Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by LittleTinGoddess, Jan 24, 2013.
Anyone else not care to watch a real-life game of pong?
You have a point. I wont watch it either.Ultimate choker Murray against Lance.I have better plans on Sunday.
I concur. I'll catch some highlights but that's it. I'd wake up at 3 AM for Fed (or Delpo or Tsonga).
Hold up. You are just casually calling Nole "Lance". Pics or it didn't happen.
I won't even watch the highlights.
It will be so boring. It's just 2nd after Djokovic-Nadal. Gosh even I sometimes rather watch a bit of loopy FHs and lefty play, rather than 2 players who literally play the same game with 1 slightly better than the other.
It would be just as entertaining as watching Djokovic hit against a wall by himself.
Thread title should be:
The final is Djoko v. Murray, I don't care to watch it
I might skip it too.
I'll watch it. But if they get into defensive, retriever mode, I'll probably go back to bed. Will definitely read a match recap.
Just ignore this thread
I will watch it with some grass to take the pain away.
If it was Federer in the final...then no need.
I'll get up to watch it. But as soon as the bordem factor goes up, I'll be drifting back off to zzzzzzz on the couch. A couple of single malts might make it more interesting from the start.
Agreed. Dumb thread.
Murray will play Nole a lot harder then Fed will and he has a better chance to beat Nole.
Fed hasn't managed even ONE set off of Nole at the AO in 5 years. Fed can't hang with Nole o this surface. Murray can though
I would love a djoko murray final. With their ridiculous defence and consistent power from the baseline, it will be a treat. Like a boxing match Long rallies, burning lungs, a real physical grind with some serious fight from both players.
Enjoy the golf, bro.
If its anything like this then it's your loss
Yup! That was a GREAT match!!!! I hope Murray brings the forehand back!
I have watched that whole highlight video 9 times.
I'll go with plan B:
2) start watching when they've played for 1-2 hours
3) skip time between points
4) finish just in time to see the last games live
It worked for the Djokovic-Nadal matches!
Seems like most people on here are fans of players and not fans of the sport. Anybody who isn't going to watch Djokovic/Murray in the final (if Murray gets through) is not a real fan of tennis.
Especially after that awesome AO 2012 semifinal match!
I'm watching it no matter what. Sleep be damned!
You would find this boring?
Why do you follow tennis?
They're not bad, but there is no contrast in their games. Feels like pong.
I prefer it when Murray/Djoko play Federer or JMDP or Tsonga , perhaps even a Wawrinka, Almagro or Berdych.
I loved Djokovic's reaction after saving that BP at 5-5 in the 5th set. Just badass.
hey..old school gaming.. nice one
pong was the first to 21 if i remember right..maybe do that scoring in the final..one set only..first to 21 points, or like a tie break past that with a 2 point gap to win.
Real tennis fan will watch Major final, no matter who plays in...
Not unless the particular viewer has a personal vendetta against one of the finalists.
You don't have a personal vendetta. You're just a racist.
And you wonder why you've been banned a few times?
Racist against whom? All of the top 4 are white caucasians
Scots and anyone not English.
I can honestly say that this will be the first major final that I will not watch since I've started watching tennis religiously in 2004. And, sadly, it's because I simply do not care about the result, and I am not interested in watching Murray and Djokovic play a best-of-five match. I'm not really interested in either player's game or personality, tbh. I'd much rather watch Federer play Djokovic, even if it's not that competitive...
I won't watch either. I'll pvr it in case something controversial happens and then I can take a peek but I don't care for either player so I won't watch.:cry:
It's not that it isn't high quality tennis. In fact, it has nothing to do with it. For me, it boils down to two things:
-A lack of contrast or diversity between the players.
-Predictability. Not so much the result, but the rallies themselves.
It's like when I watch pornography. It could be a great scene with a beautiful woman and fantastic camera work, but sometimes it get's old, and that's why compilations can be a much better viewing experience. Some of the clips might be terrible, but it's the variety that maintains my interest.
Scots are a race?
Not my absolute favourite match-up on tour (due to the combination of both of them having such amazing court coverage on HC and playing high % tennis) but If I'm able you bet your *** I'll watch it, the drama/not knowing who will win will be enough for me (maybe I'm shallow but that's how I feel, if the match has great drama it's entertaining for me).
Yeah, I live in France and lived in Switzerland for years. Boy do I hate those countries what with their clean streets and low unemployment rates.
Beautiful analogy. I concur.
I'll watch it, but I will miss the shotmaking of Fed when the match inevitably shifts into a "who will retrieve the most balls" mode.
I won't answer that.
Edit: I'll assume you're from the States and that's why you asked that question?
Actually I'm not really that interested in knowing more. Thanks anyway.
You ask the question you get the answer.
About 1500 years ago the Celtic Picts merged with Celtic Scots and a couple hundred years later merged with the Viking Norse.
That in a nutshell are the Scots.
In the USA, give it a 1000 years when the Spanish, British, Blacks, Chinese, other Europeans etc have merged into one big melting pot and you will have the race of Americans whatever that will look like.
Good ole 'Merica.
OP: if Murray and Djokovic are in the final, it will be fascinating to see them fight to draw "first blood" at the majors, and see how it forces the rest of the big four to scramble to take him down (always a bad strategy--if one player is the focus).
someone is bitter....
Of course it will be fascinating and a fantastic match. Unfortunately the two current best players on the planet also happen to be the two most unpopular.
That would be current #1 and #2 right? Novak and Federer. Even in the last official tournament where Murray and Federer were in, Federer went further.
I don't understand this logic. Murray fans are ready to pull rank where the RLA night match issue came up (#3 not getting a single match on show court), but for saying two current best players somehow #2 doesn't count??
Separate names with a comma.