PDA

View Full Version : who's commentating the dmitrov/monfils match?


The_Punisher
08-29-2011, 05:36 PM
one of the guys is SO annoying. im not sure but i think he commentated federer/roddick at shanghai 2007 and i remember being extremely annoyed. is he bothering anyone else out there?

this guy. a;lkvdha;kljdfbvkj;asfbdj;kvadkf :evil: does he even know who dimitrov is? does he realize that he's only 20? he's being WAY too harsh on the guy. he just said "i'm surprised this guy is 52 in the world." wow. ughh the most annoying commentator ive ever heard and he is making this match waay too hard to watch.

ty slothrop
08-29-2011, 05:49 PM
murphy jensen. i think it's the first match he's seen in about 3 years.

akv89
08-29-2011, 06:02 PM
It's Murphy Jensen. I think both of these commentators have some unrealistic expectations of how good a player ranked in the 50s is supposed to be.
A list of things I noticed in Jensen's commentary:

1. Claiming that tennis is a simple game
2. Claiming that some Latvian player he couldn't name (it was Gulbis) was 2 sets up on Andy Roddick (he was 1 set up) a couple years back and that he should have won that match easily
3. Suggesting that Dimitrov should just make sure to hit the ball back into the court immediately after complaining that he wasn't hitting the ball hard enough
4. Saying that Dimitrov should have hit an injured Monfils who had given up on the point and was moving out of the way when Dimitrov had the opportunity to hit an easy passing shot with Monfils at the net.
5. Claiming that none of the top players have any holes in the game and that anyone in the top 200 is able to play different styles of the game
6. Referring to Andre Agassi as an example of a player who did not have an impressive junior career and went on to have a great pro career ignoring the fact that Agassi turned pro at 16. (This point was made to suggest that the currently 20-year old Dimitrov would not have a good pro career despite success in juniors)

ty slothrop
08-29-2011, 06:13 PM
It's Murphy Jensen. I think both of these commentators have some unrealistic expectations of how good a player ranked in the 50s is supposed to be.
A list of things I noticed in Jensen's commentary:

1. Claiming that tennis is a simple game
2. Claiming that some Latvian player he couldn't name (it was Gulbis) was 2 sets up on Andy Roddick (he was 1 set up) a couple years back and that he should have won that match easily
3. Suggesting that Dimitrov should just make sure to hit the ball back into the court immediately after complaining that he wasn't hitting the ball hard enough
4. Saying that Dimitrov should have hit an injured Monfils who had given up on the point and was moving out of the way when Dimitrov had the opportunity to hit an easy passing shot with Monfils at the net.
5. Claiming that none of the top players have any holes in the game and that anyone in the top 200 is able to play different styles of the game
6. Referring to Andre Agassi as an example of a player who did not have an impressive junior career and went on to have a great pro career ignoring the fact that Agassi turned pro at 16. (This point was made to suggest that the currently 20-year old Dimitrov would not have a good pro career despite success in juniors)

an excellent list of specific outrages, coupled with a general unfamiliarity of what's going on in pro tennis since 1993 and a tendency toward fourth grade hyperbole and non-stop, stream-of-consciousness babble.

MLB_MOB
08-29-2011, 06:31 PM
It's Murphy Jensen. I think both of these commentators have some unrealistic expectations of how good a player ranked in the 50s is supposed to be.
A list of things I noticed in Jensen's commentary:

1. Claiming that tennis is a simple game
2. Claiming that some Latvian player he couldn't name (it was Gulbis) was 2 sets up on Andy Roddick (he was 1 set up) a couple years back and that he should have won that match easily
3. Suggesting that Dimitrov should just make sure to hit the ball back into the court immediately after complaining that he wasn't hitting the ball hard enough
4. Saying that Dimitrov should have hit an injured Monfils who had given up on the point and was moving out of the way when Dimitrov had the opportunity to hit an easy passing shot with Monfils at the net.
5. Claiming that none of the top players have any holes in the game and that anyone in the top 200 is able to play different styles of the game
6. Referring to Andre Agassi as an example of a player who did not have an impressive junior career and went on to have a great pro career ignoring the fact that Agassi turned pro at 16. (This point was made to suggest that the currently 20-year old Dimitrov would not have a good pro career despite success in juniors)

You realize Murphy Jensen is one of the best coaches in the game?

1. A tennis pro who is 50 in the world is really freakin good, despite what members of this board may believe you have to be a god to reach the top 500 let alone top 50. Many D1 players cannot even make it past qualifying in futures.
2. Yeah he got the score wrong but he was still right, Gulbis blew that match.
3. They were complaining about his consistency the entire match, he was going for too much at the wrong time. They were right all he needed to do was put the ball in the court, Monfils was dying.
4. that was a joke.....
5. A top pro does not have any glaring holes in there game, just parts that aren't as good as the rest. These are usually exposed when they play other top level pros. If you notice the top 10 in the world usually only lose to eachother, because it takes the best to beat the best. And a top 200 level pro can play any style they want, they can make the changes its just a question of whether they want to or not.
6. Most pros outside America turn pro at a very young age now. Especially in Spain and South America. They do not really believe in developing as juniors. They believe that the best way to get experience is to go do the real thing and forget the juniors because there are no real rewards for it. They could've given another example but given they are american they probably know aggasi's history a little better

The_Punisher
08-29-2011, 06:38 PM
You realize Murphy Jensen is one of the best coaches in the game?

1. A tennis pro who is 50 in the world is really freakin good, despite what members of this board may believe you have to be a god to reach the top 500 let alone top 50. Many D1 players cannot even make it past qualifying in futures.
2. Yeah he got the score wrong but he was still right, Gulbis blew that match.
3. They were complaining about his consistency the entire match, he was going for too much at the wrong time. They were right all he needed to do was put the ball in the court, Monfils was dying.
4. that was a joke.....
5. A top pro does not have any glaring holes in there game, just parts that aren't as good as the rest. These are usually exposed when they play other top level pros. If you notice the top 10 in the world usually only lose to eachother, because it takes the best to beat the best. And a top 200 level pro can play any style they want, they can make the changes its just a question of whether they want to or not.
6. Most pros outside America turn pro at a very young age now. Especially in Spain and South America. They do not really believe in developing as juniors. They believe that the best way to get experience is to go do the real thing and forget the juniors because there are no real rewards for it. They could've given another example but given they are american they probably know aggasi's history a little better

theres no question that he's a good coach. he obviously has the reputation and is a great player since he did win a grand slam in doubles. HOWEVER, he just blew chunks all over the commentating tonight.

MLB_MOB
08-29-2011, 07:00 PM
theres no question that he's a good coach. he obviously has the reputation and is a great player since he did win a grand slam in doubles. HOWEVER, he just blew chunks all over the commentating tonight.

you gotta realize he wasn't being hard. He is saying what a lot of people on here have said about Dimitrov. His game looks pretty but isn't effective against the better players. And in tennis 20 is not that young, Dimitrov has had 2 solid years on tour to figure stuff out and he is still not posting good results. Given he could be a late bloomer. But I mean look at guys like Nishikori, Cilic, Delpo, etc. By the time they were 20 they had all accomplished much more than Dimitrov. Hell even Harrison and Tomic have. They all have wins over top 20 players, made the 2nd week of a slam (Harrison an exception here), won a tournament (Harrison and Tomic exceptions), and made it past the qfs of an atp draw.

Rob_C
08-29-2011, 07:18 PM
You realize Murphy Jensen is one of the best coaches in the game?



Who is Jensen coaching??? Do u mean World Team tennis??

MLB_MOB
08-29-2011, 07:32 PM
Who is Jensen coaching??? Do u mean World Team tennis??

Nobody at the moment, Gulbis wanted to hire Jensen but he declined because he didn't want to travel

The_Punisher
08-29-2011, 07:45 PM
you gotta realize he wasn't being hard. He is saying what a lot of people on here have said about Dimitrov. His game looks pretty but isn't effective against the better players. And in tennis 20 is not that young, Dimitrov has had 2 solid years on tour to figure stuff out and he is still not posting good results. Given he could be a late bloomer. But I mean look at guys like Nishikori, Cilic, Delpo, etc. By the time they were 20 they had all accomplished much more than Dimitrov. Hell even Harrison and Tomic have. They all have wins over top 20 players, made the 2nd week of a slam (Harrison an exception here), won a tournament (Harrison and Tomic exceptions), and made it past the qfs of an atp draw.

its not about what he was saying about dimitrov. yeah all thats correct, and i do feel like dimitrov is gonna be a late bloomer. heck, federers early career was very unfruitful. feds biggest win in his early career would be the classic sampras match and he was playing out of his mind against a post prime sampras. if grigor plays out of his mind and he catches nadal/djoker/fed on a bad day (which is very reasonable these days since djoker is getting close to burn out, rafa's self esteem is shot, and feds mental lapses are longer than ever), he does stand a chance, just like how fed did against sampras way back then. but enough about that debate! thats not what this thread is about. :wink:

jensen just made that match unbearable. the things he was saying and the way he was talking about dimitrov and his praise for monfils just seemed over the top and unreasonable. however, i thought the commentary during the federer/giraldo match, though not amazing, was much better. i think it was his brother luke jensen and some other guy, but their commentary really supplemented the game play, versus overshadowing it. they seemed to have more self awareness over the things they were saying (they even made fun of themselves a little about how they were starting to get repetitive) and didnt really berate either player the way murphy did. they gave credit where it was due. and they didnt just focus on the match and the players, they talked about random things like the hurricane and new york during change overs. i felt like i was just listening to two tennis fans having a casual conversation about the match, which is what i think commentary should be like in the early rounds of tournaments.

stoble
08-29-2011, 07:49 PM
WHAT? I can't believe you guys are talking about how annoying Jensen was when Doug Adler was right there along side him. Adler is easily the most annoying tennis nerd, the most predictable simplistic commentary ever. It's like every match is the same if Adler is commentating.

slice bh compliment
08-29-2011, 08:00 PM
Murph is known as a tour coach? I remember him doing some lessons...and 'hitting' with Robin Givens for a while in the late 90s, hahah.
His brother coaches a lot (WTT, and the women's team at Syracuse). Maybe that was the confusion.

Murph probably remembers that Agassi had a good jr career, but did not win jr slams like some of the other guys in their age group. Luke had a heck of a jr career.

As for not remembering Gulbis, I'm actually shocked Murphy knew where Latvia is (might've been vestigial knowledge from that tennis travel/variety show he did on TTC). Most people confuse Latvia with the other Baltic states...and the BalKAN states for that matter. Murph's stock went up a tick there, for me. I must not expect much.

The other stuff is just juvenile little Murph. A 40 yr old who never grew up.

THAT SAID...just tonight I was on the phone with a certain relative I love, so I watched the Federer/Giraldo match on MUTE. Not the best match, but I loved it. Yeah, I missed out on the sound of the ball, but it was a treat to not have to hear the usual inane blather. Meanwhile I had a fun conversation with a great 60+ yr old tennis nut (while watching a 30 yr old tennis nut).