Reed: True number one Murray will win US Open

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

Originally Posted by batz

Thing is, Cesc and I ARE the local population - but we both know Reed writes rubbish.

I don't know a single Murray fan who would agree with this. OK, apart from Maximo I don't know a single Murray fan who would agree with this.

Heyy batz, hows it going today!? Great day isnt it!!

[FedNad316]

Originally Posted by TheMagicianOfPrecision

English media are world-famous for blowing things out of proportions, if England wins 1-0 against Iceland in qualifying for the World Cup in football the English press/tabloids are writing their headlines with HUGE letters "We will win the World Cup" or "England are the best in the world". I understand that it selld but is sometimes ridiculous.
Simon Reed is a noob who didnt know who Andy Murray was 3 years ago and i hope he feel really embarrased right now.

Dont worry......here is the excuse simon reed gave when Murray lost at AO 2009 to Verdasco
"I still believe that Andy wasn't right when he went into that match - he had a massive cold sore on his face, his legs looked leaden, and when you're talking about tennis at that level then a bug can make a critical difference of a few per cent."

He will surely come up with Tired, Too much tennis, Not enough time to rest, Not Motivated enough......excuses.........

Just wait for em to come

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

Originally Posted by FedNad316

Dont worry......here is the excuse simon reed gave when Murray lost at AO 2009 to Verdasco
"I still believe that Andy wasn't right when he went into that match - he had a massive cold sore on his face, his legs looked leaden, and when you're talking about tennis at that level then a bug can make a critical difference of a few per cent."

He will surely come up with Tired, Too much tennis, Not enough time to rest, Not Motivated enough......excuses.........

Just wait for em to come

Wow, this guy really is something else!? Im eagerly awaiting his comments

[drwood]

Originally Posted by TheMagicianOfPrecision

Wow, this guy really is something else!? Im eagerly awaiting his comments

Why? They're meaningless...just like Sampras' comments.

[TheMagicianOfPrecision]

Originally Posted by drwood

Why? They're meaningless...just like Sampras' comments.

They are, but at the same time its fun to watch what his limits are...

[Wolland]

Originally Posted by FedNad316

Here is Simon giving excuses for Murray's loss at AO 2009 and also annointing Verdasco as a top 5 player, as usual full of BS

Simon Reed: All over for Federer?

Eurosport - Wed, 11 Feb 09:32:00 2009

It's easy to look at Andy Murray's early exit in Melbourne and think that he must be disappointed at having gone out relatively early - but I really believe there's more to it.

I saw him around the place a lot and interviewed him several times, and to me he looked very under the weather: as if he'd really picked up a nasty virus. If I'm right, then it's all credit to him that he didn't say a word about it.

Even still, it was a tight match anyway, one that Murray was winning for a long time until Verdasco caught fire - and Verdasco is in the form of his life anyway, and went on to give Nadal a heck of a match later in the tournament.

I still believe that Andy wasn't right when he went into that match - he had a massive cold sore on his face, his legs looked leaden, and when you're talking about tennis at that level then a bug can make a critical difference of a few per cent.

Had he over trained and weakened his immune system? I've heard people suggest it, but only Andy knows how he felt.

Either way, it's really part of his maturing process that he refused to blame the defeat on anything other than meeting an opponent who played better on the day.

As for Verdasco? Well, I've always thought that a leopard can't change his spots - and he's always had a reputation as a bit of a playboy. In fact I've even seen him in action out on the town, getting girls' phone numbers - he's as quick off the court as he is on it!

But last year he trained with Agassi's former fitness coach Gil Reyes, a fearsome taskmaster who takes no prisoners. He survived the experience, and has become a much better player for it. He's certainly better than Novak Djokovic.

If he doesn't become a top-five player by the end of the year then you'll know that something has gone wrong

LOL Now it's official. This man is an idiot. I just can't believe that Eurosport constantly presents this bloke as an expert. Reeds thinks that... Simon believes... Blah, blah, blah... I mean, haven't they seen what people think about his expert analysys. By the way, I don't think he guessed anything right.

[jones101]

Originally Posted by Wolland

LOL Now it's official. This man is an idiot. I just can't believe that Eurosport constantly presents this bloke as an expert. Reeds thinks that... Simon believes... Blah, blah, blah... I mean, haven't they seen what people think about his expert analysys. By the way, I don't think he guessed anything right.

I lost all respect for him a while ago, one article he states that Venus and Serena are the best, a few weeks later they will struggle to stay at the top. He slated Fed at the beginning of the year, then calls him the best ever after Wimby, now states he is not the true no 1, and was gifted both his GS?

He also stated that Bartoli could become of of the top players also (lol). His articles are very biased, no real supporting evidence to go along with them, I wonder whether he actually watches the matches sometimes or whether he just drools over whoever is flavour of the month.

[TheMusicLover]

Reed.... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Please continue the exellent jinxing job. We're obliged and bowing down to your immense powers.

[Wolland]

Here is one more of his stupid articles.

Simon Reed: All over for Federer?

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/110220...d-federer.html

[Telepatic]

Looks like true #1 received spanking today by false #1.

[kevvycore]

Originally Posted by Wolland

Here is one more of his stupid articles.

Simon Reed: All over for Federer?

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/110220...d-federer.html

that article was something. i guess when nadal beat fed at AO murray also beat him. kind of weird. i guess he forgot about the USO final that just happened where fed beat up on murray.
everyone seems to forget fed beat up on murray at the USO final but remember fed losing at an exo, or indian wells, or something that will be lost with time.

[FedNad316]

Originally Posted by kevvycore

that article was something. i guess when nadal beat fed at AO murray also beat him. kind of weird. i guess he forgot about the USO final that just happened where fed beat up on murray.
everyone seems to forget fed beat up on murray at the USO final but remember fed losing at an exo, or indian wells, or something that will be lost with time.

Thats called Selective Amnesia......something the media & tennis gurus who write biased articles excel in

[kinski76]

Here's another oldie, but goodie from the grand tennis connoisseur known by the name of Simon Reed:

Reed: Verdasco is the future

Eurosport - Tue, 17 Mar 16:40:00 2009

Eurosport-Yahoo! blogger Simon Reed has seen the future - and his name is Fernando Verdasco.

I saw Fernando Verdasco playing at Indian Wells last night - and he's the future.

I wrote last week that the world's top four are all pretty much in the right place with their games, but that Verdasco could be better player than Novak Djokovic - and I stand by that now.

He's the most exciting new thing in tennis, and the world could be his oyster.

The tennis he produced against Richard Gasquet last night was simply exhilarating, thrilling stuff. I was dog tired but I just couldn't keep my eyes off it. Fantastic.

The combination of coaching from Darren Cahill, physical training from Gil Reyes, and Andre Agassi chipping in with bits of advice, have turned Verdasco into a quite incredible player.

His physique in particular has changed completely. Reyes has obviously been at him non-stop, and if he can keep himself fit and consistent then he could be right up there with Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray.

There are no other words for it: he's a potential world number one, though several things need to happen for him to reach the top spot.

For starters, Federer's self-doubt in crucial situations would have to continue and Nadal would have to falter physically, which isn't happening at the moment but certainly could happen given his history.

I don't see Djokovic as quite the threat that others do. He's got terrific credentials but I'm just not on his bandwagon like other people are. Murray, for his part, has yet to go that final yard in a Grand Slam - but I think he will.

Verdasco, in my eyes, is up with any of them. What's more, he has become the most thrilling spectacle in the game. His shotmaking is unbelievable, his stamina - as we saw in Melbourne - is endless, and if I could watch any player in the world at the moment, I'd watch him.

And all this from a player who spent years floating around the middle reaches of the world's top-50 without looking like he had the potential to reach the top.

The truth of it, I think, is that he was easily distracted in a way that many of us are in our early twenties. Let's just say he kept a closer eye on the women's circuit than the men's!

His social life definitely wasn't helping his tennis, but boy are things different now. He's putting in the physical and mental work he needs to do. He's got much more patience, more confidence to keep going through the rallies, and he knows he can pull the trigger at any time.

And then there's his breathtaking array of shots. This man is a champion waiting to happen.

All in all it's a really exciting time for the game that compares to any of the golden periods of tennis: Agassi, Sampras and Courier from the early '90s, Becker and Edberg, or Connors and McEnroe from the '80s. There were great rivalries out there, and we're once again getting greater strength in depth.

Before Federer came on the scene the depth was lacking. That's not to say he was lucky, because he was incredibly consistent. And he was also unlucky in that Nadal came on to the scene. As probably the greatest clay-court player of all time, Nadal has stopped Federer claiming a career Grand Slam.

But the depth at the top has increased hugely now, with first Murray and now Verdasco staking their claims to be among the world's best.

Verdasco does need to win at Indian Wells to show he is the real deal. If he gets bundled out in the next round I'll look pretty silly, because he needs to beat better players than Gasquet to prove himself at the top level.

But right now, if all of the top-five produce their best this week, I genuinely believe Verdasco would walk away the winner.

Bandwagoning, much? Somebody on another board referred to Mr. Reed as the "tennis commentators' answer to Ed Wood." I thought that was a pretty apt description.

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by grafselesfan

True #1 without even winning a slam. What blind homerism. Federer atleast is a many time and recent multiple slam champion. That being said for me the true #1 is Nadal as he lost it through injury rather than by Federer outperforming him to take it.

Great post. I feel the same way for the same reason!

[bruce38]

Originally Posted by grafselesfan

True #1 without even winning a slam. What blind homerism. Federer atleast is a many time and recent multiple slam champion. That being said for me the true #1 is Nadal as he lost it through injury rather than by Federer outperforming him to take it.

You mean "injury"

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by grafselesfan

True #1 without even winning a slam. What blind homerism. Federer atleast is a many time and recent multiple slam champion. That being said for me the true #1 is Nadal as he lost it through injury rather than by Federer outperforming him to take it.

Um...you do realize that Nadal never would have been #1 at all if Federer had never gotten mono and injured his back, right? Now that Federer is finally healthy again, Nadal won't be getting back to #1 anytime soon.

[yung goon]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Um...you do realize that Nadal never would have been #1 at all if Federer had never gotten mono and injured his back, right? Now that Federer is finally healthy again, Nadal won't be getting back to #1 anytime soon.

The guy is right though. Fed would still be 2 if not for nadals knees

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by yung goon

The guy is right though. Fed would still be 2 if not for nadals knees

And Nadal would have still been #2 if not for Federer's mono (which caused him not to win anything until the US Open).

And, no, he's not right. If Nadal lost before the Wimbledon semis (which was likely) and Federer won Wimbledon, Federer would have been #1 anyway.

[Cesc Fabregas]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

And Nadal would have still been #2 if not for Federer's mono (which caused him not to win anything until the US Open).

And, no, he's not right. If Nadal lost before the Wimbledon semis (which was likely) and Federer won Wimbledon, Federer would have been #1 anyway.

If Nadal was healthy at Wimbledon he would have streamrolled through the draw.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Cesc Fabregas

If Nadal was healthy at Wimbledon he would have streamrolled through the draw.

You mean like the way he's "steamrolling" his way through the draws at Montreal and Cincinnati?