PDA

View Full Version : Federer will never win against Murray again


sureshs
01-09-2009, 10:51 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

fastdunn
01-09-2009, 10:56 AM
My prediction is :

Murray will need 5 sets to beat Federer in his 1st win at a slam though (unless Federer truely declines).

FraNkcn
01-09-2009, 10:57 AM
USO 2008

6-2, 7-5, 6-2 Fed > Murray, tells me otherwise.

Again, Federer is only concentrating most on the Slams (which are the most important tournaments), as he is wanting to surpass Sampras' record. I think a lot of people have said this but he just doesn't seem to put a lot of intensity in to the smaller tournaments, but rather, looks at those as a warm up and preparation for the big ones.

As to your claim, I guess we'll see..

Mick
01-09-2009, 11:00 AM
all of a sudden, the prospect of federer reclaiming the world's number 1 ranking is getting a lot tougher.

FraNkcn
01-09-2009, 11:09 AM
all of a sudden, the prospect of federer reclaiming the world's number 1 ranking is getting a lot tougher.

You could take that and say that, "The prospect of Nadal maintaining his World No. 1 Ranking is getting a lot tougher" as well???? ^^

deme08
01-09-2009, 11:10 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

No, Murray IS the NEW Federer. Let's all jump the bandwagon.

tennisgirl90
01-09-2009, 11:10 AM
Murray seems a very difficult match up for Federer, but all his losses were very tight, so I wouldn't say that. Federer won their only meeting in a Grand Slam and it's more difficult to beat Federer in a best-of-five-match. They have only played on hardcourt, so I'm very curious to see these two meeting on clay. IMO Federer is still the best claycourt-player after Nadal. I'm sure Murray will be a big contender in the future, but Federer will find a way to beat him now and then.

Turning Pro
01-09-2009, 11:11 AM
It was Murray's first GS Final. Look at Djokovic in U.S 07. His first then went on to destroy Fed in the AO 08. Except Djoker dosen't have enough fight and gameplan to consistently take out Fed (e.g US Open 08).

World Beater
01-09-2009, 11:12 AM
what is this crap about federer concentrating only on the slams? it is as if federer doesn't even try for the smaller tournaments.

federer badly wanted to win today...it was obvious...he tried his best and lost.

zoobears
01-09-2009, 11:17 AM
this is all bull crap. Federer is So much better than Murray. The only thing Murray is good at is playing a boring strategy against a half hearted Fed in exhibition matches and what are essentially warm up matches before grand slams.

tennisgirl90
01-09-2009, 11:18 AM
It was Murray's first GS Final. Look at Djokovic in U.S 07. His first then went on to destroy Fed in the AO 08. Except Djoker dosen't have enough fight and gameplan to consistently take out Fed (e.g US Open 08).

I know, but Murray hasn't proved yet he can Federer beat in a Grand Slam. I'm sure he is able to do it, but as long as he don't beat Federer in a Slam you have to be carefully with predictions like 'Federer will never beat Murray again'. Murray won four times in a row against Federer, but if he loses at the Australian Open to Federer when it really matters, that would be very embarrassing.

Fedace
01-09-2009, 11:22 AM
you guys have any interview of federere post match??

albino smurf
01-09-2009, 11:22 AM
OP: Even on grass? Doubtful.

GameSampras
01-09-2009, 11:35 AM
Murray continues improving, I would like Murray's chances against Fed on ANY SURFACE. It would be interesting to see how Murray improved on clay and grass.

But to say Fed didnt care about the match today is inaccurate. Fed was sitting there screaming the F words when he messed up on a few points. Thats a pretty good indication Fed wanted this match.

Of course until Murray finally wins a slam and can take Fed down in the process during a 5 set match, Murray is still below Fed at this point. But he does have his number with the 3 set matches

mordecai
01-09-2009, 11:37 AM
Fed took a dump on murray at the USO so I really doubt that.

stician
01-09-2009, 11:38 AM
I rather see Fed win two more majors than reclaim the number one spot. He's held the #1 spot long enough. What was Sampras' ranking when he won USO for the last time?

Mick
01-09-2009, 11:40 AM
You could take that and say that, "The prospect of Nadal maintaining his World No. 1 Ranking is getting a lot tougher" as well???? ^^

yep. to think about a year ago, after borg had predicted that murray could become the next number 1, a number of people in this forum said borg was out of his mind.

zoobears
01-09-2009, 11:54 AM
Fed was angry for his unforced errors. However it still seems to me that the result of that match never really bothered him. He was too cool in the way he calmly put those points at the net. Looks like someone in control. He has Murray in his pocket.

But enough about murray. He is a gob***** who will always have deep rooted negative sentiments towards England. What he said before was his true reflection. What he said after was what he was trained to say to satisfy the egalitarian norms of the world we live in. Fed drops the lowest strokes to the net I have ever seen. Fed is the best technically by stats and technically by technique. Murray is a lanky choker.

jetlee2k
01-09-2009, 11:57 AM
Murray has improved alot since last year.. Federer has lost his confidence and consistency since last year.. it will be tough for Federer to get a few more slams .. I hope he will.. and I pray he will.. but it's very very tough for him now

oneguy21
01-09-2009, 12:00 PM
Federer is still my boy. :)

edmondsm
01-09-2009, 12:02 PM
If Murray was straight setting Federer then I might wonder. But Federer is still winning sets, and if you can win sets then you can win matches.

Moose Malloy
01-09-2009, 12:03 PM
I rather see Fed win two more majors than reclaim the number one spot. He's held the #1 spot long enough. What was Sampras' ranking when he won USO for the last time?

Out of the 14 majors Sampras won, he was only seeded #1 at 7 of them.
I doubt Fed, Nadal, etc will remember what days/months they were ranked #1years from now. But they will likely remember what major trophies they won(though Sampras already can't remember what years he won what majors)

Back on topic, Murray is only the 2nd player to win 3 straight matches vs Fed since 2004(Nadal being the other)

And he's the first player to beat him 3 straight times on a hardcourt since Nalbandian in 2003. I don't think these are insignificant stats.

tennis-hero
01-09-2009, 12:05 PM
and so the bandwagon rolls into town

just be aware, whenever the Murray bandwagons crashes, you shall jump off ship. [whats the saying about rats aboard a ship?]

he's never won a slam, he's not invincible (like Nadal) on a single surface, his second serve is a liability (and when he gets worried and starts missing his first serve, anyone can beat him), he'll nevr dominate, and most of all... he doesn't have the magic of a true great- however, i expect him to win a few slams for sure

robertg06
01-09-2009, 12:07 PM
No, Murray IS the NEW Federer. Let's all jump the bandwagon.

Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

fps
01-09-2009, 12:07 PM
and so the bandwagon rolls into town

just be aware, whenever the Murray bandwagons crashes, you shall jump off ship. [whats the saying about rats aboard a ship?]

he's never won a slam, he's not invincible (like Nadal) on a single surface, his second serve is a liability (and when he gets worried and starts missing his first serve, anyone can beat him), he'll nevr dominate, and most of all... he doesn't have the magic of a true great- however, i expect him to win a few slams for sure

people aren't saying they're *fans* of the murray ship, just that it's a good ship. when it starts sinking, people will say it's not a good ship any more. and they'll be right.

GameSampras
01-09-2009, 12:12 PM
Maybe Fed is playing the old mind game tactic with Murray.

Murray had the h2h on Fed before the US OPEN and look at how Fed destroyed him.

Until Murray can prove something at the slams against Fed, I wont be totally convinced but he has a darn good chance.

Is it me or did Fed just look like he gave up sometime in the 3rd. Talk about some pathetic tennis Fed was displaying. Or maybe he just though to himself, "Damn I cant beat this kid. No matter what I do, he comes back and gives it to me tenfold."

World Beater
01-09-2009, 12:14 PM
Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

sad but true

murray is a good player...maybe even a great player but he is uninspiring

iamke55
01-09-2009, 12:15 PM
He should try losing the first set for a change.

World Beater
01-09-2009, 12:16 PM
i seem to remember a similar thread was made when nalbandian was routining federer...and then boom...federer starts owning bandy.

Lotto
01-09-2009, 12:19 PM
I agree with WorldBeater. Roger always finds a way, like he did with Nalbandian although the thing about that is Murray is more consistent then Nalbandian. I have no doubt Roger will turn the H2H around though.

norbac
01-09-2009, 12:20 PM
Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

I still prefer Murray, he just feels more real to me.

oneguy21
01-09-2009, 12:24 PM
sad but true

murray is a good player...maybe even a great player but he is uninspiring

Agreed. Murray is an exceptional player, but his game isn't all that special. I mean how many players are out there who have a 2 hander along with a solid ground game, a good serve, and ok net play. Sounds like the majority of players doesn't it? Now compare that with Federer who has a liquid-whip forehand, a beautiful one-hander, amazing mental cool, and all court variety to bring to the court. There aren't many players out there like that and that's why he'll always be one of my favorite players. I certainly hope that although his year may not be as successful as lets say 2006, he'll be on at the right times which we'll allow him to win majors and break Pete's record. After that, he should just leave the game. It's always good to retire on a good note.

sureshs
01-09-2009, 12:26 PM
Agreed. Murray is an exceptional player, but his game isn't all that special. I mean how many players are out there who have a 2 hander along with a solid ground game, a good serve, and ok net play. Sounds like the majority of players doesn't it? Now compare that with Federer who has a liquid-whip forehand, a beautiful one-hander, amazing mental cool, and all court variety to bring to the court. There aren't many players out there like that and that's why he'll always be one of my favorite players. I certainly hope that although his year may not be as successful as lets say 2006, he'll be on at the right times which we'll allow him to win majors and break Pete's record. After that, he should just leave the game. It's always good to retire on a good note.

Consistent ugly two hander is better than erratic beautiful one hander

zagor
01-09-2009, 12:29 PM
Out of the 14 majors Sampras won, he was only seeded #1 at 7 of them.
I doubt Fed, Nadal, etc will remember what days/months they were ranked #1years from now. But they will likely remember what major trophies they won(though Sampras already can't remember what years he won what majors)

Back on topic, Murray is only the 2nd player to win 3 straight matches vs Fed since 2004(Nadal being the other)

And he's the first player to beat him 3 straight times on a hardcourt since Nalbandian in 2003. I don't think these are insignificant stats.

4 if you also include the exhibtion in Abu-Dhabi.I agree,definitely not insignificant stats.

tacou
01-09-2009, 12:30 PM
I don't get what people when they mean Fed is different in slams/only concentrating on slams. why did he enter Doha then? or Kooyong?

if you say it's to get in match practice, well, he lost his match to murray! did he throw it or something? I think not.

Dan007
01-09-2009, 12:31 PM
all of a sudden, the prospect of federer reclaiming the world's number 1 ranking is getting a lot tougher.

Fed needs to forget about the number rankings, he had it for very long time and he is past his prime now. He needs to focus more on slams

Zaragoza
01-09-2009, 12:32 PM
i seem to remember a similar thread was made when nalbandian was routining federer...and then boom...federer starts owning bandy.

Nalbandian and Hewitt used to beat Federer when Federer had not reached his prime. Since Federer reached his prime, Nalbandian only beat Federer on indoors and Hewitt couldn't beat him.
Murray is a totally different case. He is an upcoming player who just arrived and will probably stay in the top for many years whereas Federer will struggle to mantain his level in the next years. Their tendencies are completely opposite.
3 consecutive wins over Federer (not counting the exo from last week) is very impressive. I think only Nadal did it against a prime Federer. Federer, like any other player, has some bad matchups and both Nadal and Murray are not only great players but also bad matchups for Federer. You have to accept that. Although on clay and grass Federer would be the clear favourite against Murray at the moment.

World Beater
01-09-2009, 12:36 PM
Nalbandian and Hewitt used to beat Federer when Federer had not reached his prime. Since Federer reached his prime, Nalbandian only beat Federer on indoors and Hewitt couldn't beat him.
Murray is a totally different case. He is an upcoming player who just arrived and will probably stay in the top for many years whereas Federer will struggle to mantain his level in the next years. Their tendencies are completely opposite.
3 consecutive wins over Federer (not counting the exo from last week) is very impressive. I think only Nadal did it against a prime Federer. Federer, like any other player, has some bad matchups and both Nadal and Murray are not only great players but also bad matchups for Federer. You have to accept that. Although on clay and grass Federer would be the clear favourite against Murray at the moment.

well...lets not forget that nalbandian did come back and take two straight against federer in 2007 only to get owned twice in 2008. so you never know.

also..nadal is a special player on clay...murray is good on hc but i dont know if he is revolutionary like federer or nadal.

stician
01-09-2009, 12:43 PM
Those are match-ups, not stats. Yes Murray has had the edge recently but so did Canas in early '08. I agree with alot of fine points about Feds game. It's fun to watch. Murray is winning more because his fitness has improved and undoubtedly he may win a few like Hewitt did at his fitness prime. But like all retrievers, probably with the exception of Borg, they only as good as their legs.

vtmike
01-09-2009, 12:45 PM
Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

Agree +1 :)

tacou
01-09-2009, 12:51 PM
Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

respectfully disgaree. did you see fed today?

Murray had to run to catch him in front of the ump's chair to shake his hand, Fed didn't give him the time of day and didn't shake the chair ump's hand.

is that how a champion loses? or did he just invest so little emotionally/physically into the match that he thought it didn't warrant the proper etiquette?

Oui, c'est moi.
01-09-2009, 12:56 PM
Never? We'll see.

JankovicFan
01-09-2009, 01:15 PM
Then again, Fed starts the season with a SF and picks up 90 points. He did better than either Nadal or Djokovic. Djoker now needs 110 points, or better than a SF at Sydney, to match Federer. Federer was not defending any points, so it's all to the good. The drama is all Djokovic at this point.

S H O W S T O P P E R !
01-09-2009, 01:28 PM
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y257/DamnThoseWiffyDogs/Animated/TV%20Shows/StarTrekFacePalm.gif

NGRSupaEaglez92
01-09-2009, 02:09 PM
either way i think this will be one of the most entertaining years, we have seen in a while, with lots of people contending for the one ranking.

Emelia21
01-09-2009, 03:25 PM
Look at Federer's elegance, look at Murray. Nothing alike. Federer plays like a champion, loses like a champion and wins like a champion. Murray wins and loses like they're the same thing. He is as charismatic as my foot, on a good day.

Is that why he didn't give Andy the time of day at the net?

Roger Federer is a cool champion and a cool guy when winning, when he's up against a lets say troublesome player, Nadal and Murray, his coolness goes away and his real character shows.

All-rounder
01-09-2009, 03:29 PM
again with this now that he has gained a advantage in H2H you assume he will be doing this in a best of 5 set hmm.... does US open final remind you of something

SempreSami
01-09-2009, 03:31 PM
Federer was a tantrum throwing little sket before he started winning, convenient that nobody seems to know that despite the documentaries and books written about him.

Emelia21
01-09-2009, 03:33 PM
again with this now that he has gained a advantage in H2H you assume he will be doing this in a best of 5 set hmm.... does US open final remind you of something


Who are you asking? :-?

All-rounder
01-09-2009, 03:37 PM
Who are you asking? :-?
i was following off of one of gamesampras's points about murray not being able to beat federer in a best of 5 but in a best of 3 he is coming out on top

Emelia21
01-09-2009, 03:45 PM
Federer was a tantrum throwing little sket before he started winning, convenient that nobody seems to know that despite the documentaries and books written about him.

Funny Roger himself described himself like Andy Murray (tantrums ect), the last time Andy Murray beat him, then went on to declare Nadal (in attitude) as perfect.

The thing is Roger has a had sly dig at both these guy's game, then gone on to lose to them.

Nadal_Monfils
01-09-2009, 04:00 PM
again with this now that he has gained a advantage in H2H you assume he will be doing this in a best of 5 set hmm.... does US open final remind you of something

Federer fans are always pointing back to the past. I imagine they will be doing this more and more often in the near future.

clayrules
01-09-2009, 04:10 PM
Is that why he didn't give Andy the time of day at the net?

Roger Federer is a cool champion and a cool guy when winning, when he's up against a lets say troublesome player, Nadal and Murray, his coolness goes away and his real character shows.

Very well said.

oneleggedcardinal
01-09-2009, 04:12 PM
Troll thread?

Tennisguy777
01-09-2009, 04:36 PM
I think Murray might have his number now! And the fact that there are a lot of players who can beat him besides Murray and Nadal presents a problem. No longer is he the favorite to win at every event. And the theory that he is holding out to win another GS, although may be true, doesn't and won't help him recapture the #1 ranking! He'd still have to win 2 more GS to surpass Sampras and that will be difficult when it comes to winning 5 set matches against the likes of Djokovic, Nadal, Murray and a few others. Also a lot of players concentrate on winning a GS, thats where the points and cash cows are at, this is nothing new. Look out this year for a healthy Simon, Delpotro and Tsonga and other young guys to make an impact. And lastly Federer has reached the plateau and might be going down form here on out, sure he'll win tournies but I'd expect a slightly better season from him than the last one. I'd say 5-6 titles and Possibly 1 Grand slam - US Open.

Nadal_Freak
01-09-2009, 04:39 PM
I agree with this thread. Fed may never win a slam again. :D

marc45
01-09-2009, 04:40 PM
[QUOTE=Moose Malloy;2991404]Out of the 14 majors Sampras won, he was only seeded #1 at 7 of them.
But they will likely remember what major trophies they won(though Sampras already can't remember what years he won what majors)

what a problem to have, huh?

luckyboy1300
01-09-2009, 04:41 PM
Maybe Fed is playing the old mind game tactic with Murray.

Murray had the h2h on Fed before the US OPEN and look at how Fed destroyed him.

Until Murray can prove something at the slams against Fed, I wont be totally convinced but he has a darn good chance.

Is it me or did Fed just look like he gave up sometime in the 3rd. Talk about some pathetic tennis Fed was displaying. Or maybe he just though to himself, "Damn I cant beat this kid. No matter what I do, he comes back and gives it to me tenfold."

nah, until the australian open proves otherwise, we might infer: damn the australian open is getting closer, and this kid is still a tough job. no sense risking injury over this one."

veroniquem
01-09-2009, 04:43 PM
respectfully disgaree. did you see fed today?

Murray had to run to catch him in front of the ump's chair to shake his hand, Fed didn't give him the time of day and didn't shake the chair ump's hand.

is that how a champion loses? or did he just invest so little emotionally/physically into the match that he thought it didn't warrant the proper etiquette?
Federer is as much of a sore loser as the next guy. This reputation of "classier than the lot" has been completely fabricated as illustrated again by today's after match reaction.

luckyboy1300
01-09-2009, 04:45 PM
respectfully disgaree. did you see fed today?

Murray had to run to catch him in front of the ump's chair to shake his hand, Fed didn't give him the time of day and didn't shake the chair ump's hand.

is that how a champion loses? or did he just invest so little emotionally/physically into the match that he thought it didn't warrant the proper etiquette?

he was waiting for murray over the net close to the umpire, and i don't think he didn't shake the ump's hand. it's just that it was not shown.

tacou
01-09-2009, 05:33 PM
no it was shown, that he did not.

vmosrafa08
01-09-2009, 05:46 PM
USO 2008

6-2, 7-5, 6-2 Fed > Murray, tells me otherwise.

Again, Federer is only concentrating most on the Slams (which are the most important tournaments), as he is wanting to surpass Sampras' record. I think a lot of people have said this but he just doesn't seem to put a lot of intensity in to the smaller tournaments, but rather, looks at those as a warm up and preparation for the big ones.

As to your claim, I guess we'll see..

The US Open result means more than all the other matches that Murray and Fed played. Fed beats Murray when it really matters. In these small matches, it doesn't really matter if he loses or wins. 13 Gs> 0 Gs

Tennis_Monk
01-09-2009, 06:06 PM
There are no small matches. No player would like to lose a match regardless of significance.

I dont want to read too much into Murray's win against Fed today but at the sametime i dont want to ignore its significance either.

Murray now fully believes he can win against Federer and that must be worrying to Federer. There is an aspect to Federer's game that scares opponents. Murray no longer subscribes to that group.

Does this mean he will ALWAYS win against Federer?NO. Like Nadal, Djokovic he respects Federer's game but is not scared.

Andyk028
01-09-2009, 06:24 PM
Im pretty sure that Fed Express still comes out on top on grass and clay against the goatfaced Brit.

miyagi
01-09-2009, 06:28 PM
To say Federer will never win against Murray AGAIN is crazy. I think Nadal so far has a greater advantage when playing Federer than Murray as it seems that even when Rog should win he can't! But I think Fed can still beat Nadal.

But Federer is most dangerous in slams as last years results proved....I would say Fed can beat ANYONE on his day.

Plus their matches have been tight when they really matter in a Semi or Final of a Slam Murray may tighten up or not play the big points so well.

A.O is going to be so interesting..........

Morrissey
01-09-2009, 07:37 PM
Well here's the deal. The Australian Open will truly indicate where Fed stands with the new Murray. If he loses meekly, in 3 or 4 sets then we'll know if Murray truly has Fed's number on every possible stage, big or small. But if Fed wins again 6-2, 7-6, 6-2 like last time, then all the wins Murray achieved will have meant little. He can beat Fed in best of 3 sets, but he can't quite do it in a best of 5. The Grand Slams is put up or shut up time. See? When I'm not angry I do write knowledgeable posts. :-)

zagor
01-09-2009, 07:43 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Underrating Fed again,are we? Smells like USO last year all over again.I would hardly use word "never" when it comes to best tennis players,as any proffesional sport,tennis can be quite unpredictable and you never know what the future brings.

Mansewerz
01-09-2009, 07:49 PM
Agreed, I believe Federer will beat him, Murray is just on fire right now.

He beat Nadal, too :evil:!

klementine
01-09-2009, 07:51 PM
Im pretty sure that Fed Express still comes out on top on grass and clay against the goatfaced Brit.

I'm pretty sure Murray's a scot. Can anyone verify this? I predict a Sampras passing the torch to Federer moment with Murray and Federer. Murray, in my opinion, has the type of demeanor and resreved game that will spell a long and enduring position at number one. The passing of the troch will come at where else????? Wimbledon this year.

luckyboy1300
01-09-2009, 08:19 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

the same similar thread was created after the australian open semifinals federer vs djokovic. "federer will never win against djokovic from now on..."

richjohn
01-09-2009, 08:46 PM
My point is every player has his ups and downs. However, if you keep ups for too long, then your downs are closing.....

mrDamien
01-09-2009, 09:14 PM
Federer frustrated and he couldn't challenge Murray anymore.

1st Seed
01-09-2009, 09:26 PM
Roger's has to pack more patience this year.Soon we all see the old Roger.Losing his cool, temper tantrums,Racquets,Safin style throws.Can't wait

Spider
01-09-2009, 09:29 PM
Although Murray is a much more complete and talented player with much greater defense, I still don't think he will win all the time. He would still have his occasion losses to fed (say 1 in 10 matches or so).

Tennis_Bum
01-09-2009, 09:35 PM
Consistent ugly two hander is better than erratic beautiful one hander

I don't see how you can boldly predict that Fed will never beat Murray again. But time will tell. I do however agree with you about the an ugly, consistent 2hbh is much better than an elegant, erratic 1hbh. I take an ugly, consistent 2hbh over an elegant 1hbh any day. Consistency wins matches, especially at pro levels.

I still bet Murray put too much pressure on himself by declaring that he's ready to win slams, or something of that effect. It would be better just to go about your business and win slams then make statement after the fact. It would not be late. But again, time will tell.

I am with Fed, but it's tough to convince myself that he'll have a good time when he plays Murray. I think Fed doesn't like looking at the draw and say "Good I get to play Murray in the Semi and then Nadal in the Final. I can't wait." It's not like he is playing Roddick or Blake. Nadal and Murray are super fit now, and can really make Fed work for points. Much more than Blake or Roddick because of their go-for-everything styles of play.

Again, let's see what will happen at AO2009. But Fed will have to really play exceptional tennis and to have a good draw to win this year.

GameSampras
01-09-2009, 09:39 PM
Im waiting for Fed NOT to make a deep run at a slam. Good lord hes consistent at the slams. No worse than a Semifinals. When is a darkhorse going to take Fed out. You would figure some of the guys would be foaming at the mouth to make a name for themselves and say they took Fed out in the 3rd of 4th round

batz
01-10-2009, 02:18 AM
I'm pretty sure Murray's a scot. Can anyone verify this? I predict a Sampras passing the torch to Federer moment with Murray and Federer. Murray, in my opinion, has the type of demeanor and resreved game that will spell a long and enduring position at number one. The passing of the troch will come at where else????? Wimbledon this year.

Klementine - Murray is Scottish AND British - Scotland is one of the kingdoms of Great Britain (along with England and Wales). 'Scottish' and 'British' are not mutually exclusive, in fact one must be British to be a Scot (although some Scottish Nationalists think otherwise!).


Hope that helps.

TheTruth
01-10-2009, 02:39 AM
[QUOTE=tacou;2991602]respectfully disgaree. did you see fed today?

Murray had to run to catch him in front of the ump's chair to shake his hand, Fed didn't give him the time of day and didn't shake the chair ump's hand.

is that how a champion loses? or did he just invest so little emotionally/physically into the match that he thought it didn't warrant the proper etiquette?[/QUOTE

Was this televised? Darn, I missed it. Anyway, typical Fed when he loses. Graceless!

fps
01-10-2009, 02:47 AM
I'm pretty sure Murray's a scot. Can anyone verify this? I predict a Sampras passing the torch to Federer moment with Murray and Federer. Murray, in my opinion, has the type of demeanor and resreved game that will spell a long and enduring position at number one. The passing of the troch will come at where else????? Wimbledon this year.

Murray is Scottish, and falls into the category of British. Chris Hoy, the triple Olympic cycling champion, is also Scottish and therefore British. There is a perceived double standard where we English claim Scots/Welsh/NI sportsmen as our own when they're doing well. One of our more poisonous papers, the Daily Mail, is especially good at reporting *Brit Andy Murray wins Dubai* but *Scot Murray crashes out of Aussie Open*- type headlines.

Tony Sideway
01-10-2009, 03:24 AM
USO 2008

6-2, 7-5, 6-2 Fed > Murray, tells me otherwise.

Again, Federer is only concentrating most on the Slams (which are the most important tournaments), as he is wanting to surpass Sampras' record. I think a lot of people have said this but he just doesn't seem to put a lot of intensity in to the smaller tournaments, but rather, looks at those as a warm up and preparation for the big ones.

As to your claim, I guess we'll see..

Exactly my words too.... :evil:

luckyboy1300
01-10-2009, 03:40 AM
Im waiting for Fed NOT to make a deep run at a slam. Good lord hes consistent at the slams. No worse than a Semifinals. When is a darkhorse going to take Fed out. You would figure some of the guys would be foaming at the mouth to make a name for themselves and say they took Fed out in the 3rd of 4th round

you can only hope...federer basically gave up after the 2nd set so as not to risk an injury before the big one.

Djokovic
01-10-2009, 04:02 AM
Has to be said that that is a very bold claim but could be an element of truth to it! (sadly)

Andyk028
01-10-2009, 08:13 AM
Murray is Scottish, and falls into the category of British. Chris Hoy, the triple Olympic cycling champion, is also Scottish and therefore British. There is a perceived double standard where we English claim Scots/Welsh/NI sportsmen as our own when they're doing well. One of our more poisonous papers, the Daily Mail, is especially good at reporting *Brit Andy Murray wins Dubai* but *Scot Murray crashes out of Aussie Open*- type headlines.

cheers!!!!

zagor
01-10-2009, 08:22 AM
Im waiting for Fed NOT to make a deep run at a slam. Good lord hes consistent at the slams. No worse than a Semifinals. When is a darkhorse going to take Fed out. You would figure some of the guys would be foaming at the mouth to make a name for themselves and say they took Fed out in the 3rd of 4th round

Lol,I don't know if you realize that you're actually complementing Fed for his consistancy and level of play in slams here.

mrmo1115
01-10-2009, 08:22 AM
Murray doesn't completely dominate Federer yet, but he is working on it...

Come on Fed ! Pick it up !

tenis
01-10-2009, 08:34 PM
No, Murray IS the NEW Federer. Let's all jump the bandwagon.

Comooon baby, agly game!

All-rounder
01-11-2009, 10:55 AM
Federer fans are always pointing back to the past. I imagine they will be doing this more and more often in the near future.
but your not telling me that alot of people thought that because of murray's advantage against federer that he could come away with the US open title

sureshs
01-11-2009, 11:16 AM
Let us see if Fed can "shift to a higher gear" as he could once. This year he doesn't have the mono excuse going, or the stiff back, or whatever else. We will see if he can take it up a notch when it matters.

1Sampras
01-11-2009, 05:02 PM
Murray has not beat Roger in Grand slam play. Until her proves he can beat Roger in a slam, he is nothing

veroniquem
01-11-2009, 05:06 PM
Murray has not beat Roger in Grand slam play. Until her proves he can beat Roger in a slam, he is nothing
They have only met once in a slam and it was for Murray's first final! Maybe you could wait until they meet a second time before drawing conclusions...

NamRanger
01-11-2009, 05:15 PM
Michael Chang beat plenty of players outside of Slams. He actually compiled a pretty good list of players defeated in Masters and other tournaments. When it came down to the slams though, more often then not, Chang got pummeled.




Murray has still yet to prove whether he's a real contender or not. We've seen plenty of players go on huge hotstreaks (i.e. Nalbandian, Djokovic, Safin, etc) only to fizzle out and disappear for the entire year. People are jumping on the bandwagon; once Murray loses in a slam though, everyone will jump off and find another player.

El Diablo
01-11-2009, 05:19 PM
They say economists are able to predict the past. Reminds me of sureshs -- making these "bold" predictions when a guy has lost four in a row to someone.

veroniquem
01-11-2009, 05:23 PM
They say economists are able to predict the past. Reminds me of sureshs -- making these "bold" predictions when a guy has lost four in a row to someone.
It's bold in the sense that lots of people maintain that Fed still has the edge in slams.

GasquetGOAT
11-25-2009, 06:48 AM
Thought I should bump this another "classic" thread from suresh.

oh and with veroniquem as bonus.

nikdom
11-25-2009, 07:27 AM
Let us see if Fed can "shift to a higher gear" as he could once. This year he doesn't have the mono excuse going, or the stiff back, or whatever else. We will see if he can take it up a notch when it matters.

sureshs is the most shameless poster on these boards. Time and again he/it appears with his stupid doomsday scenarios for Roger and gets sh1t on his face but never learns from it. Other Nadal fans or fans of the game who don't cheer for Roger at least admit their mistake or praise a tennis record or a wonderful match. sureshs never does. I vote him the oldest and most stupid troll on these boards. (now that gj011 is no longer here)

Agassifan
11-25-2009, 07:51 AM
sureshs is the most shameless poster on these boards. Time and again he/it appears with his stupid doomsday scenarios for Roger and gets sh1t on his face but never learns from it.

Don't worry.. some day he'll get it right. Like in 2012 or 2013. He'll keep throwing **** till then.

Now.. look at him come off the woodwork the next time the GOAT loses

Blinkism
11-25-2009, 07:53 AM
I can imagine if this board was operational in 2001

"Federer will never win a title again"
Sureshs

Federer doesn't have the mental strength or talent to keep up with the tour. He'll never beat guys like Safin or Hewitt, or Sampras at Wimbledon for that matter.

federerfanatic
11-25-2009, 07:58 AM
Murray wont beat Federer again for a long time I predict. The tide has turned in that matchup.

joeri888
11-25-2009, 08:43 AM
Murray wont beat Federer again for a long time I predict. The tide has turned in that matchup.

I don't know. Time is with Murray.

Omega_7000
11-25-2009, 08:51 AM
It's bold in the sense that lots of people maintain that Fed still has the edge in slams.

Ahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha
















hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! :lol:

edberg505
11-25-2009, 09:06 AM
Ahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha
















hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! :lol:

LOL, leave it to someone to pull up old threads in which copious amounts of fail are present.

Fabfed
11-25-2009, 09:34 AM
Don't worry.. some day he'll get it right. Like in 2012 or 2013. He'll keep throwing **** till then.

Now.. look at him come off the woodwork the next time the GOAT loses

I think you are being overly optimistic about sureshs getting it right some day...I'm afraid sureshs is doomed to utter all that is moronic and puerile for the rest of his/its (thanks nikdom) life... but it takes all kinds to make a world....I mean, c'mon, I'm sure you would all miss sureshs if he stopped posting, it won't be the same here without sureshs as the village idiot.

aphex
11-25-2009, 09:54 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

It's bold in the sense that lots of people maintain that Fed still has the edge in slams.


S&V: the biggest FAIL artists of TT at work.

thanks for entertaining us with your stupidity guys.

sunnyIce
11-25-2009, 10:32 AM
wow, this guy is an idiot. i cant remember voting "terrible" on polls this many times from other folks.

flyinghippos101
11-25-2009, 10:47 AM
FAIL

That is all

kishnabe
11-25-2009, 11:10 AM
very Nice thread with Flaliling Comprimises.

GasquetGOAT
01-31-2010, 12:04 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

quote for the win!:twisted:

LafayetteHitter
01-31-2010, 12:08 PM
What an idiot! I'm sure he will post back and put something like:

Okkkk!!!! Starting now! LOL

CHOcobo
01-31-2010, 12:14 PM
AHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA HA....what a joke. never say never or else the butterfly affect.

Agassifan
01-31-2010, 12:30 PM
LOL what a loser. Be sure.... This guy will show up saying fed is done the next time the GOAT loses. Pathetic. But yeah..... He'll win someday as wil
most trolls

edmondsm
01-31-2010, 12:37 PM
Fed haters have had a tough life on TTW.

_maxi
01-31-2010, 12:39 PM
The troll fail again.

Its like Cesc Fabregas "del potro will never win a mayor" thing.

Carsomyr
01-31-2010, 01:23 PM
Fed haters have had a tough life on TTW.

Yep. Can't imagine how crushed veroniquem must be.

:(

Agassifan
01-31-2010, 01:32 PM
Fed haters have had a tough life

fixed for accuracy

surfvland
01-31-2010, 02:07 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

You've been sniffing too much glue buddy.

coloskier
01-31-2010, 07:36 PM
The most likely reason for Fed to never beat Murray again is that Murray will always get beat before he has to play Fed.

forthegame
01-31-2010, 07:39 PM
C'mon! This is blatant trolling!
Enough of this already!!!

skip1969
01-31-2010, 07:48 PM
once a troll . . .

Sentinel
01-31-2010, 08:03 PM
once a troll . . .always a troll ??

:)

edberg505
01-31-2010, 08:27 PM
They have only met once in a slam and it was for Murray's first final! Maybe you could wait until they meet a second time before drawing conclusions...

I think we can draw conclusions now.

BounceHitBounceHit
01-31-2010, 08:35 PM
Murray has loads of talent and is still young. But he needs to learn to control his emotions. For now, he is simply not at Fed's level in the big matches. I wouldn't be surprised to see Fed drop sets or even matches to him here and there in the smaller events, but in the Grand Slams.........well, you were watching today, yes? :) BHBH

abmk
01-31-2010, 11:16 PM
I think we can draw conclusions now.

yep, murray's tummy hurt, that's why he lost !

P_Agony
01-31-2010, 11:37 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Another failure by sureshs!

valiant
01-31-2010, 11:49 PM
Failure and Suresh are synonymous. Wake me up where there is something new.

DarthMaul
01-31-2010, 11:49 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Nice one, LOL!

lawrence
01-31-2010, 11:56 PM
LMAO.
It's ok, just keep saying Fed sucks for the next few years. You're bound to get it right one day.

Sentinel
01-31-2010, 11:58 PM
Okay lets not beat up the troll. He might lose motivation and retire !!

Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Seems like he means Murray will lose to Federer every time. :shock::shock:

zagor
02-01-2010, 12:08 AM
LMAO.
It's ok, just keep saying Fed sucks for the next few years. You're bound to get it right one day.

That's what's funny with all those people predicting Fed's going down every year(heck every slam),eventually they'll get it right(after about a dozen times they were wrong)and they will go like "Man I'm a genious,didn't I tell you Fed's finished?" Lol.

Dean
02-01-2010, 01:55 AM
I'm picking Murray to crush Fed in 'The Real Slam' at Cincinnati Masters later this year. Then he'll be the true goat.:shock:

fed_the_savior
09-24-2010, 04:23 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Spot on! !

fed_the_savior
09-25-2010, 07:46 PM
That's what's funny with all those people predicting Fed's going down every year(heck every slam),eventually they'll get it right(after about a dozen times they were wrong)and they will go like "Man I'm a genious,didn't I tell you Fed's finished?" Lol.

Good post. Hilarious signature. Anybody know what the bet was. :)

Agassifan
07-08-2012, 01:38 PM
GOAT thread!!!!

Agassifan
07-08-2012, 01:40 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Preserved for posterity

West Coast Ace
07-08-2012, 01:41 PM
GOAT thread!!!!Very nice find. Suresh and the other trolls must be crowded under the same bridge...

Agassifan
07-08-2012, 01:43 PM
That's what's funny with all those people predicting Fed's going down every year(heck every slam),eventually they'll get it right(after about a dozen times they were wrong)and they will go like "Man I'm a genious,didn't I tell you Fed's finished?" Lol.

exactly!!!!

Marius_Hancu
07-08-2012, 01:46 PM
What a sucker OP!

Netspirit
07-08-2012, 03:21 PM
http://i45.tinypic.com/bl81u.jpg

sdont
07-08-2012, 03:40 PM
Props to Agassifan for the bump.

Almost up there with the Cincy thread.

Nostradamus
07-08-2012, 03:42 PM
http://i45.tinypic.com/bl81u.jpg

is this suresh ? he keeps popping up

jokinla
07-09-2012, 01:33 AM
Very nice find. Suresh and the other trolls must be crowded under the same bridge...

Suresh, jm1980, LOLville, someone needs to find these clowns, I fear the worst.

TennisLovaLova
07-09-2012, 02:40 AM
is this suresh ? he keeps popping up

is this the guy they showed yesterday when murray was cryin during the ceremony? I remember this face...

Tafmatch
07-09-2012, 02:44 AM
Why would anyone start a thread like this?

Sentinel
07-09-2012, 02:50 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.
LOOOL. I thought this was a new "comeback" thread for the great sureshs.

Seems the OP is in hiding like JV and others, they were waiting to pounce back into the forum, after the first set yesterday, but had to slink back into their holes after the second. Props to the OP for having the courage to come out with such silly stuff consistently.

TennisLovaLova
07-09-2012, 02:52 AM
LOOOL. I thought this was a new "comeback" thread for the great sureshs.

Seems the OP is in hiding like JV and others, they were waiting to pounce back into the forum, after the first set yesterday, but had to slink back into their holes after the second. Props to the OP for having the courage to come out with such silly stuff consistently.

He did come up with a marvelous thread yesterday though...
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=431438

BounceHitBounceHit
07-14-2012, 08:08 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Stop it, please. You are freaking me out with this precognition stuff. BHBH

Seany
07-14-2012, 08:20 PM
Honestly, the best part of when Fed wins a slam, is the post-slam epic thread reviving ! Brilliant !

smoledman
07-14-2012, 08:22 PM
http://gallery.rennlist.com/albums/greatthread/best_thread_ever2.jpg

underground
07-15-2012, 06:29 AM
Honestly, the best part of when Fed wins a slam, is the post-slam epic thread reviving ! Brilliant !

QFT

especially when Fed is in 'decline' and the haters come out. :twisted:

augustobt
07-15-2012, 10:18 AM
hahahahaa. Federer won two majors against Murray since this topic, correct?

tudwell
07-15-2012, 12:08 PM
Im waiting for Fed NOT to make a deep run at a slam. Good lord hes consistent at the slams. No worse than a Semifinals. When is a darkhorse going to take Fed out. You would figure some of the guys would be foaming at the mouth to make a name for themselves and say they took Fed out in the 3rd of 4th round

Man, Federer still hasn't lost before the quarters since this post. Incredible consistency (and longevity).

Agassifan
07-15-2012, 12:21 PM
Suresh is a Grade A Clown. Once in a while he starts parody threads like "Technology favoring Fed" or "Rafa lost Wimbledon because of a strategy". Let that not fool you into thinking that some of his moronic threads are also parodies.

Agassifan
01-25-2013, 12:57 PM
Congratulations. Sorry you have had to wait 4 years (and for Fed to break all kinds of records) for this to come true.

I am very sure all your predictions will come true. Eventually.

Jeffrey573639
01-25-2013, 01:14 PM
My prediction is :

Murray will need 5 sets to beat Federer in his 1st win at a slam though (unless Federer truely declines).

+1
10propredictions

ultradr
01-25-2013, 01:18 PM
The thing is that Murray's approach to the game is very very methodical.

Agassifan
08-16-2014, 07:08 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Another suresh fail

stringertom
08-16-2014, 07:52 PM
Another suresh fail

sureshs is like a gem cutter who has lost his touch...he takes a hammer and a chisel to a precious diamond and turns it into worthless shards of pretty little compressed carbon. Still, it is a most amusing aspect of TTW to see what he comes up with next!

kishnabe
08-16-2014, 07:56 PM
sureshs is like a gem cutter who has lost his touch...he takes a hammer and a chisel to a precious diamond and turns it into worthless shards of pretty little compressed carbon. Still, it is a most amusing aspect of TTW to see what he comes up with next!

I think he knows what he is doing....:twisted:

Goosehead
08-16-2014, 09:26 PM
lolwut :):twisted:

..the FAIL is unbelievably strong with this one. :neutral:

Nostradamus
08-16-2014, 09:33 PM
Murray is done, will never will another major as long as time exists. with that Back that we think is fixed will never be the same

Mayonnaise
08-16-2014, 09:35 PM
Murray is done, will never will another major as long as time exists. with that Back that we think is fixed will never be the same

I don't know why people are so quick to rule players out. Didn't you learn from the OP's fail?

Mainad
08-16-2014, 09:44 PM
Murray is done, will never will another major as long as time exists. with that Back that we think is fixed will never be the same

Hmmm... and would you have also agreed with the OP when he first created this thread back in '09? :twisted:

Sentinel
08-16-2014, 09:50 PM
sureshs is like a gem cutter who has lost his touch...he takes a hammer and a chisel to a precious diamond and turns it into worthless shards of pretty little compressed carbon. Still, it is a most amusing aspect of TTW to see what he comes up with next!
:D
I think he knows what he is doing....:twisted:
Precisely.

For the esteemed OP a fail is actually a win.

britam25
08-16-2014, 10:07 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Based on a stat of their head to head since 2009, you've been wrong roughly 9 times. Nice call...

stringertom
08-17-2014, 03:44 AM
:D

Precisely.

For the esteemed OP a fail is actually a win.

This explains the beauty of the Forehand of Evolution!

Chanwan
08-17-2014, 05:38 AM
My prediction is :

Murray will need 5 sets to beat Federer in his 1st win at a slam though (unless Federer truely declines).

good prediction from fastdunn back in 09. Less so by our bionic poster

Agassifan
11-13-2014, 03:56 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Never a bad time to bump a #SureshFail thread, but keep fighting the good fight.

Chanwan
11-13-2014, 03:58 PM
Never a bad time to bump a #SureshFail thread, but keep fighting the good fight.
the king of fail threads. long may this king among kings reign:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySzQPURsbvs

RF-18
11-13-2014, 03:59 PM
Hahahahahah

britam25
11-13-2014, 04:11 PM
The OP(who is conspicuous by his absence in these kinds of threads) has long been clueless, and this is just another brick in the wall in that regard.

tennisaddict
11-13-2014, 04:19 PM
Oh God !

Now this beats the crap out of the Cinci thread.

Only sureshs !!!

tipsa...don'tlikehim!
11-13-2014, 04:20 PM
My prediction is :

Murray will need 5 sets to beat Federer in his 1st win at a slam though (unless Federer truely declines).

Amazing prediction,
Australian open 2013.

(even though Olympics final was a 3 sets to zero victory in a best of 5 match).

Agassifan
11-13-2014, 04:24 PM
the king of fail threads. long may this king among kings reign:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySzQPURsbvs

At least that guy plays tennis, unlike many (if not most) posters here

Sysyphus
11-13-2014, 04:25 PM
Is this the culmination of OP's masterly planned longterm jinx?:o

Chanwan
11-13-2014, 04:27 PM
At least that guy plays tennis, unlike many (if not most) posters here
he walks around on a tennis court and occasionally gets a racquet on the ball, yes.

Jokes aside, don't know how many play and don't play. I find it odd to spend time here if one doesn't play the game, but surely, there are many, who don't.

tipsa...don'tlikehim!
11-13-2014, 04:29 PM
Both players seem to think it's allowed to let the ball bounce twice before hitting it.

Steve0904
11-13-2014, 04:33 PM
he walks around on a tennis court and occasionally gets a racquet on the ball, yes.

Jokes aside, don't know how many play and don't play. I find it odd to spend time here if one doesn't play the game, but surely, there are many, who don't.

I don't play. Never have, never will, and I don't mean to brag but I think it fits here that many people consider me one of the better posters.

All in all, I find it incredibly stupid when people say "well at least so and so plays" as if that makes them better than people that don't or better posters as the case often is.

I'm 24, been watching tennis since about 2003, and I have a pair of eyes and a working brain that certainly works better than some of the fanboys around here whether they play tennis or not. Not to mention that I've heard so called "tennis experts" come out with complete BS at times. People like Agassi and JMac for example. Yet some people invariably say "What does your opinion matter in the face of an all time great like JMac or Agassi saying the opposite." Which is ludicrous as well for the reasons stated above.

Mr.Snrub
11-13-2014, 04:51 PM
I don't play. Never have, never will, and I don't mean to brag but I think it fits here that many people consider me one of the better posters.

All in all, I find it incredibly stupid when people say "well at least so and so plays" as if that makes them better than people that don't or better posters as the case often is.

I'm 24, been watching tennis since about 2003, and I have a pair of eyes and a working brain that certainly works better than some of the fanboys around here whether they play tennis or not. Not to mention that I've heard so called "tennis experts" come out with complete BS at times. People like Agassi and JMac for example. Yet some people invariably say "What does your opinion matter in the face of an all time great like JMac or Agassi saying the opposite." Which is ludicrous as well for the reasons stated above.
Is there something stopping you from playing tennis or you just don't want to/would rather play something else?

I agree with you for the most part. You definitely don't need to play tennis to be able to watch and understand it. But there's probably a certain level of appreciation that can only be gleaned by going out and trying to hit the ball yourself.

Chanwan
11-13-2014, 04:53 PM
I don't play. Never have, never will, and I don't mean to brag but I think it fits here that many people consider me one of the better posters.

All in all, I find it incredibly stupid when people say "well at least so and so plays" as if that makes them better than people that don't or better posters as the case often is.

I'm 24, been watching tennis since about 2003, and I have a pair of eyes and a working brain that certainly works better than some of the fanboys around here whether they play tennis or not. Not to mention that I've heard so called "tennis experts" come out with complete BS at times. People like Agassi and JMac for example. Yet some people invariably say "What does your opinion matter in the face of an all time great like JMac or Agassi saying the opposite." Which is ludicrous as well for the reasons stated above.
You def. are (and one of my fav.) and you're completely right that one can become a decent to good analyst of the game by simply watching, listening and having a working brain.

I'm no Matt Linn level-wise (but who is? :oops:), but I tend to think I understand some stuff a tiny bit better/different than people who's never played nevertheless. But maybe that's naive or maybe the difference starts at a level I'm not at.

Surprised why you wouldn't wanna play though? Maybe you're just not into doing sports but just like watching?

Steve0904
11-13-2014, 05:17 PM
Is there something stopping you from playing tennis or you just don't want to/would rather play something else?

I agree with you for the most part. You definitely don't need to play tennis to be able to watch and understand it. But there's probably a certain level of appreciation that can only be gleaned by going out and trying to hit the ball yourself.

Well, nothing really, but I did have corrective surgery on my legs when I was 8. I just like watching tennis, but I'm not the athletic type. Not fat or overweight, but not really coordinated.

And I definitely agree that a level of appreciation for what these guys can do comes from hitting yourself. That said, even though I've never played, I always tell people that believe tennis is "easy" that it really is not. In fact, it is probably one of the most difficult sports to be really good at, especially to the extent that Federer, Nadal, Djokovic are as the absolute top of the sport. It's absolutely insane really.

But as long as the conversation is not about the very inner intricacy of strokes, I'm good. McEnroe could get me there, that's what I was alluding to, but if we just talked about random stuff, I, and anybody else with good knowledge of what we were talking about would be fine. That's why my (and all other people that know enough about tennis) opinions are just as valid as a guy like McEnroe's. I mean, who really thinks Nadal is the best vollyer in the top 100? It's definitely not true IMO and just because McEnroe said it doesn't make it so. I'm not bad with the history of most sports either. I know a lot of useless information. Obviously, I don't just watch tennis. I'm a sports fanatic really.

If you consider chess a sport, I'm pretty good at that, and I won't be offended if you don't because I don't either. :)

Mr.Lob
11-13-2014, 05:34 PM
I don't play. Never have, never will, and I don't mean to brag but I think it fits here that many people consider me one of the better posters.

All in all, I find it incredibly stupid when people say "well at least so and so plays" as if that makes them better than people that don't or better posters as the case often is.

I'm 24, been watching tennis since about 2003, and I have a pair of eyes and a working brain that certainly works better than some of the fanboys around here whether they play tennis or not. Not to mention that I've heard so called "tennis experts" come out with complete BS at times. People like Agassi and JMac for example. Yet some people invariably say "What does your opinion matter in the face of an all time great like JMac or Agassi saying the opposite." Which is ludicrous as well for the reasons stated above.

Good post, and agree. A lot of people watch football, baseball, basketball,golf and hockey and don't play.

tennis_badger
11-13-2014, 05:43 PM
bagel and breadstick.....excelent prediction

TommyA8X
11-13-2014, 06:05 PM
Well, nothing really, but I did have corrective surgery on my legs when I was 8. I just like watching tennis, but I'm not the athletic type. Not fat or overweight, but not really coordinated.

And I definitely agree that a level of appreciation for what these guys can do comes from hitting yourself. That said, even though I've never played, I always tell people that believe tennis is "easy" that it really is not. In fact, it is probably one of the most difficult sports to be really good at, especially to the extent that Federer, Nadal, Djokovic are as the absolute top of the sport. It's absolutely insane really.

But as long as the conversation is not about the very inner intricacy of strokes, I'm good. McEnroe could get me there, that's what I was alluding to, but if we just talked about random stuff, I, and anybody else with good knowledge of what we were talking about would be fine. That's why my (and all other people that know enough about tennis) opinions are just as valid as a guy like McEnroe's. I mean, who really thinks Nadal is the best vollyer in the top 100? It's definitely not true IMO and just because McEnroe said it doesn't make it so. I'm not bad with the history of most sports either. I know a lot of useless information. Obviously, I don't just watch tennis. I'm a sports fanatic really.

If you consider chess a sport, I'm pretty good at that, and I won't be offended if you don't because I don't either. :)

This, many, many times this :-)

moonballs
11-13-2014, 06:18 PM
Fed did pretty well after he passed age 28. Let's all sit back and watch the likes of sureshs squirm and suffer as Nadal has passed that age. I have a feeling that the appendicitis and stem cell therapies are just the beginning. :-)

Sentinel
11-13-2014, 07:54 PM
I had a big chuckle looking at the thread title thinking it was a new gem by Bionic Suresh.

During the match I was actually remembering other stalwarts such as 90's and concerned about how much they might be suffering seeing the scoreline :) Hope all is well with the big three : 90's, octomum and queenie.

fed_is_GOD
11-14-2014, 06:49 AM
I had a big chuckle looking at the thread title thinking it was a new gem by Bionic Suresh.

During the match I was actually remembering other stalwarts such as 90's and concerned about how much they might be suffering seeing the scoreline :) Hope all is well with the big three : 90's, octomum and queenie.

I wish they talked about their feelings right now..

Hitman
11-14-2014, 06:52 AM
LOL, another gem?

mike danny
11-14-2014, 06:54 AM
Federer will never win against Murray again .....except 10 more times

Dedans Penthouse
11-14-2014, 06:56 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Would you like some 'pommes frites' with your 'crow' sureshs? ;)


http://truebluenz.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/crowplate.jpg

falstaff78
11-14-2014, 07:07 AM
Klementine - Murray is Scottish AND British - Scotland is one of the kingdoms of Great Britain (along with England and Wales). 'Scottish' and 'British' are not mutually exclusive, in fact one must be British to be a Scot (although some Scottish Nationalists think otherwise!).


Hope that helps.

Batz was this your debut post?

TheMusicLover
11-14-2014, 07:09 AM
:lol: :lol: :lol: This thread most definitely belongs in a "Suresh Greatest Hits" collection.

merlinpinpin
11-14-2014, 07:35 AM
And that is why suresh is a master. Even such a scintillating gem as The Real Slam thread(TM) might be seen as something of a fluke were it the only one, but he keeps producing them with a peak level and longevity that are second to none.

falstaff78
11-14-2014, 07:38 AM
Just read through this thread and had a bit of an epiphany.

In financial terms, when Suresh makes a thread like this one or the Cincy masterwork, he is effectively selling a put option. (A put option is an instrument where the seller has limited upside with certainty but a chance of huge downside.)

Allow me to explain my analogy. The limited upside to suresh is the irk he provides to Fed fans for the ten seconds after each of them first reads whatever appalling troll prediction he has presented on the day. Said irk happens because the reader gets annoyed at the sheer gall, audacity, chutzpah, cheek or what have you, that anyone would even CONSIDER making such a prediction.

The downside, in the event his facetious prediction goes belly up, is the consumption of humble pie for long periods of time. In extreme cases for Talk Tennis eternity (>= 5 yrs).

The problem for the seller of troll put options, unlike the seller of real life put options, is that his downside is, by definition, highly likely.. Recall, he's trying to get a rise from followers of His Goatness through the temeritous disrespect of his predictions. In order for them to be most irksome, they must be outlandishly pessimistic. And therefore, unfortunately for the Troll-Seer, unlikely to come true. It's the yin and the yang. It's the paradox underlying the compact that the poor, helpless troll-seer makes with the tennis devils and his own troll-conscience.

In doing so the troll-seer provides a public service to fans of the goat, who can then delight for all eternity mocking the troll-seer's predictions, while surrounded by lush gardens, rivers of milk and honey and looping replays of Fred's matches from Cincy 09, AO 10, Wimby 12 and WTF 14.

I therefore argue that Suresh is a national treasure. A public good. A cyber-gypsy, addicted to selling doomed karmic put-options, compulsively getting high on the short term gratification of irate responses from goat lovers, and then stoically bearing eternal mockery in return. And in the process making TT a better place for the 80% of people here who follow the Goat-Prophet.

We love you Suresh!!!

Anti-Fedal
11-14-2014, 07:43 AM
OP: I hope for your sake you ain't a gambling man.

ringwraith
11-14-2014, 08:04 AM
Lol this is funny :) falstaff78 pretty much nailed it though.

jaggy
11-14-2014, 08:15 AM
I love it when these are found

sbengte
11-14-2014, 08:18 AM
My prediction is :

Murray will need 5 sets to beat Federer in his 1st win at a slam though (unless Federer truely declines).

Awesome prediction that came true after a good 5 years !

sez
11-14-2014, 08:50 AM
Just read through this thread and had a bit of an epiphany.

In financial terms, when Suresh makes a thread like this one or the Cincy masterwork, he is effectively selling a put option. (A put option is an instrument where the seller has limited upside with certainty but a chance of huge downside.)

Allow me to explain my analogy. The limited upside to suresh is the irk he provides to Fed fans for the ten seconds after each of them first reads whatever appalling troll prediction he has presented on the day. Said irk happens because the reader gets annoyed at the sheer gall, audacity, chutzpah, cheek or what have you, that anyone would even CONSIDER making such a prediction.

The downside, in the event his facetious prediction goes belly up, is the consumption of humble pie for long periods of time. In extreme cases for Talk Tennis eternity (>= 5 yrs).

The problem for the seller of troll put options, unlike his financial counterpart, is that his predictions are, by definition, likely to fail.. Recall, he's trying to get a rise from Fed fans through the temerity of his predictions. So in order for them to be most irksome, they must be outlandish and disrespectful to his Goatness. And therefore, unfortunately for the Troll-Seer, unlikely to come true. It's the yin and the yang. It's the paradox underlying the compact that the poor, helpless troll-seer makes with the tennis devils and his own troll-conscience.

In doing so the troll-seer provides a public service to fans of the goat, who can then delight for all eternity mocking the troll-seer's predictions, while surrounded by lush gardens, rivers of milk and honey and looping replays of Fred's matches from Cincy 09, AO 10, Wimby 12 and WTF 14.

I therefore argue that Suresh is a national treasure. A public good. A cyber-gypsy, addicted to selling doomed karmic put-options, compulsively getting high on the short term gratification of irate responses from goat lovers, and then stoically bearing eternal mockery in return.

And in the process making TT a better place for the 80% of people here who follow the Goat-Prophet. We love you Suresh!!!

Framed on my wall, since it's too big to sig.

Maximagq
11-14-2014, 11:24 AM
You def. are (and one of my fav.) and you're completely right that one can become a decent to good analyst of the game by simply watching, listening and having a working brain.

I'm no Matt Linn level-wise (but who is? :oops:), but I tend to think I understand some stuff a tiny bit better/different than people who's never played nevertheless. But maybe that's naive or maybe the difference starts at a level I'm not at.

Surprised why you wouldn't wanna play though? Maybe you're just not into doing sports but just like watching?

I appreciate the compliment :)

Maximagq
11-14-2014, 12:55 PM
I don't play. Never have, never will, and I don't mean to brag but I think it fits here that many people consider me one of the better posters.

All in all, I find it incredibly stupid when people say "well at least so and so plays" as if that makes them better than people that don't or better posters as the case often is.

I'm 24, been watching tennis since about 2003, and I have a pair of eyes and a working brain that certainly works better than some of the fanboys around here whether they play tennis or not. Not to mention that I've heard so called "tennis experts" come out with complete BS at times. People like Agassi and JMac for example. Yet some people invariably say "What does your opinion matter in the face of an all time great like JMac or Agassi saying the opposite." Which is ludicrous as well for the reasons stated above.

The thing is that the more you play and the higher level that you play at, the more you can relate to what the players are going through. As a former nationally ranked junior, I know what it is like going through the training, competition, and the nerves that these guys go through.

Steve0904
11-14-2014, 12:58 PM
The thing is that the more you play and the higher level that you play at, the more you can relate to what the players are going through. As a former nationally ranked junior, I know what it is like going through the training, competition, and the nerves that these guys go through.

Yes, and we all know you think you're better than everybody else. That's ok. Just don't expect me to subscribe to that logic.

willhunting
11-14-2014, 01:01 PM
The thing is that the more you play and the higher level that you play at, the more you can relate to what the players are going through. As a former nationally ranked junior, I know what it is like going through the training, competition, and the nerves that these guys go through.

No you don't. I'm in the same boat as you and I'd be deceiving myself to say that I have any semblance of what a pro is going through. The difference in level from juniors to college is monumental, and the difference between college and the pros is even more so. Get off your high horse and stop kidding yourself, and please don't respond by attacking me for my opinion.

Boom-Boom
11-14-2014, 01:03 PM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

Wow nice fail from 2009 :mrgreen:

West Coast Ace
11-14-2014, 03:48 PM
Wow nice fail from 2009 :mrgreen:Yeah, 2009 was obviously a Weak Era in thread creation. Of course it was @sureshs. His buddy @Breakpoint was probably posting that all the top players would be going back to 85 sq in racquets...

0-9 vs Fed, Nadal, Djokovic.

Can Murray get more aggressive so he doesn't get pushed around by these guys? Can he improve that weak 2nd serve?

Probably rates a separate thread: but could Murray be the 1st of the Big 4 to retire? If 2015 goes the same way will he hang around on tour? He's already in the Hall of Fame - legacy secure. More money than he could ever need (of course more is better!). I'm sure he could get a gig doing commentary if he wanted - he would be very good at it.

Sentinel
11-14-2014, 08:32 PM
Just read through this thread and had a bit of an epiphany.

In financial terms, when Suresh makes a thread like this one or the Cincy masterwork, he is effectively selling a put option. (A put option is an instrument where the seller has limited upside with certainty but a chance of huge downside.)

Allow me to explain my analogy. The limited upside to suresh is the irk he provides to Fed fans for the ten seconds after each of them first reads whatever appalling troll prediction he has presented on the day. Said irk happens because the reader gets annoyed at the sheer gall, audacity, chutzpah, cheek or what have you, that anyone would even CONSIDER making such a prediction.

The downside, in the event his facetious prediction goes belly up, is the consumption of humble pie for long periods of time. In extreme cases for Talk Tennis eternity (>= 5 yrs).

The problem for the seller of troll put options, unlike the seller of real life put options, is that his downside is, by definition, highly likely.. Recall, he's trying to get a rise from followers of His Goatness through the temeritous disrespect of his predictions. In order for them to be most irksome, they must be outlandishly pessimistic. And therefore, unfortunately for the Troll-Seer, unlikely to come true. It's the yin and the yang. It's the paradox underlying the compact that the poor, helpless troll-seer makes with the tennis devils and his own troll-conscience.

In doing so the troll-seer provides a public service to fans of the goat, who can then delight for all eternity mocking the troll-seer's predictions, while surrounded by lush gardens, rivers of milk and honey and looping replays of Fred's matches from Cincy 09, AO 10, Wimby 12 and WTF 14.

I therefore argue that Suresh is a national treasure. A public good. A cyber-gypsy, addicted to selling doomed karmic put-options, compulsively getting high on the short term gratification of irate responses from goat lovers, and then stoically bearing eternal mockery in return. And in the process making TT a better place for the 80% of people here who follow the Goat-Prophet.

We love you Suresh!!!

Epic poast, Sir.

Basically, suresh starts a thread saying something about Federer and then sits back and watches the fun. Most of us here know he is not serious, just like TTMR's threads, but the new kids on the block always trip up and get into fights. Same thing happens with TTMR's threads.

Sadly, many gems got deleted after becoming train-wrecks such as "Fed won W 2012 due to roof", lol.

falstaff78
11-15-2014, 10:12 AM
Lol this is funny :) falstaff78 pretty much nailed it though.

Framed on my wall, since it's too big to sig.

Epic poast, Sir.

Basically, suresh starts a thread saying something about Federer and then sits back and watches the fun. Most of us here know he is not serious, just like TTMR's threads, but the new kids on the block always trip up and get into fights. Same thing happens with TTMR's threads.

Sadly, many gems got deleted after becoming train-wrecks such as "Fed won W 2012 due to roof", lol.


Lol why thank you kind sirs

Senti. well said my Lord. I feel like I came of age on TT while writing that poast. ie going from finding Sensei Sureshs' work intensely irritating to finding it intensely inspiring. In the immortal last words of dastacoman's magnum opus: The Man's a Maestro

Agassifan
11-15-2014, 10:15 AM
Basically, suresh starts a thread saying something about Federer and then sits back and watches the fun. Most of us here know he is not serious, just like TTMR's threads, but the new kids on the block always trip up and get into fights. Same thing happens with TTMR's threads.


That's what he wants you to believe. Some of his threads are meant to be sarcastic, but many are not. Like this one.

and some of his threads are because he can't stand federer winning.

smoledman
11-15-2014, 10:23 AM
http://bestdemotivationalposters.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lines-trains-fail-coloring-precision-best-demotivational-posters.jpg

BounceHitBounceHit
11-22-2014, 05:30 AM
Murray has become the new Nadal for Federer. He will lose to him every time from now on.

As my grandmother used to tell me, "Never is a VERY long time". :) BHBH