US Open

[1Parker1]

I can't believe there isn't a thread on this in here...no one likes tennis???

I'm looking forward to Federer vs. Roddick...for the first time in a while Roddick is actually healthy and looking like he did back in 03 when he last won the title.

Maria Sharapova, defending US Open champ, outsted in the 3rd round today by a rookie 18 year old.

Who are you guys rooting for?

[Whisky Dog]

Dude, tennis died with the retirements of Sampras and Agassi. It's no longer interesting because Federer is the biggest bad ass and wins everything. He needs a serious rival for tennis to be revived again. Until then, let it lay dead in silence.

[SAtown]

There's always a thread about grand slams. I'm just as surprised there wasn't one about the US Open yet. And no, tennis is not dead in any way.

[1Parker1]

Tennis is not dead...in fact Roger Federer may single-handedly be reviving it again. Have you seen him play?? His game is near perfection and just amazing to watch...even someone who doesn't understand tennis can watch it and understand this.

Besides, Federer isn't completely unbeatable...he's going to have some tough competition this Open...Nadal or Roddick are playing at very high levels and can beat him (though Roddick has yet to do it).

[1Parker1]

Oh and I love how there's 13 responses to a thread about David Beckham injuring himself again..surprise surprise! US Open has got to be more enticing than that at least!!! :lol

[Whisky Dog]

Tennis is not dead...in fact Roger Federer may single-handedly be reviving it again. Have you seen him play?? His game is near perfection and just amazing to watch...even someone who doesn't understand tennis can watch it and understand this.

Besides, Federer isn't completely unbeatable...he's going to have some tough competition this Open...Nadal or Roddick are playing at very high levels and can beat him (though Roddick has yet to do it).


Yes, I have seen him play. That's why most people don't watch it, there's no suspense. The guy is by far a bigger beast to his sport than Tiger Woods is to golf, he just basically wins everything he plays.

You don't understand what I mean by tennis is dead. Of course the sport could never be completely dead as long as people are playing it, but interest has decreased on a widespread level severely because there aren't great matchups. Roddick is a flake, and Nadal only stands a chance at Federer on clay. There's nobody to challenge Federer, and that doesn't make for an interesting competition. Therefore, tennis is dead.

[Whisky Dog]

Oh and I love how there's 13 responses to a thread about David Beckham injuring himself again..surprise surprise! US Open has got to be more enticing than that at least!!! :lol

The reason there are that many responses is because I said that Beckham is half assing it and collecting the money and Hollywood life in LA, and the Beckham apologists rush to attempt to clear his good name.

The only reason this thread has any responses are because I correctly stated that tennis is dead.

[1Parker1]

:lol So what are you trying to say? Because Federer has no competition or challenger, the outcome of every tennis match is basically set?

Were fans thinking the same thing about the NBA, that it was dead, when Jordan was winning 6 straight years back in the 90's. I mean, no team was ever challenging them, you kinda knew they were going to win it and the Jazz would always choke. So did people think the NBA was dead or did they watch because they knew they were watching one of the greatest players in the history of the sport????

[Whisky Dog]

:lol So what are you trying to say? Because Federer has no competition or challenger, the outcome of every tennis match is basically set?

Were fans thinking the same thing about the NBA, that it was dead, when Jordan was winning 6 straight years back in the 90's. I mean, no team was ever challenging them, you kinda knew they were going to win it and the Jazz would always choke. So did people think the NBA was dead or did they watch because they knew they were watching one of the greatest players in the history of the sport????

People watched because Jordan was a larger than life figure that was marketed in an extremely effective manner. He became the NY Yankees by himself - you either watched him because you loved him or you watched him because you hated him and wanted to see him lose. Federer is a likeable guy who doesn't command that kind of emotion in people. I'm not saying that every match he enters he wins, but it's practically every match. Also, most of the matches he wins aren't very close. If a great tennis star with a polarizing personality arouse to legitimately challenge Federer then tennis would be relevant again to the masses. Agassi was that flamboyant guy to Sampras's working class hero in the 90's, and that was the last time tennis was really big.

[Whisky Dog]

You're looking at it all wrong. You started this thread asking why no one was talking about US Open tennis, and the reason is because tennis is dead to the masses. People care more about preseason NFL football and FIBA basketball than tennis.

[1Parker1]

You're looking at it all wrong. You started this thread asking why no one was talking about US Open tennis, and the reason is because tennis is dead to the masses. People care more about preseason NFL football and FIBA basketball than tennis.

Well, maybe you're right...but by "no one" I just meant people in this forum...I know tennis isn't that popular to watch for the masses, but I do recall last year there were quite a few avid tennis fans and a big thread on the Open and Wimbleton on this forum.

[SAtown]

Dude, tennis died with the retirements of Sampras and Agassi. It's no longer interesting because Federer is the biggest bad ass and wins everything. He needs a serious rival for tennis to be revived again. Until then, let it lay dead in silence.


Just because 'Americans' aren't dominating the sport, doesn't mean it's "dead."

[Brutalis]

yeah its fucked up. the usa is open to anyone, and all these illegals end up staying too. good point and thread!

[SAtown]

yeah its fucked up. the usa is open to anyone, and all these illegals end up staying too. good point and thread!

:lmao

would've been better in the Political Forum

[MajorMike]

They still play tennis to keep it warm for Andre and Steffi's boy.

[Whisky Dog]

Besides, Federer isn't completely unbeatable...he's going to have some tough competition this Open...Nadal or Roddick are playing at very high levels and can beat him (though Roddick has yet to do it).

Nadal flakes as usual and loses to a nobody, and Roddick proves to be probably the biggest flake waste of talent in the history of American tennis. Federer just toyed with the boy until finishing him off in straight sets. Federer is a shark in a guppie tank, and without any other sharks around it's not even interesting.

Seriously, how bad is Roddick? After coming off of heart and guts champions like Agassi and Sampras, how in the hell is this bitch Roddick America's tennis hope? That's pathetic.

[loveThe23]

i agree, 1Parker.. hardly any discussion on tennis, :depressed

anyone see the game tonight, Djokovic vs. Mayo? so it's now Novak Djokovic vs. Nadal, this should be a great match. :hungry:
Novak is amazing... hes only like 20 and hes beating all these veterans. bring it on baby, i can't wait for this match...

and the Venus vs. Justine one should be really good.

[SAtown]

i agree, 1Parker.. hardly any discussion on tennis, :depressed

anyone see the game tonight, Djokovic vs. Mayo? so it's now Novak Djokovic vs. Nadal, this should be a great match. :hungry:
Novak is amazing... hes only like 20 and hes beating all these veterans. bring it on baby, i can't wait for this match...

and the Venus vs. Justine one should be really good.

Nadal is out, Ferrer beat him in the 4th round

[L.I.T]

Eh, I haven't been able to watch too much.

I did catch the Federer/Roddick match. Connors has the right idea in turning Roddick into a serve and volley player. The problem is Roddick just doesn't have the footspeed or the instincts to be a dominant serve and volley player; and he doesn't have the reflexes to handle Federer at the net, at all.

Give Roddick another year developing his serve and volley game and I think he might be able to press Federer a bit more. But as it is right now, Federer at his best is just a level or three above Roddick on his best day. Sad really.

[L.I.T]

Nadal is out, Ferrer beat him in the 4th round

I was a bit disappointed by this. Based on Nadal's play this year, I was hoping this would be finally be his real breakout on a hardcourt grand slam; alas injuries.

[jay014]

Eh,I haven't been able to watch too much also because they're all a bunch of fags, yall actually watch this shit.

[smeagol]

Tennis is not dead.

Nadal kicks Federer's ass in clay. 50% of the ATP tournaments are played on clay.

And I agree with Roddick being a fluke. His best days are over and he is only 25?

[smeagol]

Eh,I haven't been able to watch too much also because they're all a bunch of fags, yall actually watch this shit.

You would probably get along with the poster known as pewee's lovechild

[DarkReign]

Tennis is an excellent sport. I love watching it.

But it kinda sucks to watch a movie when you know the ending.

Federer in 4 sets.

[resistanze]

V. Williams and J. Henin is shaping up to be a great match.

6-5 Williams, she made a nice comeback facing set point.

[resistanze]

Henin dominates in tiebreak. Don't know if Venus can recover.

[1Parker1]

Roddick: I have a feeling he'd be winning a lot more Slams if a certain guy named Federer wasn't always in his way. Yes, Roddick has weaknesses in his game, but he isn't exactly a scrub...if he played the way he played against Federer the other day, he'd be able to beat at least 98% of the competition...just not Federer :lol


And Novak's post game interview was hilarious with him doing imitations of Nadal and Sharapova...he was right on! Did anyone else catch that?

[Shaka]

I come from China,but our sports channel CCTV5 doesn't concern much about the US OPEN.
BTW:I like Andy Roddick

[dbreiden83080]

Roddick: I have a feeling he'd be winning a lot more Slams if a certain guy named Federer wasn't always in his way. Yes, Roddick has weaknesses in his game, but he isn't exactly a scrub...if he played the way he played against Federer the other day, he'd be able to beat at least 98% of the competition...just not Federer :lol


And Novak's post game interview was hilarious with him doing imitations of Nadal and Sharapova...he was right on! Did anyone else catch that?

Roddick is a heck of a player he just gets no respect because he is playing in the Federer era and can't beat him ever. He has been to the Wimbledon finals twice the US open final last year, losing to yeah you guessed it. If not for Roger he would be in the discussion of all time great American players but with Roger seeing to it he never wins slams that is never going to happen.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu7OKS9fU14

Djokovic is hilarious

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Roddick is a heck of a player he just gets no respect because he is playing in the Federer era and can't beat him ever. He has been to the Wimbledon finals twice the US open final last year, losing to yeah you guessed it. If not for Roger he would be in the discussion of all time great American players but with Roger seeing to it he never wins slams that is never going to happen.bull... Roddick is a decent tennis player, nothing exceptional. You can't compare him with any All Time great American players, are you shiting me?? With Sampras? Connors? Agassi? McEnroe? Roddick isn't even worthy of being named in the same freaking paragraph as all those, no matter what era he's playing in. You're delusional buddy

[Whisky Dog]

Roddick: I have a feeling he'd be winning a lot more Slams if a certain guy named Federer wasn't always in his way. Yes, Roddick has weaknesses in his game, but he isn't exactly a scrub...if he played the way he played against Federer the other day, he'd be able to beat at least 98% of the competition...just not Federer :lol


And Novak's post game interview was hilarious with him doing imitations of Nadal and Sharapova...he was right on! Did anyone else catch that?


Yes you are right, because Roddick only loses to Federer and never drops matches to weak ass, unranked players who should have no business winning.

Shit, COME ON!! Roddick drops those all the time because he's a flake. Get real and get a clue.

[smeagol]

Federer might simply be the best tennis player ever.

[dbreiden83080]

bull... Roddick is a decent tennis player, nothing exceptional. You can't compare him with any All Time great American players, are you shiting me?? With Sampras? Connors? Agassi? McEnroe? Roddick isn't even worthy of being named in the same freaking paragraph as all those, no matter what era he's playing in. You're delusional buddy

Dial it down a notch jackass. In terms of accomplishments he would be in the discussion if not for Federer. Do i put him in there with Agassi or Mcenroe, no i don't, Connors i always thought was overated though. Don't sit there and tell me that if he had 3 or 4 slams right now which he would if not for Federer that he would not even be in the realm of those guys in most peoples minds because he would be.

GS titles.

McEnroe 7
Agassi 8
Connors 8

Andy would easily have 3 or 4 by now if not for Fed and did any of those guys face a guy like Fed in there day? No they didn't nobody ever has he is the best ever. Agassi had to deal with Sampras and even he is not on Fed's level. The only guy that could challenge him year in and year out would be Sampras. So again do i put him with some of those all time great players, no but he would be having a much greater career and be getting a lot more respect if he was not playing in the Roger Federer ERA.

[L.I.T]

I'm going to wade back into this, Andy Roddick may have 3 or 4 if not for Federer, but he isn't an all-time great player. He's on the same level as a Hewitt or a Ivanisovic. How many GS would Ivanisovic have if not for Sampras and Agassi?

Roddick is a very talented player; but in no uncertain terms, no matter what he would not be considered a great. This very argument is why I consider this era to be one of the weakest top to bottom in terms of men's talent.

Roddick is Greg Rusedski or Mark Philoppousis (sp) or Richard Krijeck. Big service, big forehand...average (for pros) the rest of his game.

[dbreiden83080]

I'm going to wade back into this, Andy Roddick may have 3 or 4 if not for Federer, but he isn't an all-time great player. He's on the same level as a Hewitt or a Ivanisovic. How many GS would Ivanisovic have if not for Sampras and Agassi?


I agree with you that he is not an all time great overall. However i do think he would be in the conversation of an all time great American player. Not as good as Mac or Agassi or even Connors but if he had say 4 GS by age 25 i don't think it is fair to say he is nowhere close to them, just like it is not fair to say Rog is easily the best ever because who knows how many GS he would have if Pete was still in his prime. I do think Roger is the best ever but he does not have 12 GS in 4 years if Pete were around. I know you and i also disagree about the level of depth in the game today. I think it is quite strong and you don't. Agassi himself though at the open this year when talking about Fed commented on how amazing it is what he is doing because of the depth in the game.

[L.I.T]

I agree with you that he is not an all time great overall. However i do think he would be in the conversation of an all time great American player. Not as good as Mac or Agassi or even Connors but if he had say 4 GS by age 25 i don't think it is fair to say he is nowhere close to them, just like it is not fair to say Rog is easily the best ever because who knows how many GS he would have if Pete was still in his prime. I do think Roger is the best ever but he does not have 12 GS in 4 years if Pete were around. I know you and i also disagree about the level of depth in the game today. I think it is quite strong and you don't. Agassi himself though at the open this year when talking about Fed commented on how amazing it is what he is doing because of the depth in the game.

Good point.

Actually, I just get annoyed with Roddick. He seems like he has the talent, but it's like he's missing some fundamental aspect of his game that allows him to win consistently. I wish Connors could switch his instincts with Roddicks; jeez that would be a great player.

I enjoyed listening to Agassi during the tournament; he's a classy guy and I don't think is going to say anything negative about any generation. My favorite crack of his was when he said he married the greatest forehand in history.

Re: Connors (just read that). I've always thought he was slightly overrated; his record in the Slams was not nearly as impressive as his record in other tournaments. That being said, the guy had a serious flair for the dramatic; which is why he ended up being more of a tennis hero and icon than other players of his period.