Tennis - ATP World Tour Finals - London

[North West Tom]

Don't know if there's any tennis fans on here but the Finals start this weekend. I'm going down to London on Saturday and watching the Sunday afternoon session. Doubles at 12:30, then singles after

[Not Ideal]

ARod just pulled out unfort.

[Greenie]

I'm going on the Friday. Like you shortish afternoon session nice long lunch and then settle in for the evening.

Edited by Greenie on Wednesday 18th November 11:08

[North West Tom]

Group A:

Federer
Murray
Del Potro
Verdasco

Group B:
Nadal
Djokovic
Davydenko
Soderling

[elster]

Does anyone else think that Del Potro looks a little bit special needs with his band around his head.

He reminds me of the Character Simple Jack in Tropic Thunder.

Anyway, quite a good match so far. First set Murray was significantly better. Del Potro seems to have picked things up a bit and winning points.

[North West Tom]

Got back from London earlier. What a fantasric day it was. It was the first ever professional tennis match I've been to and I absolutely loved it.

The rallies were so much better and faster than they appeared on TV. And fk me, Delpo can hit it fking hard!! Forehand winners coming from nothing.

Did anyone else go/going in the week? The O2 was frigging packed! It took us half an hour to get out of the arena! People queuing for miles for the millions of restaurants.

Great day, will be back next year!!

[Not Ideal]

Cool glad you enjoyed.

[willyjc]

I have (good) tickets for tonight...can't wait.

Back in 2004 Mrs Willy and I "won" ticket through the wimbledon ballot, only to spend a whole day watching the rain - not a single ball hit in anger. Hoping that tonight makes up for it!

[just1]

Just spent the last 2 days up at the event, and was there for both sessions both days!! Had the same seats at the back of the court about 10 rows back.

In a word....... AWSOME!!!!

Best arena and event i have been too in 25 years in tennis. its supurb!

next year might have to take the week off!

Rich how did you get the hospitality tickets??? I didnt see them advertised??? And if i wasnt working on thursday id be biteing your arm off!!!

Edited by just1 on Tuesday 24th November 11:53

[North West Tom]

Federer has just beat Murray 6-2 3-6 6-1.

[chippy17]

North West Tom said:

Federer has just beat Murray 6-2 3-6 6-1.

3-6, 6-3, 6-1

[chippy17]

just to give it a bump as I love tennis

Murray got mauled by the master, simple as

apparently Federer said in the pre match interview words to the effect: 'I have figured out how to play Murray watch and see what happens'

[Greenie]

So he figured out how to make Murray first serve at less than 40%. No wonder he's the World No.1.

[chippy17]

Greenie said:

So he figured out how to make Murray first serve at less than 40%. No wonder he's the World No.1.

I doubt Federer's percentage was much better, you could see Federer getting into his rythym at the end of the first set and after that...also that percentage was for the third set...perhaps you weren't watching the same game I was

yes I can't think why he is the world no 1 until you enlightened me, now I know thanks

Edited by chippy17 on Thursday 26th November 13:06

[Greenie]

chippy17 said:

Greenie said:

So he figured out how to make Murray first serve at less than 40%. No wonder he's the World No.1.

I doubt Federer's percentage was much better, you could see Federer getting into his rythym at the end of the first set and after that...also that percentage was for the third set...perhaps you weren't watching the same game I was

yes I can't think why he is the world no 1 until you enlightened me, now I know thanks

Actually Federer percentage was up at 60% so it was much better.

Perhaps we were watching different matches because I wasn't watching through Federer's rose tinted glasses. In your view Federer only lost the first set because he was getting "into his rythym" and then gave Murray a master class. If you care to take off your glasses in the real world Murray out played him in the opener and his first serve was awful in the second and especially third set. Murray wouldn't have beaten any of the players in the World Tour finals serving like he did. Federer played very nicely in the third but he didn't need to as Murray was awful. Murray's forehand was consistently too short-I think he actually has a technical fault on his weight distribution on his forehand which he needs to sort out as it is costing him against the bigger hitters.

Of the 10 times they have played each other the player with the highest first serve percentage has always been the victor.

Don't get me wrong I think Federer is brilliant but your assessment of it being a master class is way off the mark. If he has learn how to beat Murray you wouldn't be able to tell from that match.

Edited by Greenie on Thursday 26th November 15:52

[chippy17]

Greenie said:

chippy17 said:

Greenie said:

So he figured out how to make Murray first serve at less than 40%. No wonder he's the World No.1.

I doubt Federer's percentage was much better, you could see Federer getting into his rythym at the end of the first set and after that...also that percentage was for the third set...perhaps you weren't watching the same game I was

yes I can't think why he is the world no 1 until you enlightened me, now I know thanks

Actually Federer percentage was up at 60% so it was much better.

Perhaps we were watching different matches because I wasn't watching through Federer's rose tinted glasses. In your view Federer only lost the first set because he was getting "into his rythym" and then gave Murray a master class. If you care to take off your glasses in the real world Murray out played him in the opener and his first serve was awful in the second and especially third set. Murray wouldn't have beaten any of the players in the World Tour finals serving like he did. Federer played very nicely in the third but he didn't need to as Murray was awful. Murray's forehand was consistently too short-I think he actually has a technical fault on his weight distribution on his forehand which he needs to sort out as it is costing him against the bigger hitters.

Of the 10 times they have played each other the player with the highest first serve percentage has always been the victor.

Don't get me wrong I think Federer is brilliant but your assessment of it being a master class is way off the mark. If he has learn how to beat Murray you wouldn't be able to tell from that match.

Edited by Greenie on Thursday 26th November 15:52

hardly amazing percentage for that level though, also his placement was not that great, in the first set his unforced errors were very high compared to Murray, sorry Murray was not outplaying him to the extent you think, once Federer had to 'into his rythym, he was pummelling shots at Murray and was far more agreessive and attacking, I have not got spectacles on in any way in fact I think Federer has been past his peak for 2/3 years but even past his peak he has been in every Grand Slam final this year, I agree his forehands were a bit short from the second half of the second set onwards but Federer was already doing damage by then

well perhaps master class was too strong a comment but from what i was watching he was well and truly beaten

you make a very good point regarding his forehand it is most certainly a weakness there's just no bite on it even at full pelt

he managed to beat Del Potro! ok before you say it Del Potro played pretty badly

[MiniMan64]

I don't think Federer won their match, I think it was much more like Murray lost that match. He totally went to pieces in the last set, very odd!

[chippy17]

MiniMan64 said:

I don't think Federer won their match, I think it was much more like Murray lost that match. He totally went to pieces in the last set, very odd!

agreed he went to pieces in the last set but there was much damage done before that, does he really have the long term ability to stay at this very high level? I hope he does

so Murray is out in a slightly bizarre way on games won versus games lost, I think?

[JNW1]

chippy17 said:

so Murray is out in a slightly bizarre way on games won versus games lost, I think?

I think it's the same concept as goal difference in football! Had Federer won one more game against Del Potro I think Murray would have gone through as the games difference for him and DP would have been the same but he beat DP when the two of them played; bit unfortunate but rules are rules and to be honest it does seem a reasonable way to decide it!

[chippy17]

JNW1 said:

chippy17 said:

so Murray is out in a slightly bizarre way on games won versus games lost, I think?

I think it's the same concept as goal difference in football! Had Federer won one more game against Del Potro I think Murray would have gone through as the games difference for him and DP would have been the same but he beat DP when the two of them played; bit unfortunate but rules are rules and to be honest it does seem a reasonable way to decide it!

you are right of course, I guess in a round robin they have to do it some way and it seems fair even though he beat Del Potro but then again Del Potro beat Federer etc, a shame though