French Open

Baxter · 4 Jun 2007 at 15:50

did a search but couldn't find anything.

Is anyone watching the french open?

I'm just sitting here watching Hewitt vs Nadal. Looks like Nadal is about to go two sets up. I'm by no means a tennis expert but i do take a regular passing interest. Nadal is looking formidable, i can't see anyone else winning it this year whilst he's playing like this, including Federer. Which is a real shame as i dont like Nadal's couter puncher style or his time wasting when the going gets tough.

Also Djokovic looked reasonable today, still space to raise his game.

Sadly the gulf between the top two and the rest looks too great for anyone else to have a look in, it's time some more players stepped up to the plate to challenge federer and Nadal.

Any other opinions?

Pigeon_Killer · 10 Jun 2007 at 16:26

No one watching the men's final? It's on BBC2 for anyone interested.

Morba · 10 Jun 2007 at 16:33

im watching, weird how it started at 4 on bbc2, yet its into the 3rd set.

for some reason i want federer to win!

Pigeon_Killer · 10 Jun 2007 at 16:35

The rugby was on beforehand so they had to pick it up mid-match.

I also want Federer to win as I think a player of his quality deserves to win the Grand Slam but Nadal is a league above when it comes to clay.

andy@moFo · 10 Jun 2007 at 17:20

Horrific, Federer lack of consistancy is crazy. For No.1 in the world how does he manage to throw away so many loose points on clay? Stupid returns that miss by miles surely may cause him concern? My Advice.. get a coach Federer and you may win the French.

EDIT: Played Nadal.

wedgie · 10 Jun 2007 at 21:03

Not sure he really needs advice.

He's playing probably the best clay court player ever, clay court also being his weakest surface, you expect what exactly?

Morba · 10 Jun 2007 at 22:19

wedgie22 said:
Not sure he really needs advice.

He's playing probably the best clay court player ever, clay court also being his weakest surface, you expect what exactly?

indeed, federer getting to the final so convincingly is already an outstanding achievment for his weakest surface.

he just needs to learn how to beat nadal, that is all. he can play clay, just not at a level that matches (let alone beats) nadal.

andy@moFo · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:15

Morba said:
indeed, federer getting to the final so convincingly is already an outstanding achievment for his weakest surface.

he just needs to learn how to beat nadal, that is all. he can play clay, just not at a level that matches (let alone beats) nadal.

And surely hiring a coach will boost his odds? More of a "get up and go" in training will surely contribute to his inevertable french title slam but with him being currently coachless im beginning to see wild shots with a low percentage being absolute brillianess and a very high percentage being completly off target. Also noticed hes putting a bit of pork on.

- Lose the pork
- Get Stronger
- Hire a Coach.

wedgie · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:22

He is still successful on clay, he does get to finals.

It's only ever going to be an uphill task when you're playing arguably the best ever player on that surface.

Morba · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:31

andy@moFo said:
Also noticed hes putting a bit of pork on.

- Lose the pork

i noticed that as well! has he becomes 'comfortable' in his life and is starting to relax a bit?

andy@moFo · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:33

I dont know whats going on, But if he reached a level of fitness on which was on par with Nadals then surely it would be a story?

wedgie · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:37

That could well be true.

You would think he would need to be at his absolute peak physical condition to have a fair chance of beating Nadal.

I wonder if Federer will be considered the greatest ever even if he doesn't win the French.

Pigeon_Killer · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:49

Nadal is a clay court specialist, Federer is not. Just getting to the final is a great achievement and losing to arguably the most dominant clay court player of modern times is nothing to cry about.

wedgie22 said:
I wonder if Federer will be considered the greatest ever even if he doesn't win the French.

Pete Sampras is widely regarded as the games greatest ever player yet he never managed to get past the semi-final stage. I've no doubt Federer will replace Sampras as the greatest when he retires.

wedgie · 10 Jun 2007 at 23:58

I'd have to agree.

Sampras was the best, Federer is well on his way to overtaking him and I am sure he will.

Winning the French would help, but his dominance on all else is enough to secure his place as the greatest ever.

My point was really that there will be some who pick up on him not winning all of the grand slams (if he doesn't) and using it against him.

Pigeon_Killer · 11 Jun 2007 at 00:08

wedgie22 said:
My point was really that there will be some who pick up on him not winning all of the grand slams (if he doesn't) and using it against him.

They would've had a valid point if Federer had played in the 60s, 70s or 80s but these days the majority of winners are clay court specialists from Spain or South America and winning it is a lot harder than it once was.

SpeedFreak · 11 Jun 2007 at 02:17

I saw a bit of a belly on Federer and immediately realised that he could win the Grand Slam if he worked more on his fitness. When you make the other guys do all the running you don't need that so much, but for 4 or five games per season he will need it against Nadal.