PDA

View Full Version : The best imaginable doubles team?


Aykhan Mammadov
06-16-2006, 01:09 PM
I think the best pair could be Santoro+Federer.

Who do u think could beat this pair?

Breaker
06-16-2006, 01:11 PM
Bryan/Bryan, Bjorkman/Mirnyi, Knowles/Nestor, etc...

I would put money on all three of those teams to win in straights over Fed and Santoro, and the "lesser doubles teams" to most likely win in 3.

mislav
06-16-2006, 01:12 PM
Sorry, but they stand no chance against Nadal and Karlovic, Aykhan! :D

Kaptain Karl
06-16-2006, 01:15 PM
The Woodies ... of course!

- KK

exruda
06-16-2006, 01:16 PM
Have you ever seen any Fed-Allegro doubles match? How's Fed's teamwork? :)
I'd guess lack of teamwork is the main reason why the biggest tournaments are won by players who play doubles frequently.

monologuist
06-16-2006, 01:21 PM
I've heard Sania Mirza's are pretty impressive, but I've never actually seen them with my own eyes. If we're including non tennis players, Heather Graham, Uma Thurman, and Terri Hatcher (especially when she was a little younger) have got to be up there.

oscar_2424
06-16-2006, 01:23 PM
I've heard Sania Mirza's are pretty impressive, but I've never actually seen them with my own eyes. If we're including non tennis players, Heather Graham, Uma Thurman, and Terri Hatcher (especially when she was a little younger) have got to be up there.
hehehehe

LowProfile
06-16-2006, 02:05 PM
I wonder how long a Safin/Safin partnership would last before one of them kills the other?

oscar_2424
06-16-2006, 02:08 PM
What about Federer and Nadal playing together

JayxTheKoolest
06-16-2006, 02:39 PM
What about Federer and Nadal playing together

They wouldn't have any teamwork.

robertk29
06-16-2006, 02:44 PM
Yo Mono..couple oldies but beauties there might be hangin a bit..I was going to mention myself..but much too shy..have good w/e.........

snoflewis
06-16-2006, 02:45 PM
i'd like to see safin/federer play doubles again...that'd be awesome.

even better, i would like to see when they DID play since federer had a bad temper just like safin...that'd be a lot of racket breaking during doubles lol.

EliteNinja
06-17-2006, 12:17 AM
Sampras/Agassi
Sampras/Federer
Sampras/Henman
McEnroe and his clone

EclipseRydr97
06-17-2006, 09:32 AM
Rafter/Sampras

Ivanišević
06-17-2006, 09:39 AM
Sampras/Agassi
Sampras/Federer
Sampras/Henman
McEnroe and his clone
federer and his clone:)

Eviscerator
06-17-2006, 09:47 AM
Bryan/Bryan, Bjorkman/Mirnyi, Knowles/Nestor, etc...

I would put money on all three of those teams to win in straights over Fed and Santoro, and the "lesser doubles teams" to most likely win in 3.

AGREED

Morpheus
06-17-2006, 09:53 AM
I'd like to see the 1985 JMac team up with Fed.

pero
06-17-2006, 09:55 AM
i'd say ljubicic ancic, with some practise

Dan007
06-17-2006, 10:08 AM
Sampras/Federer
McEnroe/Nadal

Aykhan Mammadov
06-17-2006, 10:53 AM
I don't think Nadal will be effective in doubles game. Doubles game imply diversity of the game including net game. In this meaning Ndals' game is very one-dimensional patient game on clay.

Shaolin
06-17-2006, 11:41 AM
Federer/Rios

Arafel
06-17-2006, 11:52 AM
McEnroe/Edberg. The two greatest volleyers the game has seen. McEnroe would hook his serve to the righty backhand and give Edberg easy volleys all day long. Likewise with Edberg hitting his kick serve. I think they would be unstoppable.

Of course, to quote Fleming, the greatest doubles team on Earth is McEnroe and anybody. But McEnroe/Edberg would be fearsome.

PBODY99
06-17-2006, 12:15 PM
I will have to pick Mac_85 with a vinatage Pete Sampras.

simi
06-17-2006, 12:28 PM
i'd say ljubicic ancic, with some practise

Watched Ivan and Mario's doubles match this year at the Pacific Life Open. You're right, they would need practice . . . lot's of it.

siber222000
06-17-2006, 12:31 PM
ill have to say nadal and fed for double ;) *jk*

prostaff18
06-17-2006, 01:01 PM
Sampras and Federer
They could kill anyone that got in there way.

brucie
06-17-2006, 01:14 PM
Byran bros obviously, hence no1 in world

Aykhan Mammadov
06-17-2006, 02:06 PM
McEnroe/Edberg. The two greatest volleyers the game has seen. McEnroe would hook his serve to the righty backhand and give Edberg easy volleys all day long. Likewise with Edberg hitting his kick serve. I think they would be unstoppable.

Of course, to quote Fleming, the greatest doubles team on Earth is McEnroe and anybody. But McEnroe/Edberg would be fearsome.

I never counted some players as GREAT, for example Wilander, Lendl and some others despite they won many GS. Edberg belongs IMHO to this category.

Why didn't u want to suggest McEnroe/Sampras instead ?

IMHO there were not better magician and more talented player than Santoro.

OrangeOne
06-17-2006, 02:42 PM
Sampras and Federer
They could kill anyone that got in there way.

I have to agree, two of the greatest players who can both volley, and who understand the game like they were born to play it. I think that they'd beat McEnroe & Anybody, simply as they're both at similar or better skill levels to Mc but they have the added advantage of power. And yes, doubles isn't all about power, but having it there when appropriate never hurts....

Saito
06-17-2006, 02:46 PM
I don't think Nadal will be effective in doubles game. Doubles game imply diversity of the game including net game. In this meaning Ndals' game is very one-dimensional patient game on clay.

You obviously haven't seen Nadal play doubles then. Don't get me wrong... I'm not neccessarily a fan of his, but I have a match of him playing doubles w/ Robredo... the kid can play doubles.

OrangeOne
06-17-2006, 02:54 PM
I never counted some players as GREAT, for example Wilander, Lendl and some others despite they won many GS. Edberg belongs IMHO to this category.

Lendl not a great? That's almost sacrilege ;)

- 8 consecutive US Open finals
- Closest player in the power era to agassi winning a slam on each surface (fed has to reach another french final to equal Lendl's two wimbledon finals, not to mention his 3 semi-finals)
- Speaking of the power-game.... he started it. Power, fitness, nutrition, professionalism.... he was a leader in changing the game into a truly professional & athletic game.
- Number 1 for almost 5 years - *the* player for 85-89
- I could go on, but I don't want to hijack the thread ;)

unjugon
06-17-2006, 04:25 PM
Rafter/Bjorkman, of course! :D

35ft6
06-17-2006, 05:25 PM
Federer and McEnroe.

Lee
06-17-2006, 05:34 PM
I like Blake and Fish, great buddies, great chemistry and great tennis!

ShooterMcMarco
06-17-2006, 05:44 PM
mcenroe and any bryan or leander paes.

bagung
06-17-2006, 05:56 PM
nadal and safin makes the perfect double .... cause both beat fed regularly.......

unjugon
06-17-2006, 06:14 PM
nadal and safin makes the perfect double .... cause both beat fed regularly.......
No.

superman1
06-17-2006, 06:23 PM
Anyone + McEnroe = Perfect doubles team. You would think McEnroe/Sampras would have been the dream team, but Sampras' doubles results aren't great.

armand
06-17-2006, 06:23 PM
Federer's not known for his flat strokes, and you need flat strokes in doubles because spinny topspin shots will get eaten alive on the doubles court. Of course, he can flatten out his shots, but is he anywhere near the best?

And yes, Federer is a good volleyer...by today's standards. I don't think he can hold a candle to Edberg, Rafter, or McEnroe or Sampras in the volleying department(of course, I think he woulda been an amazing volleyer if he wasn't playing in this baseline era).

Breaker
06-17-2006, 06:27 PM
For the "dream teams" or whatever I'd go with Henman and McEnroe or Mirnyi and McEnroe. I also think the Mirnyi/Hewitt team would have done extremely well if they would have continued on together.

adamdean
06-17-2006, 07:07 PM
Any combination of Mac/Edberg/Henman/Sampras.

Soem of the greatest volleyers in the game...

35ft6
06-17-2006, 07:45 PM
Federer's not known for his flat strokes, and you need flat strokes in doubles because spinny topspin shots will get eaten alive on the doubles court. Of course, he can flatten out his shots, but is he anywhere near the best?

And yes, Federer is a good volleyer...by today's standards. I don't think he can hold a candle to Edberg, Rafter, or McEnroe or Sampras in the volleying department(of course, I think he woulda been an amazing volleyer if he wasn't playing in this baseline era). I watched a Davis Cup match where Federer was single handedly destroying the US doubles team. It was unbelievable. This is before he became Super Federer. He just completely dominated that doubles court like no single player I'd ever seen. Seemed like every ball he touched turned into a winner.

sharapovalover
06-17-2006, 07:51 PM
Ali G/ Peter Griffin

hehehe

"Can't touch me"

rfprse
06-17-2006, 07:52 PM
Edberg & McEnroe.

superman1
06-17-2006, 08:31 PM
I watched a Davis Cup match where Federer was single handedly destroying the US doubles team. It was unbelievable. This is before he became Super Federer. He just completely dominated that doubles court like no single player I'd ever seen. Seemed like every ball he touched turned into a winner.

Seems like when Federer was younger he was either hot or cold, but when things were clicking he was unbelievable. Blazing hot young Federer would probably beat present day Federer in a match.

Nice profile pic, BTW. Gotta love Roman Holiday.

Zeph
06-17-2006, 08:53 PM
Ljubicic/Karlovic might be a good pair if they had volleys to back up their huge serves.

Aykhan Mammadov
06-18-2006, 12:10 PM
Lendl not a great? That's almost sacrilege ;)

- 8 consecutive US Open finals
- Closest player in the power era to agassi winning a slam on each surface (fed has to reach another french final to equal Lendl's two wimbledon finals, not to mention his 3 semi-finals)
- Speaking of the power-game.... he started it. Power, fitness, nutrition, professionalism.... he was a leader in changing the game into a truly professional & athletic game.
- Number 1 for almost 5 years - *the* player for 85-89
- I could go on, but I don't want to hijack the thread ;)

This is common opinion. Instead of words I believe in my eyes more. Just not talking, watch 10 his matches or of another "GREAT" Wilander ( 8 GS winner) and u will understand me. They didn't play tennis, they just hitted the ball back. It is boring.

007
06-19-2006, 05:22 AM
Kraijicek / McEnroe : this combo would be unplayable.

armand
06-19-2006, 05:29 AM
I watched a Davis Cup match where Federer was single handedly destroying the US doubles team. It was unbelievable. This is before he became Super Federer. He just completely dominated that doubles court like no single player I'd ever seen. Seemed like every ball he touched turned into a winner.I stand corrected! Could you describe what you saw further?

Rhino
06-19-2006, 05:47 AM
This is common opinion. Instead of words I believe in my eyes more. Just not talking, watch 10 his matches or of another "GREAT" Wilander ( 8 GS winner) and u will understand me. They didn't play tennis, they just hitted the ball back. It is boring.
Does tennis have to be dramatic before you can call it tennis?

My doubles team: Maria Sharapove and Guillermo Vilas

OrangeOne
06-19-2006, 06:17 AM
This is common opinion. Instead of words I believe in my eyes more. Just not talking, watch 10 his matches or of another "GREAT" Wilander ( 8 GS winner) and u will understand me. They didn't play tennis, they just hitted the ball back. It is boring.

Umm, I've actually watched dozens of Lendl matches, including seeing him play live at the (now-non-existent) Sydney Indoor and also at the White City Tournament (one of the main Australian Open lead-ups, now known as the Sydney International).

To be honest, I'm a Lendl fan, but hopefully not beyond the point of rational thought like some people (esp. some Fed & Nadal fans - who I also like watching play) on this site.

But yeah - after watching dozens of his matches - I can't "understand you" as you say, Aykhan. He didn't just 'hit the ball back', he constructed points, he used (for the day) true power-tennis - as I said - he practically pioneered power tennis, he strategised brilliantly, and in fact he hit some amazing winners with regularity. Sure, by his own admission he was willing to win 'ugly' (boringly) if he thought that would guarantee the win - but who cares, a win's a win.

Rhino asked "does it have to be dramatic before you can call it tennis", and i agree. I also ask why "style" is relevant in an assessment of greatness? In my opinion, great players *at any level* do the absolute most to improve and play well - irrespective of their style. Lendl did this, Wilander did this too.

Many others (Courier, Muster, Seles) come to mind too - players without huge natural 'flair' for the game or a pretty style who still did some amazing things (as opposed to Fed, McEnroe, either of the Martinas - all who I respect and admire, but all who are very naturally 'gifted' in the game). I respect all of these players, but maybe the first group that little more, they're great role models for juniors, as hard work pays off more in life than anything!

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one mate....

ambro
06-19-2006, 09:20 AM
McEnroe/Rafter

Aykhan Mammadov
06-19-2006, 01:39 PM
OrangeOne, it is not difficult to understand me. Watch one of the most boring matches of 20-th century - of 2 most boring players Lendl-Wilander at USO in 1988. Then watch Cash - Lendl at W 1987.

Not to say he was boring but also he delayed every point with cleaning his eyes similar to Nadal's pulling his socks. But Lendl delayed more than Nadal.

I can explain my words also in the following way: there is the most genius player in the history - Santoro, but he never won GS in singles. PROs regard Santoro so great and talented ( not me only) that there is proverb between them : "For every player there is his own Santoro" ( what means somebody crashing his game). Number of GS doesn't reflect necessarily tennis talent, it may also reflect great physical form, accuracy, hard working capacity.

Do u consider 2 times RG champion Bruguera or 1 time RG champion Costa as a great player ? Me - not. Of course, in comparison between PROs.

If u have understanding of the game u can understand me seing the difference between tennis being showed by Hewitt, Ferrero, Davydenko and etc.. from one side - and tennis played by Santoro, Federer, Moya, Coria and etc... from another.

RiosTheGenius
06-19-2006, 01:45 PM
the Bjorkman/Myrni team is as good as you could dream.

OrangeOne
06-19-2006, 02:34 PM
OrangeOne, it is not difficult to understand me. Watch one of the most boring matches of 20-th century - of 2 most boring players Lendl-Wilander at USO in 1988. Then watch Cash - Lendl at W 1987.

I haven't seen the first match, I would have watched a chunk of the second match at the time. Neither will change my mind, Aykhan, just as me writing more words clearly isn't going to change yours.

Not to say he was boring but also he delayed every point with cleaning his eyes similar to Nadal's pulling his socks. But Lendl delayed more than Nadal.

Greatness....or not....is in no way related to playing speed.

I can explain my words also in the following way: there is the most genius player in the history - Santoro, but he never won GS in singles.

Santoro hits an awesome ball, and some awesome shots. But, we're playing a sport where the goal is to win GS's and major tournaments, not show stylistic flair. If he was really a genius / a great, he would find a way to use his genius to win major tournaments frequently. Stylistic points are not given in tennis, they're given in ice-skating, gymnastics, etc etc.

PROs regard Santoro so great and talented ( not me only)

That's not a good argument there, you'll always find a PRO who regards someone as great, you'll find plenty of players who regard Lendl as great, you'll find plenty of PROs who regard anyone who just beat them as great!

Number of GS doesn't reflect necessarily tennis talent, it may also reflect great physical form, accuracy, hard working capacity.

Of course, but we weren't discussing tennis talent, Aykhan, we were discussing the elusive term that is greatness. And I think all of the elements you have listed go in to making up a great player, plus many more. Many of the reasons I listen as reasons I consider Lendl to be a great had nothing to do with the number of GS's he won!.

If u have understanding of the game u can understand me seing the difference between tennis being showed by Hewitt, Ferrero, Davydenko and etc.. from one side - and tennis played by Santoro, Federer, Moya, Coria and etc... from another.

It's a really, really bad way to make a point to say to someone that "if you understand SOMETHING, you'll see it MY WAY". Because you're actually saying to them "if you don't see this MY WAY, you don't understand / aren't knowledgeable / aren't capable - intelligent enough / etc".

Stylistically, I can see differences between the players you have mentioned. But I don't, in any way, think that style determines greatness. Think of it this way: would *anyone* consider Federer great if he hits the ball the way he does, but he didn't have the mental strength he does - and so he'd never won a GS? Not many - he'd just be talked about as that player who hits the ball nicely.

Anyways - greatness - as we've determined - means different things to different people. Some people it means style, some people it means speed, some people it means GS wins, some people it means wins on a surface.

Can we agree that we're unlikely to change? You're unlikely to consider Lendl a great - I'm unlikely to change my mind and say that he's not a great?

sliceroni
06-19-2006, 02:44 PM
The best I've actually seen was 92 Olympic double team gold medalists Becker/Stich. Very impressive, both crushed returns, lightening reflexes at net and ofcourse one of the best two servers of all-time. Hated each other but had good chemistry. My dream pick would be any mix of Mac/Edberg/Rafter. Best volleyers of all-time and got into net behind there serves faster than anybody else ever, great returners too. Mac's slice out wide in add court would account for a ton of free points.

Aykhan Mammadov
06-19-2006, 03:28 PM
Post deleted.

Aykhan Mammadov
06-19-2006, 03:44 PM
Greatness....or not....is in no way related to playing speed.

But I didn't tell it is related. I told it makes his boring game even more boring.


It's a really, really bad way to make a point to say to someone that "if you understand SOMETHING, you'll see it MY WAY". Because you're actually saying to them "if you don't see this MY WAY, you don't understand / aren't knowledgeable / aren't capable - intelligent enough / etc.."

I didn't want to offend u. Conversely I wrote it in the meaning that u "Definetly understand the game and obviuosly see why they differ".

Think of it this way: would *anyone* consider Federer great if he hits the ball the way he does, but he didn't have the mental strength he does - and so he'd never won a GS? Not many - he'd just be talked about as that player who hits the ball nicely.

Not really. Many people say Santoro is great despite he lose his every 2-nd match. Many people enjoy his every match.

Another examples. Many people say McEnroe is great and genius player while nobody says the same about Wilander. But both they won 7 slams.

Many people say Rios is genius while he never won single slam.

Of course, we'll not agree on Lendl and Wilander ( as happened before with some posters and me), but we definetly continue be friends with different opinions.

TennisPro
06-19-2006, 08:27 PM
Without a doubt...Yao Ming (7'6") and Manute Bol (7'7")! After a few tennis lessons, of course. :p Try getting the ball past these two!

http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/7839/yaomingnarrowweb300x52807rf.jpg (http://imageshack.us) http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/5646/bolbogues1951gi.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Morpheus
06-20-2006, 03:36 AM
Now that I think of it, I would absolutely go for JMac. I'd replace Fed, however, with someone more agile and quick....say, The Flash...you have to like his superhuman reflexes and ability to move extremely fast.

http://www.comicscontinuum.com/stories/0507/18/flash.jpghttp://www.strangesports.com/images/content/3906.jpg

kreative
06-20-2006, 05:39 PM
JMac and Edberg for dream team dubs

superman1
06-20-2006, 05:43 PM
How about McEnroe/Laver, if both played in the same era. Both guys were lefties with identical games.

jackofromalsager
06-21-2006, 07:13 AM
i think nadal and fed would be good on clay

matty p
06-21-2006, 08:49 AM
i think these 2 guys would be impossible to hit past:

http://www.hccsucks.com/images/articles/20040419193551302_1.jpghttp://www.unison.ie/sportsdesk/review/images/gallery/sumo.jpg

whodey
06-21-2006, 09:43 AM
McEnroe/Sampras

Mattle
06-21-2006, 10:28 AM
Would like to see Henman/Ancic or Henman/Dent

Could be really classy!

c_zimma
06-21-2006, 07:13 PM
Hewitt/McEnroe or Sampras/Agassi

peter
06-22-2006, 12:34 AM
JMac and Edberg for dream team dubs

JMac and Jonas Björkman will apparently play doubles again - at this years Stockholm Open...

superman1
06-22-2006, 12:38 AM
Sampras/Agassi. Boy, they'd probably be very average as a doubles team, but wouldn't that be a sight to see. I can't wait for when Sampras gets back in shape and he and Agassi can play exhibitions. Add in Federer to the mix, Nadal, the Champions Tour (McEnroe, Courier, Rios). *drool*

djones
06-22-2006, 04:59 AM
How about Rafter - Sampras?

But still, how come, not the best serve volleyers or overal best players, aren't that good in doubles?

slice bh compliment
06-22-2006, 05:15 AM
...McEnroe and his clone

Uh oh. Watch out, highlight reel! Great tennis. Intense competition and double the meltdown quotient.

slice bh compliment
06-22-2006, 05:39 AM
Federer and McEnroe.

Great call. Up there with Laver and Mac.
While we are at it, Ilie Nastase and Johnny Mac. Shotmaking and drama....wicked angles, man! Nasty won a lot with a certain other angry American lefty didn't he?
Then there's Mac and Stich, the 1992 Wimbledon Champions. Sort of a nineties version of Mac and Fleming. Mac and Edberg. Noah and Mac!! Boris and Nasty. The possibilities are endless.

The Bryans are a match made in heaven, but.....

Someone mentioned Woodforde and Woodbridge. Hard to imagine anyone better at every little aspect of the doubles game.

Okay, while we are on this....I dig good dubs. Playing it, watching it, talking about it, whatever. I like that Wimbledon likes the dubs game. Judging by the popularity of this thread, I am not alone. Nice.

I'm for Wesley Moodie and Stephen Huss somehow winning Wimbledon again. That would be cool. 2005 qualifiers who won the shole thing. They don't win much for a year then win it again? Hollywood would have to turn that script down.

Remember when Rochus and Malisse won Roland Garros? That was awesome.

Someone mentioned Hewitt and Mac. That would work, actually, even though both normally play with a big hitter next to them. Wasn't it Hewitt and Mirnyi who won the US Open a few years ago.

While I am rambling......how about another kind of dubs? Mixed. Navratilova is the story.
Hantuchova tends to win a lot of mixed titles alongside some usual suspects. But while we're having some fun: Mac and Graf (ooops), either of the Martinas and me, Edberg and my grandmother (she was really something before electricity).
Okay, here are the quarters of a silly little inter-era MXDBLS tournament.

Hingis and Federer (Hopp Schweiz!)
Mac and Venus.

Maria Bueno and Stefan Edberg.
Evonne Goolagong with Rosewall.

Becker with Sabatini.
Noah with Serena.

Conchita Martinez and Manolo Santana. On clay. Or why not grass (both won Wimbledon singles).
Bill Tilden with Martina Navratilova. I envision incredible tennis, and you gotta love the stadium lines with rainbow-colored bunting.

Arafel
06-22-2006, 07:05 AM
Great call. Up there with Laver and Mac.
While we are at it, Ilie Nastase and Johnny Mac. Shotmaking and drama....wicked angles, man! Nasty won a lot with a certain other angry American lefty didn't he?
Then there's Mac and Stich, the 1992 Wimbledon Champions. Sort of a nineties version of Mac and Fleming. Mac and Edberg. Noah and Mac!! Boris and Nasty. The possibilities are endless.

The Bryans are a match made in heaven, but.....

Someone mentioned Woodforde and Woodbridge. Hard to imagine anyone better at every little aspect of the doubles game.

Okay, while we are on this....I dig good dubs. Playing it, watching it, talking about it, whatever. I like that Wimbledon likes the dubs game. Judging by the popularity of this thread, I am not alone. Nice.

I'm for Wesley Moodie and Stephen Huss somehow winning Wimbledon again. That would be cool. 2005 qualifiers who won the shole thing. They don't win much for a year then win it again? Hollywood would have to turn that script down.

Remember when Rochus and Malisse won Roland Garros? That was awesome.

Someone mentioned Hewitt and Mac. That would work, actually, even though both normally play with a big hitter next to them. Wasn't it Hewitt and Mirnyi who won the US Open a few years ago.

While I am rambling......how about another kind of dubs? Mixed. Navratilova is the story.
Hantuchova tends to win a lot of mixed titles alongside some usual suspects. But while we're having some fun: Mac and Graf (ooops), either of the Martinas and me, Edberg and my grandmother (she was really something before electricity).
Okay, here are the quarters of a silly little inter-era MXDBLS tournament.

Hingis and Federer (Hopp Schweiz!)
Mac and Venus.

Maria Bueno and Stefan Edberg.
Evonne Goolagong with Rosewall.

Becker with Sabatini.
Noah with Serena.

Conchita Martinez and Manolo Santana. On clay. Or why not grass (both won Wimbledon singles).
Bill Tilden with Martina Navratilova. I envision incredible tennis, and you gotta love the stadium lines with rainbow-colored bunting.

McEnroe and Graf played mixed together at Wimbledon one year and were on a role when Graf withdrew because of a long singles match and having to play another singles match the same day as she would have to play her semi, I think it was.

slice bh compliment
06-22-2006, 07:09 AM
Yeah, re: Mac and Graf...that was too bad. They might have made it to the final, and even come away with a title. That's why I said 'Oops'. Mac jokes that it is still a sore subject for him. Maybe he's not joking.