zenica Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Of course, the best actual player Roger Federer has won. Tennis spor needs world stars and athlets with charisma. What does it mean for tennis world when Baghdatis would have won? Whole Cyprus has about ten courts (without the private ones). In Melbourne they´ve played 42,000 balls... Let´s see if Baghdatis can conserve his success for the next weeks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 It would have been a remarkable story. An unheralded player knocks out three of the world's top ten on the way to the final then beats the world number one in the final? What a story that would have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Agreed, but what does this mean for world tennis? We don´t have charismatic players like Agassi, Borg etc. It might be a mayfly which is actually a sensation but fall down very fast. We need people that bring the young people to tennis and not to other games like golf. Tennis is a sport with a lot of power and ideal for the youth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westfale Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 It would have been a remarkable story. An unheralded player knocks out three of the world's top ten on the way to the final then beats the world number one in the final? What a story that would have been. Like Boris Becker in the 1980´s in Wimbledon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Though I enjoy watching Federer play, I have to admit I was supporting the underdog this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Rols Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Yes, it's a pity the fairytale didn't play out to the end _ it's stories like those that are the sweetest of sport. Despite what you say, Zenica, it is fairytales like that that bring people to sport. Everyone loves an underdog, and everyone would love to emulate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 29, 2006 Report Share Posted January 29, 2006 Agreed, but what does this mean for world tennis? We don´t have charismatic players like Agassi, Borg etc. It might be a mayfly which is actually a sensation but fall down very fast. We need people that bring the young people to tennis and not to other games like golf. Tennis is a sport with a lot of power and ideal for the youth. You are joking, right. Men's tennis is stronger in depth than ever before. I hardly think people like Andy Roddick and Lleyton Hewitt are dull. And while we're talking about charisma, Pete Sampras would probably not put that high on his list of personal qualities either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 Sure, but tennis needs people like Becker, McEnroe etc. We need big idols to bring the youth into this sport not the underdogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 I'll put the names of Federer, Roddick and Hewitt to you again. They are the stars of tennis today. Live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted January 31, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 i LOVED the OZZIE OPEn...loved it!! fantastic place is melbourne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Federer and Safin are my favourite players on the men's side so i am happy to see Federer win again. Hopefully he can come out of the Roland Garros on top this year and do somethine Sampras never did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 He's got the game for clay that Sampras never did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 For tennis, a worldwide known sport, there a more than a few necessary. There are hundreds of thousand junior players where there a few the stars of tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 It's all very well talking about future stars, but there's a superstar at the top of the game right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted February 1, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 hingis jumps 200 odd places to 117, kills a qualifier 6-0 6-0 in the first round of the pan pacific open...top 10 soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 We will see. Let's see where she is come the end of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 i could easily see Hingis winning Roland Garros if her game continues to improve. That surface is far better for her than the hard court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Let´s see how things go the next few monthes, after Daviscup 1st round, Roland Garros and Wimbledon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 i could easily see Hingis winning Roland Garros if her game continues to improve. That surface is far better for her than the hard court The one Grand Slam she hasn't one if I remember rightly. Is her game really suited to clay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 If Hingis can improve her skills on clay she could win Roland Garros. She has shown in Melbourne that she is on the right way. All she needs is the experience after a long break and the physical condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 You don't forget how to play tennis, but she probably does need to get used to regular tournament play again. Having said that, she doesn't seem to be doing so badly right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 i could easily see Hingis winning Roland Garros if her game continues to improve. That surface is far better for her than the hard court The one Grand Slam she hasn't one if I remember rightly. Is her game really suited to clay? clay is more forgiving, and not as hard on the knees as hard court or grass - it makes it a good surface for her this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 every player has to prove his/her quality on the different surfaces in the venues. When they want to win the Grand Slam they have to show what they are able to do on these different surfaces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arwebb Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 Hingis has won three of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenica Posted February 2, 2006 Report Share Posted February 2, 2006 She was very close to get also the 4th. But in 1999 she lost the match against Steffi Graf. Hingis dominated have the match but then Hingis lost control and Graf had the better psychological experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.