klr87 wrote: » Well, there's certainly some "needle" between Tsitsipas and Medvedev, which usually helps.
HeidiHeidi wrote: » I've just tuned in..... I'd have expected a lot more from this game. I certainly wasn't expecting the third set and a break already! D-F doesn't look like he has a Novak-style turnaround in him, very hangdog look about him. Hopefully the later match gives more of.... a match!
Rob2D wrote: » ITV is paid??? .
MisterAnarchy wrote: » Not a fan of watching doubles. The players seem to have a chat after every point, its too slow.
HeidiHeidi wrote: » I find it hugely entertaining. The speeds and reactions are incredible. I'd watch doubles over most men's singles slugfests (esp on clay) any day. *awaits a pasting!
HeidiHeidi wrote: » I've already paid for ITV, so I'll stick with that and just grumble
HeidiHeidi wrote: » Where are you watching that? I'd much rather that than the women's singles with players I don't know! Although that was a great first match in fairness.
Rob2D wrote: » Eurosport player. €7.
HeidiHeidi wrote: » Where are you watching that?
Rob2D wrote: » Iga and Bethanie off to a good start in their Doubles again.
josip wrote: » I think what will get the thirty somethings is recovery time between games and recovery time from injuries. If a player takes proper care of themselves and can adapt their style/number of tournaments to suit their age, AND they are lucky with injuries, then I'd agree with your post. But I think Nadal and Djokovic at their age, are only 1 serious injury/issue away from never winning another slam.
Augme wrote: » I do wonder if advances in sports science and general understanding in that area will make seeing players being able to play to a high level become more common. It's not a sport where strength/power and elite speed have such significant influences, which are generally the areas people take a considerable drop in their 30s. For any sports athlete to compete at a high level you need to be very dedicated in what you do off the court in terms of health and nutrition. This area just wasn't considered as important until relatively recently. There are plenty of other players on your who also operate at a good level at an age you wouldn't expect. Tsonga, monfils and warwrinka spring to mind. I also think there's a big different between individual and team sports. The mental side of individual sports is much different. How you deal/handle pressure becomes much more important too.
Slashermcguirk wrote: » You could say the same about Wimbledon. There are only 2-3 contenders at French and Wimbledon. US Open and Australia will always be most competitive because majority of players are very good on hard courts. Grass and clay are more specialist. Federer and Djokovic have won 13 wimbledons between the two of them quote="Hector Savage;117365486"]Why anyone would watch this utter farce is beyond me, the French Open may be interesting in 5 years time (maybe) when Nadal will only by 80% sure of winning it.
klr87 wrote: » So 6 of the 8 women will be playing in their first grand slam quarter final, which is a record in the Open Era (i.e., all slams from the 1968 French Open onwards). The moral of the story is that recent form & competitive matches count. Because the rankings give no weight to the surface on which a result was achieved, or when (52 weeks ago counts the same as last week), the rankings & seedings* can be misleading. Osaka is the obvious case in point. .
Joe_ Public wrote: » Fair play to Kostyuk there, Swiatek too good but a lot of close games and solid hitting. Not bad for 18 year old.
Furze99 wrote: » Mens tennis is a physical game as much as a mental game. You can understand why these three lads psyche out their younger opponents but how do they manage to overpower them physically. That's a big question. Federer obviously can't so much anymore and I quite disagree with you. He has no business entering a grand slam tournament if he's not prepared to continue playing in it past a certain point. That just smells bad.
Girly Gal wrote: » Despite how good the big 3 are/were, the real anomaly is that no one emerged in the last decade to really challenge them at GS level, normally the coming generation retires the previous generation of players, this hasn't happened yet with both Djokovic and Nadal in their mid thirties way past their respective peaks still dominating the game and a near 40 year old Federer still in with an outside chance of a slam ( don't think it'll happen myself) when he should be long retired by the next gen players, but, outside of Djokovic and Nadal he still probably fancies himself against the rest and tbh who'd blame him with the inconsistency and mental weakness the next gen players have shown at GS level.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/75771797d68b15f0c5c6e631c7bb7ced.svg)
