandlonely
09-13-2010, 01:30 PM
:rolls: @ all the bullshit and total nonsense in this thread. If Nalbandian were so great and Roddick were so pathetic, Nalbandian would have more of everything than Roddick: more Slam finals, more titles, more wins, more prize money.

The only thing he has more of is fat rolls. :shrug:

Nalbandian used to be one of my favorite players, but he wasted his talent, something he has loads more of than Roddick. Shame on him for being so lazy and undisciplined. He should have achieved loads more than Roddick. Instead, history won't even remember him.

Yes. But let's just discuss all the scenario.

OnyxRose
09-13-2010, 02:25 PM
It's amazing how people make shit up and post them as facts. None of these things happened.

The bull**** in this thread is unbelievable. Even if the call would have affected Nalbandian (The ball hit on Roddick's side) what prevented him from winning the next two sets? Nalbandian was a lazy headcase who underachieved. I think it's time people face facts.

~*BGT*~
09-13-2010, 02:28 PM
Andy's ace on MP was in.

Action Jackson
09-13-2010, 02:29 PM
Joke scheduling.

bluefork
09-13-2010, 02:40 PM
Joke scheduling.

This. Nalbandian may or may not have been robbed on match point, but he still had a commanding lead that he let slip away. That was his own fault.

But the scheduling really screwed Ferrero while Roddick was comparatively well rested. Maybe Roddick would still have won the final, but the USTA made sure he had the clear advantage.

peribsen
09-13-2010, 02:57 PM
David was robbed.

Roddick didn't deserve the champion

Tough words. When you are trailing two sets to love, it's rather cheap to say a bad call menas you're robbed of much. I can understand your being irritated by that, but please don't make it sound like if it happened on the 5th set TB!!

Stop whinning about it, .. or I menace to start sending thread after thread on how Nadal was robbed in the Toronto SF this year by a bad call and Murray didn't deserve the championship... (which I won't, because it would be humbug).

Those things are part of the game, get over it.

Action Jackson
09-13-2010, 02:59 PM
This. Nalbandian may or may not have been robbed on match point, but he still had a commanding lead that he let slip away. That was his own fault.

But the scheduling really screwed Ferrero while Roddick was comparatively well rested. Maybe Roddick would still have won the final, but the USTA made sure he had the clear advantage.

Of course it's only Nalbandian's fault and they should have played the final on Monday. Even though Roddick was just as likely to win it.

Merton
09-13-2010, 03:38 PM
Ferrero totally got the shaft there, Andy was a bad matchup for him anyway but he was dead on his feet on the final and he wouldn't stand a chance against Nalbandian either.

freeandlonely
09-18-2010, 02:31 PM
bump

thrust
09-18-2010, 03:42 PM
Yes I seriously give much credit to Roddick like Federer have mentiond enough times.
Yes so far Roddick is only behind Federer, Nadal, Hewitt, and Safin achievement-wise this generation while Djokovic is above Nalbandian and yes you can also put JMDP, Murray, Davydenko above Nalbandian if you like.
Yes Nalbandian should blame himself to hell.
Yes Nalbandian has beers, racing cars, fishes, hamburgers and everything in front of him, which is why Nadal can't believe he still has no slam, also part of why, Safin, who has fucking talent and only two slams.
But no. Nalbandian is not Gaston Gaudio, who, is in super-bipolar-mode to beat Coria, which is by far the best tragedy than any single one William Shakespeare could have ever imagine in his life.
But no. I'm talking about truth.

FANTASTIC POST! NOT SURE I QUITE UNDERSTAND IT BUT IT IS A CLASSIC JUST THE SAME.

Topspindoctor
09-18-2010, 04:04 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI

the controversial point starts at 8:30.

I think it should definitely have been replayed.

New Balls Please
09-19-2010, 07:31 AM
Actually, a fit (and at his peak) JCF would have had a better chance to win the final if he had played against Nalbandian (since Roddick is one of the worst matchups for Ferrero). If Nalbandian had won his SF in straight sets, he would have probably defeated a tired JCF. But I think Nalbandian injured himself late in the match against Roddick, so if he had won the SF in 5 sets, a tired JCF would have an advantage over an injured Nalbandian.

Also, had JCF won the final (hence assuming Roddick lost in SF/F), he would have ended no.1 in 2003.

So to me, the three-way battle for no.1 between Roddick/Federer/Ferrero was the most exciting end-of-year for tennis over the last decade.

Also, the rankings and points difference was so close that if they had adopted the current ranking system (2009-onwards) with the same results, the top 3 may also have been different, with the 0.6 vs 0.7 ratio of points in tournaments and also with the inclusion of Davis Cup points.

Shirogane
09-19-2010, 10:14 AM
a tragedy that Agassi lost to that mug

:lol:

Seriously though, it was a superb but physically taxing win over Andre. You want to beat him and win the Open on the same day – just ask Pete.

In the meantime, it was probably Agassi's best chance to win another USO title. :(