Tennis

[-BARON-23-]

Oh really? i've personally never noticed him before which surprised me to say how much i watch the sport!

Yeah he's looked poor since winning and up until this Wimbledon but in those first few matches he looked to be at his best again until being beaten by Dimitrov. I don't think this new coach will do much for him either. Honestly i don't think we will see him win a Grand Slam any time soon!

[rob_of_the_robots]

Down to 10th in the world will mean harder draws in the slams too.

[Rover the Top]

Down to 10th in the world will mean harder draws in the slams too.

I've never really bought that argument. All it means is he may have to play the other top players he has to beat anyway a little earlier in the competition. If it's a false position and he's still one of the top 4 players, then he should still be beating the rest of the draw even if they're currently ranked above him. But all draws look hard if you're not winning your matches.

[theadore]

being outside the top 4 does make a difference though... If you look at federer when he first dropped out... he went from avoiding the top 3 until the semis to having to play one in the quarters. This means that he needs to play 2 of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray, just to make it to the final. Lets say he gets there and plays Raonic... previously he would have faced him fresh(ish) in the quarters, but now hes just played 2 of the best in the world so anyone will be a tough match.

[Rover the Top]

being outside the top 4 does make a difference though... If you look at federer when he first dropped out... he went from avoiding the top 3 until the semis to having to play one in the quarters. This means that he needs to play 2 of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray, just to make it to the final. Lets say he gets there and plays Raonic... previously he would have faced him fresh(ish) in the quarters, but now hes just played 2 of the best in the world so anyone will be a tough match.

Not strictly accurate. It was possible he'd have to play two of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray/Ferrer before the final. It was by no means certain that he'd always need to play the three you named. And when he was in the top four, there was a one in four chance of getting a likely match up against Ferrer in the quarters anyway. Even at this year's Wimbledon, he got the world no. 3 and Australian champion in the quarter finals, but has avoided having to play any of the other top 4 seeds. Was Murray's quarter final against Dimitrov easier than if he'd played Nadal? I don't think it makes a significant difference, if you want to be champion you have to be able to beat everyone, you can't rely on getting an 'easy' route through to the final.

[Jimmy James]

Martina Hingis was playing doubles at Wimbledon yesterday. Nice to see her again. Some injury problems in the past? One of my old work mates, she was his all time tennis hero(heroine).....

[theadore]

being outside the top 4 does make a difference though... If you look at federer when he first dropped out... he went from avoiding the top 3 until the semis to having to play one in the quarters. This means that he needs to play 2 of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray, just to make it to the final. Lets say he gets there and plays Raonic... previously he would have faced him fresh(ish) in the quarters, but now hes just played 2 of the best in the world so anyone will be a tough match.

Not strictly accurate. It was possible he'd have to play two of Nadal/Djokovic/Murray/Ferrer before the final. It was by no means certain that he'd always need to play the three you named. And when he was in the top four, there was a one in four chance of getting a likely match up against Ferrer in the quarters anyway. Even at this year's Wimbledon, he got the world no. 3 and Australian champion in the quarter finals, but has avoided having to play any of the other top 4 seeds. Was Murray's quarter final against Dimitrov easier than if he'd played Nadal? I don't think it makes a significant difference, if you want to be champion you have to be able to beat everyone, you can't rely on getting an 'easy' route through to the final.

I think the cumulative effect of those game does make a difference.... perhaps not a huge one... but I'd prefer to face the top seed in the final than have to overcome them just to get there.

[Rover the Top]

Maybe there is a cumulative effect from a series of tough games... but again, in practice it's not a given that you'll get an easier ride playing those ranked below you. Cilic took Djokovic to five sets, Nadal and Murray are out. You might not want to face the number 1 seed until the final, but then I'm going to assume you don't expect to beat him. I don't think it matters so much if you're confident you can win that match, it's only if you're afraid that it will be the end of the tournament that you want to avoid that tie for as long as possible.

[daib0]

I see the Celts won Wimbledon again this year....

Jock O'Vitch

[Dan]

What to you call Jock O'Vitch when he's had his vacuum cleaner stolen.....?

[Rover the Top]

Easy - Hooverless Jock O'Vitch.

[Rover the Top]

Murray looks like he's rediscovered his ambition again. He's won 3 out of 4 tournaments over the last 5 weeks. They're only minor competitions, but he entered the Vienna one a couple of weeks ago as a wild card because he needed the points to reach the end of season championship. And he put in a dogged performance yesterday to beat Robredo in three sets in Valencia, despite being visibly shattered from halfway through the first set. He's back up to 8th in the world now.

[-BARON-23-]

Roger is nearly World Number 1 again

[Rover the Top]

Murray through to the Australian Open semi finals. He now has a tough match against Berdych, who thrashed Nadal this morning having lost to him in each of their previous 17 meetings...

On the other side of the draw, Djokovic has been cruising towards the final, and now faces 8th seed Raonic in the quarters. The remaining match is between defending champion Wawrinka and US Open finalist Nishikori.

[Ethiaa]

No, Murray is shite and will never win anything.