Action begins Sunday morning at 10am Irish time.
Draw already made, Nadal vs Zverev and Murray vs Wawrinka in the first round!
yeah I agree , but I still think 3 difference surfaces is more impressive than nadals start tbh
You have to remember that he is playing lower level opposition, Ferderer was slow to win his first slam, but, once he did he was near unbeatable for a few years outside of the FO in the other slams, that meant it was difficult for both Nadal (outside of the FO) and Djokovic to win slams in their early years, despite laying at a high level. Nadal still managed to win 3 slams (all FO) at a younger age than Alcaraz despite having to contend with Federer. Alcaraz is playing at a high level, but, he has the benefit of facing a weaker field, he's not facing a prime Federer like Nadal and Djokovic had to contend with at his age.
I agree with some of this. But I think Alcaraz at 21 is quite clearly playing a higher level than any of the big 3 at that age.
That really does tell the whole story, while it may mean that players ranked lower (around 100) are better than previous generations, ie better prepared, it doesn't follow that at the ellite level ( top 10) players are better. u can't really fairly compare a top player's fitness or how hard they hit the ball from the 80's , 90s or 00's with a player from today as fitness standards and equipment have moved on across all sports, that doesn't necessarily mean the standard of tennis has improved.
For example the standard of tennis from around 2007 to 2016 was exceptionally high, probably the highest ever, the standard in the last few years has definitely dropped. Are the players faster, fitter and hitting the ball harder now than 10-15 years ago, probably, but, that's more a consequence of fitness standards and equipment across sports in general improving in that time. It's the same in most sports, fitness standards rising doesn't necessarily mean the standard of a particular sport actually rises, The mental side is as important as the physical side at elite level.
Possibly in mentality standards, but players now are fitter, faster and hit the ball harder.
While it would be a great achievement, it's also a reflection of the drop in standard at the elite level, outside of Sinner and an obviously declining Djokovic, there really isn't huge opposition there, mainly guys like Zverev, Tsitsipas and Medvedev who have proven themselves to not really be elite level players, when compared to previous generations.
Odd dynamic between Zverev and his auld fella alright. After the match when Zverev was giving his speech, the whole stadium was standing out of respect, except his dad who sat slouched in his seat. He did manage to summon the energy to stand for Alcaraz though!
The absolute worst for that kind of carry on was Kyrgios, absolutely screaming at his box for not showing him enough fist pumps or some nonsense. He seems so normal as a commentator too.
The constant looking up to the box really pisses me off.
Andy Murray constantly used to be berating them for not showing enough support as if it makes a blind bit of difference, just strikes me as being somewhat mentally weak to be constantly looking up to them.
I thought it was just me who missed the end of the match, despite thinking I'd set everything to record practically until the 9 o'clock news! Eurosport's broadcast set-up is a complete pain for matches that drag on - I seem to remember the BBC just extending Wimbledon programmes way beyond the listed time if the matches were long ones, so the recording was just one that continued.
Delighted to see Alcaraz win, I just love watching him play, although he didn't seem to enjoy this match as much as others (probably not surprisingly!)
I thought the contrast between his support box and Zverev's was marked - there was constant interaction and what looked like reassurance from Ferrero, all very positive looking - but when Zverev looked to his team, yer man just sat there looking grumpy!
I don't particularly like the way that players look to their box after every single point these days - I much preferred when they just went out and played their game and had to do it by themselves - but given that that's the way it's gone, I think Alcaraz's set-up is the best I've seen .
Really enjoyable match that unfortunately I didn't get to see all of because there was a gap in the recording on the sky plus box despite me recording 3 hours of programmes after the scheduled program.Why the hell can;t this technology not just record everything without any gaps at all.
Didn't see anything after 3-1 in the 5th but looks like Alcaraz pulled away quite easily so I didn't miss much I guess.
It has to be said that wa a massive collapse by Zverev puts himself 2 sets to 1 up and with Alcaraz partly injured and yet only wins 3 games from that point on , he started the 4th set atrociously when he should have had all the momentum.
could potentially win a career grand slam at 21, fairly unheard of.
Wow, the relief of checking the score and seeing Carlos got over the line!
Nice one Alcaraz. May Zverev stay slamless forever 😎
Are you sure you weren't watching a different match? Considering the conditions on court today, I thought they both played fantastic tennis.
Thank fúck for that.
That was poor quality stuff though. We've been spoiled over the past 20 years, Nadal vs Djokovic that was not. He may have won but talk of Alcaraz winning every slam unopposed for the next 15 years was fairly premature, he looks far from invincible. I reckon a 37 year old Djokovic would have wiped the floor with either of those guys today.
Dear god no, Zverev to actually win a slam here 😞
Zverev playing well, but Alacaraz not happy. Mishitting a lot now and complaining that there is a lack of clay on the surface.
You'd have to think Swiatek will at least get into double digit major wins and probably beat Chris Everts Roland Garros record.
I think the thing with Iga that'll keep her at the top is she doesn't beat herself ever and is so mentally strong that she'll win bucket loads of matches other even other top class players would have found a way to lose.If she improves her serve she's going to be even harder to beat going forward.Also she appears very level headed and there is no bullshit or drama with her and you feel like she's really 100% focussed on tennis whereas the likes of Osaka, Barty and Muguruza seemed to not really be pushed about tennis whereas she seems to love it and want to be the very best.
No comments on the women's final? 😅 Didn't get to watch but about as competitive as expected.
Swiatek now up to five grand slams at the age of 23, you'd wonder just how many more will she win. She's certainly in with a shout of beating Chris Evert's record at RG anyway.
Coco's forehand was horrifically bad today, all Iga had to do was play the ball to that Coco's forehand and Coco's would just beat herself.
Disappointing women's final, hoping Swiatek wins easily. Would've been cool for Andreeva to make it, but she's got plenty of time yet.
Iga must be wondering if she'll get her nails done before or during the final……
Zverev would drive you mad with his 15 bounces for every serve. Hopefully he falls foul of the shot clock before long.
Did Andreeva win?? I'm just watching the first set now, was assuming that Sabalenka would get her act together eventually and wipe the court with her!
Delighted to see Paolini get through, she'd light up the room, I love watching her play. The contrast in players and styles between her and Rybakina could not have been bigger, it was funny watching them on the same court!
Pretty random semi final, but hoping Andreeva makes it through to have a crack at Swiatek or Gauff
Surprised to see Rybakina beaten by Paolini. I hope Andreeva beats Sabalenka, I just can't warm to Sabalenka and the screaming.
Wow, strong possibility we'll get all four top seeds in the women's semi finals. Must be quite a while since that's happened. Hoping Gauff can avoid a drubbing from Swiatek, but the signs aren't looking great. Would actually prefer either one of Sabalenka or Rybakina to win it at this stage.
You'd think the Alcaraz-Sinner match is the de facto final, but I do have that match between Alcaraz and Zverev from Melbourne at the back of my head too. Either way I hope the winner of this semi final wins the tournament, both would be great champions.
Sampras was still a top player, how does him still winning a major disprove my point? But his majors were drying up, and he wanted to get out on top. Hewitt was routinely beating him by that stage, that's just a fact many people don't want to accept. He was routinely beating Federer too. He broke through as one of the youngest world numbers 1's and grand slam winners. You can't do that without being phenomenally talented. It's unheard off. It's freakish talent
Ye his career was still 20 years, showing just what an amazing talent he was. He had no weapons, and when his pace left him, his technical game and shot placement was so brilliant, he could still be competitive. But he simply wasn't the player he could of been after getting his first injuries at the end of 03.
Are you tring to suggest Hewitt was in his prime after this or was the same player? Because we all know injuries hampered his game, when would you suggest they started to effect his game?
Do you reckon when Federer was regularly bageling him, he was at his peak? Or Federer all of a sudden became so much better? Like not just a little better, but way way way better? Overnight?
In finals? He beat Sampras 4 games on the trot, and demolished him in the US Open one year. Sampras feared him, and retired to save his legacy, as he knew what was coming.
I never said Hewitt was as good as Federer. His career was far too short, and mostly hampered by injuries. But for the period he was fully fit, was every bit as good. His last great performance was at the end of 2003 against Federer, that was the last time we saw a fully fit Hewitt at the top of his game. Thereafter, with the injuries starting, a noticable drop in his pace and ability to get to certain shots.
The point was more, how at a young age, he came in and stood up to the established players, and basically cleared them out. This new generation, has continually collapsed under pressure, when they had the big 3 on the ropes. They've basically had to wait for them to retire. So there is a huge contrast to the way Hewitt broke through and took the game to the top players, in the way this useless lot haven't.
What happened in the rest of Hewitt's career is moot really, in terms of the context of my point. But when he started getting niggling injuries at the end of 2003 and started to lose his pace, you could see a drop off in his standard. By 05/06 and the injuries got more serious, he simply wasn't the player he once was. Still stayed ranked in the top 3 for a long time, which shows his talent. His technical game and shot placement is arguably the best I've ever seen. To lose his pace, and have no weapons and power, just shows how incredible his shot placement was to stay at the top so long.
The big 3 have their fanboys and will hear no wrong. But it's a myth Hewitt dominated a transitional era. He cleared the previous generation out. After Federer won his first Wimbledon, Hewitt beat him in the Davis cup. Then the niggling injuries started. People forget just how incredibly good a fully fit Hewitt was. He'd put it right up to any of the big 3, gave Nadal his hardest game in France in 09 I think, crippled with injuries. He was right up there with Federer until his pace slowly deteriorated, that's how good he was. But the fanboys will try and explain away the routine beatings he used to give Federer.
Only for injuries, a prime Hewitt is as good a player you'll ever see. Infact he never even got to his prime tbh
