Well as I was typing Roger Wins a 5 set marahon and we know what Rogers Legacy is ��
2017 ATP season begins with a Novak win ...
- Thread starter raptorizedguy
- Start date
Well as I was typing Roger Wins a 5 set marahon and we know what Rogers Legacy is ��
I think Ken Rosewall (a converted righthander) was the oldest to reach a Slam finals. A 21 year old Jimmy Connors destroyed him in that finals.Well as I was typing Roger Wins a 5 set marahon and we know what Rogers Legacy is ��
The point I was trying to make is that although Stan has clearly been one of the best the last 4 or 5 years (I like him better than Murray and Nadal), I don't think that guys who win 3 or 4 majors have any significant legacy, which was why I pointed out guys like Santana and Kuerten or even a Stan Smith who had comparable majors totals. They were very good/the best for a few years but are now relegated to the sands of time. If Stan got up to about 6 majors then I think he can be considered in a historical sense.I was going on the premice that if he won ( sorry it may not have been clear ) .. He wouldn't be some guy who played on the tour if he wins another slam . I am curious what his legacy will be . He always isn't mentioned as a favorite in this Era but he got slams .
Oh I agree with you cause he is never mention much as a favorite in this era in any slam he enters but when he gets an opportunity in a Final he makes the most of it ...The point I was trying to make is that although Stan has clearly been one of the best the last 4 or 5 years (I like him better than Murray and Nadal), I don't think that guys who win 3 or 4 majors have any significant legacy, which was why I pointed out guys like Santana and Kuerten or even a Stan Smith who had comparable majors totals. They were very good/the best for a few years but are now relegated to the sands of time. If Stan got up to about 6 majors then I think he can be considered in a historical sense.
I always respect his effort and he has an amazing backhand.Oh I agree with you cause he is never mention much as a favorite in this era in any slam he enters but when he gets an opportunity in a Final he makes the most of it ...
Personally, I didn't think last night's match was all that compelling. It was a good matchup on paper but I did not think the level of tennis was great. Lots of misses and most of the sets were not that close, although Stan made it a lot more interesting by tying it after being 2 sets down. It may have gone 5 sets but at a little over 3 hours, not really a marathon.
I had picked Stan over Roger and tonight I am picking Dimitrov. He will return a lot more balls to Nadal than Milos, the rallies will be longer. Aside from not having Milos' serve, and who does, he hits well from both sides and is more mobile.
Hope it's a good one. It may be Grigor's time to break through with a major.
Dimitrov often 'flatters to deceive'. So I think Nadal will win.I always respect his effort and he has an amazing backhand.
Personally, I didn't think last night's match was all that compelling. It was a good matchup on paper but I did not think the level of tennis was great. Lots of misses and most of the sets were not that close, although Stan made it a lot more interesting by tying it after being 2 sets down. It may have gone 5 sets but at a little over 3 hours, not really a marathon.
I had picked Stan over Roger and tonight I am picking Dimitrov. He will return a lot more balls to Nadal than Milos, the rallies will be longer. Aside from not having Milos' serve, and who does, he hits well from both sides and is more mobile.
Hope it's a good one. It may be Grigor's time to break through with a major.
Golden oldies finals coming up.
This era is unlike any other in tennis history. It's pretty safe to say that there has never been a time where there were 3 players with over 10 major victories plus all completed the career Grand SlamThe point I was trying to make is that although Stan has clearly been one of the best the last 4 or 5 years (I like him better than Murray and Nadal), I don't think that guys who win 3 or 4 majors have any significant legacy, which was why I pointed out guys like Santana and Kuerten or even a Stan Smith who had comparable majors totals. They were very good/the best for a few years but are now relegated to the sands of time. If Stan got up to about 6 majors then I think he can be considered in a historical sense.
Dimitrov is undefeated in 2017 so far and so confidence is high but hoping being in his first grand slam may cause to have the presume get to him .. Nadal just scares me being a Roger fan ... Although he has a edge over Nadal on hard court that maybe offset that Nadal could be in his head ..They're both looking pretty good right now. Nadal has the edge but Dimitrov is giving him all he can handle
Nice to see a pastionate tennis fan on TERB .. Sometimes the ATP thread is me just cheering on Roger ��This is an awesome match...but Nadal's a beast
I once played an ambidextrous player who never played a backhand..... Just switched the racket over into the other hand. Very disconcerting ��
I don't think you are allowed to call someone "ambidextrous" on this Board. Show some civility. Just kidding! BTW: I think the great Pancho Gonalez(sp) was ambidextrous.I once played an ambidextrous player who never played a backhand.....
Congrats to Roger. It is a young man's game and I was on record saying he'd never win another major because of rigors of the 2 weeks.
The level of tennis was high and there were some amazing points. The only thing that would have made it better would have been closer sets. No tie breaks and no "extra innings" in the 5th. I felt the only real tension was in the 5th set. Roger missing some break points and some match points and needing 2 breaks. Nadal is known for his dogged determination and today was no different but Roger out-Nadalled him in the end for a change. He won more big points. Nadal had some moments near the end where he was looking worn down. Roger looked fresher.
Still, the only calendar grand slam by Rocket Rod. Nobody else has done it even once and he did it twice.
The level of tennis was high and there were some amazing points. The only thing that would have made it better would have been closer sets. No tie breaks and no "extra innings" in the 5th. I felt the only real tension was in the 5th set. Roger missing some break points and some match points and needing 2 breaks. Nadal is known for his dogged determination and today was no different but Roger out-Nadalled him in the end for a change. He won more big points. Nadal had some moments near the end where he was looking worn down. Roger looked fresher.
Still, the only calendar grand slam by Rocket Rod. Nobody else has done it even once and he did it twice.
I think you were not alone in your prediction and even I had given up hope ... You can see it in the tennis thread cause I have often or always put Roger name in the title of the thread .... Wow to not play competive tennis in 6 months and then go on to beat 4 top ten players in the same tournament is simply amazing ...Congrats to Roger. It is a young man's game and I was on record saying he'd never win another major because of rigors of the 2 weeks.
The level of tennis was high and there were some amazing points. The only thing that would have made it better would have been closer sets. No tie breaks and no "extra innings" in the 5th. I felt the only real tension was in the 5th set. Roger missing some break points and some match points and needing 2 breaks. Nadal is known for his dogged determination and today was no different but Roger out-Nadalled him in the end for a change. He won more big points. Nadal had some moments near the end where he was looking worn down. Roger looked fresher.
Still, the only calendar grand slam by Rocket Rod. Nobody else has done it even once and he did it twice.
