Australian open

[Savo]

I'm not a big fan of Federer, but I have to admire him. He is a true Champion. One would say that he is like a machine out there. A Terminator on a mission. And yet he always shows that he is human after all. Think about it. This is his 7th GS title and he embraced the Trophy as if it were his first. He cried the same way in 2003, when he took the Wimbledon title for the first time. I must say that I was surprised to see him like that today, but it was touching. Every title means so much to him. Respect!

That is why I hope he makes it this year. The Grand Slam that is. It won't be easy in France, but if anyone can do it, it's the Swiss king. It's so hard to even imagine it. Can it be done?

One down, three to go...

 

[fishgirl]

That was probably one of the friendliest coin tosses I've ever seen in all my years of watching tennis. And in the traditional pre-match pic, they had their arms around each other, and I don't remember the last time I saw that.

(Just kinda weird how they got Shannon Noll to perform after the players have walked out on court instead of before they did.)

Since Baghdatis booked his slot in the final, I've said I'd want Federer to win. Up until that coin toss. I would've been happy had it gone Baghdatis's way. But Federer still is King. I also found it refreshing to see the tears and his show of emotion.

But I think Baghdatis still is this year's Aussie Open story. Like Nazman said, he has energized the tournament with his infectious smile. He seems like such an amiable, warm guy that makes me wanna jump in there with his football-style cheering squad. He's such a great personality, and it's amazing for men's tennis.

 

[Kajun]

Every year, the "Can he do the Grand Slam?" talk flares up. Don't get me wrong, if there's one guy to do it, it is, of course, Roger. But it is such a longshot (some people seem to think he's got a 25%+ shot at it, which is ridiculous), that we shouldn't seriously consider it until he wins the French Open first. In order for Fed to win the French, everything needs to be right -- him playing his best tennis (he often has bad days on clay), drawing the right opponents, and having a bit of luck. His bookie odds at the French are often lower than they should be. Also, I think the pressure would be enormous at the US Open, should he win the first three. Even a guy with such mental toughness cannot escape from that.

The way he broke down at the speech today, showed he had all that tension and emotion bottled up. Combination of his fear of losing this match (during the first two sets), being honoured by the presence of Laver, being the first man since Pete to win 3 in a row, and being in Australia, with which he's got close ties (Rochey, Carter). Initially it looked like a very awkard moment, when he was at a loss for words at the speech, but the sobfest eventually turned into a very endearing moment. Like Savo said, he only did it at Wimbledon ('03 and '04), and beforehand, you would not have believed he could be so emotional.

At the age of 24 yr and 5 months, Pete and Roger both have 7 slams. It is looking good for Roger to break, or at least to match Pete's slam record. He's also close to Pete's #1 weeks at that age.

In the meanwhile, he already
- had won 3 slams in a calendar year, first guy to do it since Wilander
- had the best 2 year stretch. In fact, of the last 9 slams, he won 6 of them. 7 of last 11. Sick!
- holds the points record (7200+!)
- holds the hardcourt winning streak (50+)
- had the sick finals win record (25 in a row or so)
- had the sick match record last year (81-4), best since Mac

 

[Nazman]

The reason why Federer could possibly do it (winning all four slams in one calendar year) is because he has the perfect mental focus to match his incredible skills and one cannot overstate that key advantage. He has the extraordinary ability to maintain his composure and to adjust his multi-faceted game to the needs of the moment. If you are not paying close attention it is easy to miss.

This guy, Federer, is an artist, a craftsman, a SWEDE, and the consumate professional. Hard not to pull for the guy although my heart was clearly w/ Baghdati last night.

Federer's only challenge is to keep up w/ the Spaniards and South Americans on clay. Hard to say what will happen.

Will keep my eye out for Baghdati as well. And Schriapan (sp?) and a host of other favorites...

 

[Kajun]

The reason why Federer could possibly do it (winning all four slams in one calendar year) is because he has the perfect mental focus to match his incredible skills and one cannot overstate that key advantage. He has the extraordinary ability to maintain his composure and to adjust his multi-faceted game to the needs of the moment. If you are not paying close attention it is easy to miss.

Nobody underestimates his drive and focus. Like I said, if there's a person to pull it off, it naturally is Federer. The point is, that so much has to go right to win a slam. 8 weeks of focus, good play, winning points when it matters, avoiding injuries, staying fit, etc. There's also a bit of luck involved. Some people (not point out anyone here, but more of a general statement) seem to oversee this. The fact is, nobody since Rod Laver has managed to win all 4 in a year (and that's when there was much less depth in the game, and 3 out of 4 slams were on grass!). That really has to count for something, doesn't it?

This guy, Federer, is an artist, a craftsman, a SWEDE, and the consumate professional. Hard not to pull for the guy although my heart was clearly w/ Baghdati last night

He's Swiss!

Federer's only challenge is to keep up w/ the Spaniards and South Americans on clay. Hard to say what will happen.

Yes. He might not even win one French title during his career. We'll have to wait and see.

Will keep my eye out for Baghdati as well. And Schriapan (sp?) and a host of other favorites...

Srichaphan a favourite? Hate to say it, but that guy can only win World Series tournaments. And not alot of them for that matter.

 

[KingKong]

Federer breaking down the way that he did was a little alarming, but I agree overall it was very endearing. You can see the guy is so passionate about the game and takes nothing for granted, it speaks volumes of his humility. I think Federer wasn't completely on top of his game this entire tournament, and that could be largely due to his ankle, but Federer still dominated without much opposition.... which seems to be a trend these days. I think if Nalbadian had beaten Baghdatis, he would have given Fed a run for his money.

Moreover, I can't believe Baghdatis forgot to thank his girlfriend. She would be (and is) on my mind every second of everyday, silly Cypriat. Ahh and how can forget about the good ol' Indian Mahesh Bhupati & Hingis taking the mixed doubles title.

 

[Nazman]

My bad, Kajun, on the messing up on Federer's nationality. My bad. No excuse on that one although i have on occasion made similar errors confusing things concerning Switzerland and Sweden. If i had just kept in mind how connected Federer has been w/ Hingis' resurgence that would have cleared it in my mind. But again, no excuse. My bad.

Nonetheless i am very intrigued w/ this guy's game. Remember i was not pulling for him in the final but rather for Baghdati but when this guy just keeps finding a way to prevail against all the great players in the game it starts to get your attention. He's brilliant and i find myself trying to do the analysis. His temperment in my mind is part of it. Wasn't that part of Borg's great success. His mental game? When you are grinding it out match after match with a ball that it coming at you at a very high speed and maintaining such an incredible level of play you gotta have some focus along w/ the ability. Too easy to get wrapped in the errors and frustrations but Federer seems less prone to that problem. Much less volatile albeit the suprising emotional outpouring during the ceremony.

As for Scrichaphan i don't necessarily follow him because he's a winner but in this case because he's a Buddhist (rare bird in tennis) and i saw him play a few remarkably inspired matches. That's all it took. So i tend to look out for him when he's playing.

 

[Kajun]

Nonetheless i am very intrigued w/ this guy's game. Remember i was not pulling for him in the final but rather for Baghdati but when this guy just keeps finding a way to prevail against all the great players in the game it starts to get your attention. He's brilliant and i find myself trying to do the analysis. His temperment in my mind is part of it. Wasn't that part of Borg's great success. His mental game? When you are grinding it out match after match with a ball that it coming at you at a very high speed and maintaining such an incredible level of play you gotta have some focus along w/ the ability. Too easy to get wrapped in the errors and frustrations but Federer seems less prone to that problem. Much less volatile albeit the suprising emotional outpouring during the ceremony.

Oh, no question. Federer has the right mindset. He does, Sampras did, and so did Borg, Lendl and Connors. They are guys who are in some way obsessed with winning, with being the best, and will regard anything but winning as utter failure. They can raise their game when they have to, and manage to win even when they have a bad day. It's the mark of a champion.

But...nobody has Roger's talent. He is arguably the most talented player of all time. He has that insane package -- the talent, and the mind to go with it.

I was, and still am, a HUGE Sampras fan. I will always be. But I hope Federer breaks the Slam record. Athletes generally evolve -- tennis is no different. Each generation gets a little bit better. Roger is one step closer to the most complete player (though I still think Sampras at his very peak is still best; if he's not at his peak though, Federer is better).

 

[Nazman]

Kajun,
Loved Jimmy Connors and the incredible night in New York during the U.S. Open years ago when he worked his way through the tournament and into the quarters or semi's was it. But God could he work up the crowd. What a character he was (is). Never miss those telecasts at night from New York. Great viewing if you love tennis and drama.

One you didn't mention was Stefan Edberg. Used to be one of my heroes. I play serve and volley and it's almost a lost art. AND believe it or not i learned my one hand backhand from Ivan Lendl. Used to follow him, too. Just getting way down on that back hand down the line. Just a thing of beauty. He was an interesting character. Remember the sawdust or am i sounding a bit dated here?

Also loved Yannick Noah speaking of serve and volley and charismatic individuals. Tennis is a great sport and it's so good to have others to share it all with.

Not as big a Pete Sampras fan although i was pretty moved by his retirement ceremony in New York. He did alright w/ Bridget, wouldn't you say?

And you are right. Tennis IS an ever evolving sport. But i just can't imagine where there is room for improvement when you see the skill sets of Roger Federer who seemingly has no weakness and just beautifully precise mechanics from both sides.

 

[Bballkingsrock]

In my opinion, he is in my top 2 favorites, FEDERER, for the French title. UI think he and Nadal have the best chances IMO to iwn.

 

[Nazman]

You got that right, BBKR. Nadal is a force to be reckoned with. Like a middleweight dancing w/ eagerness at the ring of every bell. Literally. Very confident and capable. Those two could put on quite show. But don't rule out other players from Spain or South America that always come out of the shadows to make their game known on clay...

 

[Bballkingsrock]

You got that right, BBKR. Nadal is a force to be reckoned with. Like a middleweight dancing w/ eagerness at the ring of every bell. Literally. Very confident and capable. Those two could put on quite show. But don't rule out other players from Spain or South America that always come out of the shadows to make their game known on clay...

Yeah, like Peurta but he wsas accused for using Steriods. I also think Safin might have a good chance.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

I don't see Nadal challenging Federer this time at Rolland Garros. Federer breezed through the Australian open with his B game, he'll be deadly next major with his A game.

 

[loopymitch]

I was totally out of touch while I was out of town but I did see Roger winning and was surprised how emotional he got. I must congratulation the Bryan brothers for winning the mens's doubles. At least Americans won something.

 

[Kajun]

Kajun,
Loved Jimmy Connors and the incredible night in New York during the U.S. Open years ago when he worked his way through the tournament and into the quarters or semi's was it. But God could he work up the crowd. What a character he was (is). Never miss those telecasts at night from New York. Great viewing if you love tennis and drama.

One you didn't mention was Stefan Edberg. Used to be one of my heroes. I play serve and volley and it's almost a lost art. AND believe it or not i learned my one hand backhand from Ivan Lendl. Used to follow him, too. Just getting way down on that back hand down the line. Just a thing of beauty. He was an interesting character. Remember the sawdust or am i sounding a bit dated here?

Also loved Yannick Noah speaking of serve and volley and charismatic individuals. Tennis is a great sport and it's so good to have others to share it all with.

Not as big a Pete Sampras fan although i was pretty moved by his retirement ceremony in New York. He did alright w/ Bridget, wouldn't you say?

And you are right. Tennis IS an ever evolving sport. But i just can't imagine where there is room for improvement when you see the skill sets of Roger Federer who seemingly has no weakness and just beautifully precise mechanics from both sides.

Sorry for the late reply. I've been really busy lately with moving and starting my new job.

I named those particular players, because they had the best mindset for tennis. Edberg was a great player, but he falls a little bit short when comparing him to *the* greatest players of the open era. Federer has already surpassed Edberg.

Edberg was all class. In my opinion he's the best volleyer ever, but I guess some would argue that title belongs to Mac.

I love serve-and-volleyers as well. It's too bad it's a dying breed.

Pete did pretty well with Bridget indeed. He also dated Kimberley Williams before, who wasn't exactly bad looking either.

I think there can be a better player than Roger Federer -- he doesn't have glaring weaknesses, but there are some parts, which aren't as as strong as they should be.

- his serve, as decent as it is, isn't the best serve around.
- he misses a little oomph on his running forehands.
- too often he hits short groundstrokes (even before the service line), relying on spin to make up for the lack of length. Good players can take advantage of this; fortunately for him, there aren't that many!
- Roger has a great feel for the ball, but if he had to serve-and-volley while his life depended on it, he wouldn't make it. He can volley well when he uses it as a finishing shot, but if he's charging the net too often his volleys leave me unimpressed. He's no Edberg in that department.

Maybe it's hard to imagine right now, but at some point there will be a player whom you think cannot be better either.

 

[Kajun]

I don't see Nadal challenging Federer this time at Rolland Garros. Federer breezed through the Australian open with his B game, he'll be deadly next major with his A game.

Nadal is the favourite for the French, no matter what. Clay is a special case for Federer, period.

I don't think he "breezed" through the Aussie Open. Haas scared him, Davydenko almost held a 2-1 lead, Kiefer made life tough as usual. Baghdatis choked a bit. Federer needed a fair bit of luck, and the fact that he broke out in tears during the ceremony showed how hard it eventually was for him. The tension that he had built up all came out.

 

[Nazman]

That second set w/ Davydenko and Federer was some pretty inspired tennis. I was loving it. Davydenko is a little hellion.