PDA

View Full Version : reed: murray will win wimbledon LOL


aphex
06-21-2009, 06:56 AM
seriously, has this guy ever been right?

this is the most failed reasoning i've heard in a while...

i especially lold at the bolded part



Wimbledon - Reed: Murray will go all the way
Eurosport - Sun, 21 Jun 08:19:00 2009
Eurosport commentator Simon Reed has installed Britain's Andy Murray as his favourite to win Wimbledon.

MORE STORIES
Federer rues Nadal absence
Wimbledon men's draw
I don't want to pile any more pressure on Andy Murray, but looking at the draw I have to make him favourite to win Wimbledon.
He has got a dream draw, and he is now the top seed in his half following Rafael Nadal's withdrawal.
Nadal's decision was almost inevitable, considering what went on at Roland Garros and in his exhibition matches at Hurlingham.
His team were hoping against hope his knee would be alright, but I was taking him out of the equation anyway - even if he had played he would not have been at 100 per cent.
Murray has got a clear run through the first three rounds, no problem. It is only in the last 16 that it starts to get tough, against either Stanislas Warwinka or Marat Safin, who can be formidable if he gets his head right.
After that, the top seeded player he could face in the quarter-finals is Gilles Simon, but I don't think it will be him. More likely is Fernando Gonzalez, who got the better of him at Roland Garros, but I don't think he can live with Andy on grass.
The semi-final is more of a stumbling block. It is likely to be Andy Roddick, who is always a tough customer at Wimbledon. It could also be Juan Martin del Petro, who would be the highest seed in his quarter of the draw by that stage and is a tricky opponent. Again, I don't see Andy losing to either of those. He's too good.
That leaves Roger Federer in the final. Andy lost to him in last year's US Open final, but that was by far Federer's best match of 2008.
Since then, he has not been at that level, even at the French Open which he won. I don't think Federer's the player he was, and I see Andy beating him.
People have said it might be easier for Federer now he has got the monkey off his back, finally winning the French.
The theory is his frame of mind is better, he will play with freedom and return to the Federer of old. I need to see that before I think he's got any chance against Murray.
There is no doubt the pressure will be immense, and match by match it will reach almost unimaginable levels. It would freak most people out, but I don't think it will affect Andy at all.
The danger is that he could put pressure on himself because he's not producing the goods, he doesn't feel right or just isn't playing good tennis.
There is probably going to be a match like that, it could be against anyone, and that is when he's going to be under pressure.
Andy has struggled in the past against players he is expected to beat so that might be one of the pitfalls of a relatively straightforward draw.
I don't think he ever underestimates his opponent, but he does get very frustrated with his own play. He's much better than he was at coping with that, and I think he can pull through especially in a five-set match. There is time for him to lift himself if he gets down.
All in all, the signs for Murray are very optimistic.

Muzzafan
06-21-2009, 07:01 AM
Everyone's free to their opinion, it's not like federer's guaranteed to win.

batz
06-21-2009, 07:02 AM
Reed is a tube.

malakas
06-21-2009, 07:06 AM
It started well but...:lol:

Is Reed maximo's lost brother?:D

maximo
06-21-2009, 07:09 AM
He's correct, Murray will win Wimbledon.

batz
06-21-2009, 07:14 AM
It started well but...:lol:

Is Reed maximo's lost brother?:D

No, but believe it or not he is hell-raising actor Oliver Reed's brother!

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:17 AM
maximo, do you think federer has ANY chance against or not really?

malakas
06-21-2009, 07:21 AM
No, but believe it or not he is hell-raising actor Oliver Reed's brother!

oh didn't know that!!

aphex,eisai pragmati ellinas?:p

Telepatic
06-21-2009, 07:23 AM
Poor Fed, doesnt have any chance against Murray.

We should respect Reeds opinions, hes usually right anyway.

p.s- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOzcxveb_NA

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:27 AM
oh didn't know that!!

aphex,eisai pragmati ellinas?:p

yep! apo athina...esy?

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:29 AM
Poor Fed, doesnt have any chance against Murray.

We should respect Reeds opinions, hes usually right anyway.

p.s- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOzcxveb_NA

thanks for the free porn:)

malakas
06-21-2009, 07:31 AM
yep! apo athina...esy?

karditsa..:rolleyes:..
den se eixa xanadei edw gyrw..itan pio palia 2-3 ellines alla exoun fygei twra.
Kalws ilthes!:D me lene sani (gia na mi me fwnazeis kai malaka!!! :p )

Muzzafan
06-21-2009, 07:33 AM
Poor Fed, doesnt have any chance against Murray.

We should respect Reeds opinions, hes usually right anyway.

p.s- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOzcxveb_NA

Yes, because we must all hold the same narrow minded view that federer's guaranteed to win and anyone that says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about.:roll:

Telepatic
06-21-2009, 07:34 AM
thanks for the free porn:)

Yea I should have censured it because of some kids, haha :)

Telepatic
06-21-2009, 07:37 AM
Yes, because we must all hold the same narrow minded view that federer's guaranteed to win and anyone that says otherwise doesn't know what they're talking about.:roll:

Yo man, its realistic and totally fine/ok to say Murray have a chance to win Wimbledon, but to say Federer doesnt have any chance against Murray is more then ridiculous..

maximo
06-21-2009, 07:39 AM
Yo man, its realistic and totally fine/ok to say Murray have a chance to win Wimbledon, but to say Federer doesnt have any chance against Murray is more then ridiculous..

Murray's beaten federer 4 times in a row, if you can't comprehend that then lord help you.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:40 AM
karditsa..:rolleyes:..
den se eixa xanadei edw gyrw..itan pio palia 2-3 ellines alla exoun fygei twra.
Kalws ilthes!:D me lene sani (gia na mi me fwnazeis kai malaka!!! :p )

xaxaxa fysika...emena giorgo

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:42 AM
Murray's beaten federer 4 times in a row, if you can't comprehend that then lord help you.

your talking is useless...wanna put your money where your mouth is?

Telepatic
06-21-2009, 07:42 AM
Murray's beaten federer 4 times in a row, if you can't comprehend that then lord help you.

I know mate, but then again even Fed himself said that grand slams are a different animal, which is proven to be right according to both Murrays/Feds recent GS results.

Muzzafan
06-21-2009, 07:42 AM
Yo man, its realistic and totally fine/ok to say Murray have a chance to win Wimbledon, but to say Federer doesnt have any chance against Murray is more then ridiculous..

Hey, I agree, I wasn't meaning federer will have no chance, I was meaning that we should'nt just say "haha, someone who thinks federer can't win" when someone says they think murray can win it.

The guy who wrote it did go abit overboard with federer having "no chance", but realistically its not laughable to say murray can win against him in the final.:)

navratilovafan
06-21-2009, 07:44 AM
What is so stupid about that? Murray is clearly atleast the 2nd favorite to only Federer now. Does anyone really think Djokovic, Roddick, Del Potro, or any of the French players have a better shot than him at this years Wimbledon? If so you are the crazy ones.

skip1969
06-21-2009, 07:44 AM
i think someone said this the other day, but if every tom-dick-and-harry on this board is allowed to make their oh-so brilliant predictions (regardless of how many failed predictions they have had in the past) about who they think is gonna win a tournament . . . then surely people that are actually getting paid to cover tennis can make their stupid predictions, too.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:46 AM
What is so stupid about that? Murray is clearly atleast the 2nd favorite to only Federer now. Does anyone really think Djokovic, Roddick, Del Potro, or any of the French players have a better shot than him at this years Wimbledon? If so you are the crazy ones.

imo, the 3 your mentioned, do indeed have a better chance

maximo
06-21-2009, 07:46 AM
your talking is useless...wanna put your money where your mouth is?

Your the biggest troll on these board, go find some other interesting place to do your stuff.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:49 AM
Your the biggest troll on these board, go find some other interesting place to do your stuff.

it's "you're".

your lack of reply has been noted. kthxbye.

Muzzafan
06-21-2009, 07:50 AM
imo, the 3 your mentioned, do indeed have a better chance

What evidence do you have?

Firstly djokovic, lost to haas in halle final. Fair enough haas playing well, but federer would have played better, therefore how does he have a chance against fed?

Del potro, only won 8 matches on grass, lost 5. 2 -2 record at wimbledon not going further than 2nd round. Height makes him questionable as a good grass player.

Roddick, playing better than ever but is a poor match-up to federer and has a terrible record against him.

malakas
06-21-2009, 07:51 AM
heh giorgo,don't pick on maximommy!:(

you just gotta love the english press!:D

maximo
06-21-2009, 07:53 AM
it's "you're".

your lack of reply has been noted. kthxbye.

"kthzbye" demonstates your coordination ******ation.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:55 AM
What evidence do you have?

Firstly djokovic, lost to haas in halle final. Fair enough haas playing well, but federer would have played better, therefore how does he have a chance against fed?

Del potro, only won 8 matches on grass, lost 5. 2 -2 record at wimbledon not going further than 2nd round. Height makes him questionable as a good grass player.

Roddick, playing better than ever but is a poor match-up to federer and has a terrible record against him.

maybe i misspoke...i didnt mean they have a better chance against fed, i meant
that imo, they have a better chance against murray...i.e. if murray were to play any of these 3, i would pick them.

navratilovafan
06-21-2009, 07:56 AM
imo, the 3 your mentioned, do indeed have a better chance

Then you are the one who is delusional if you really believe that, not Reed. A totally out of form Djokovic who Murray has dominated for almost a year now, Roddick who was owned by teenage pre-prime Murray and whose slam winning days are clearly over, and Del Potro who sucks on grass, all have better chances than Murray!?! Dream on. I am not even a Murray fan but I am not blind to reality.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:57 AM
"kthzbye" demonstates your coordination ******ation.

can't you even copy/paste? i mean really!! even you are capable of acquiring that skill...

i wrote kthxbye, not kthzbye.

kthxbye.

Cesc Fabregas
06-21-2009, 07:58 AM
Simon Reed is a pratt.

aphex
06-21-2009, 07:59 AM
Then you are the one who is delusional if you really believe that, not Reed. A totally out of form Djokovic who Murray has dominated for almost a year now, Roddick who was owned by teenage pre-prime Murray and whose slam winning days are clearly over, and Del Potro who sucks on grass, all have better chances than Murray!?! Dream on. I am not even a Murray fan but I am not blind to reality.

deep breaths...relax man...

navratilovafan
06-21-2009, 08:00 AM
deep breaths...relax man...

I am a women, not a man. :)

maximo
06-21-2009, 08:01 AM
can't you even copy/paste? i mean really!! even you are capable of acquiring that skill...

i wrote kthxbye, not kthzbye.

kthxbye.

You fool, it just shows how what you wrote makes no sense whatsoever. Even your capable of realising that.

aphex
06-21-2009, 08:04 AM
I am a women, not a man. :)

oops, sorry:)

aphex
06-21-2009, 08:07 AM
You fool, it just shows how what you wrote makes no sense whatsoever. Even your capable of realising that.

i can't believe i'm doing this...


kthxbye

1.) Form of the phrase "Ok, Thank you. Goodbye." Used exclusively on the internet, most commonly in cases where a person no longer wishes to continue a conversation.

maximo
06-21-2009, 08:10 AM
i can't believe i'm doing this...


kthxbye

1.) Form of the phrase "Ok, Thank you. Goodbye." Used exclusively on the internet, most commonly in cases where a person no longer wishes to continue a conversation.

Yeah, i can't believe your incompetent and need help regarding your trolling.

joeri888
06-21-2009, 10:13 AM
Simon reed is an idiot, but idiots are totally entitled to their opinion, I just don't value it.

Since then, he has not been at that level, even at the French Open which he won. I don't think Federer's the player he was, and I see Andy beating him.

Short memory Simon. Name me one better match Federer EVER played than the one against Del Potro at AO. His Soderling match at RG, his Nadal match at Madrid, they were just as good as that Murray match. He played great there, but those journalists should watch less tennis because all they talk about is ****ed up h2h's which were made in Master series and other small events nobody in 'the real world' really cares about. Mr Reed should realise that a fivetime Champion ALWAYS stands a chance, wherever, whoever he plays. It's fine to think Murray can win it, so do I.. but saying Fed needs to show things before Reed believes he "stands a chance"(!!!) is ridiculous.

I guess it sells in the UK

Lion King
06-21-2009, 10:31 AM
Murray's beaten federer 4 times in a row, if you can't comprehend that then lord help you.

None of us here on this forum would have a chance to win a game against Murray, that's for sure. But to say that Fed has no chance against him is ridiculous. i would say most players in the top 50 have at least some chance against Murray, even though small. Otherwise why not just give Murray the title before the whole thing starts?

maximo
06-21-2009, 10:34 AM
i would say most players in the top 50 have at least some chance against Murray, even though small. Otherwise why not just give Murray the title before the whole thing starts?

Your saying no players in the top 50 have any chance against Federer?

Remember Haas and Acasuso at the French?

you make me chuckle.