UKC

Novak Djokovic beats Rafael Nadal to reach Wimbledon final http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/44834244

The two longest semi finals in Wimbledon history, with this one being another episode in the story of probably the three greatest players of all time. No quarter given, relentless intensity on every stroke, for over 5 hours. The 5 set format seems perfect for throwing up these epic confrontations. Enjoy it while it lasts, and who cares which one is the GOAT? Great competitors are usually defined by their rivalries; it’s the fact that federer, nadal, and Djokovic all share an era and drive each other to their limits that elevates them all to where they are.

hopefully the final can live up to what’s come before...

 

Women's final was dreadful, as was most matches building up to it. Poor tennis. They must be laughing to themselves they get equal pay at the slams.

 

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

The golden era continues, but what's next, noone is stepping up. I wonder if this will be the first generation that effectively retires undefeated.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I think 5 hours of Nadal towelling down after each point, choosing which balls to use, tugging at his shorts wedgie and bouncing the ball 30 times before each serve would have been too much for me. And the grunting. 

In reply to Pedro50:

Its the weird routine of it which tickles me. After every point he does exactly the same thing to his face.

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Nadal-Djokovic was the match of the tournament for sure. And the third set climax past bed-time in particular. Djokovic has a knack of getting under Rafa’s skin. But give credit to Anderson. His defeat of Federer from two sets and match point down was the best display of relentlessly bold hitting in a long time. To hang so tough in his semi speaks volumes of his courage and I hope he is sufficiently recovered to give Novak a contest today. 

In reply to goldmember:

As a spectacle, the women’s final is a long way behind the men’s. But that’s undoubtedly in part due to the best of 3 set format. I really don’t see why they haven’t gone to best of 5.

 

In reply to BnB:

I think he should be- only an hour more on court than Djokovic in the semi, and an extra day to recover 

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

I think it should be best of 5 for equal pay.  But watching 5 sets would be horrendous in terms of spectacle and the noise some make.

In saying that S Williams would have more many more slams over 5 sets. Such is her endurance and conditioning 

In reply to goldmember:

Nadal and Djokovic were pretty noisy yesterday! 

And serena- you could well be right, but I don’t think it’s a given. She’s much more powerful than other players, but has she got the endurance? She never has to show it in the current format. 

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

The grand slams don’t want it. It’s hard enough to fit the matches into the schedule as it is. 

If they did move to 5 sets, Serena would dominate. One of the most depressing things i’ve read relating to sport was Sharapova saying she didn’t do any weight training as she was worried a more muscular physique would affect her endorsements. 

In reply to galpinos:

What a truly awful role model for young players

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

And yet even the players involved seem to think that the format needs to change:

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon/wimbledon-2018-kevin-a...

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Trouble is, the artist Federer got knocked out by yet another beanpole big server. 

 

In reply to goldmember:

Blame the system, not the person.

In reply to Pekkie:

Well, I set aside time to watch yesterday's final, curtailing a pleasant walk in some nearby forests and hills, (and tarnished my very soul by paying €10 to Sky for the privilege of doing so) and I rather wish I hadn't bothered.

The first two sets were not just pathetic but painful to watch -- I was literally groaning ever time Anderson departed from the base-line in an incompetent attempt to approach the net or clubbed a perfectly ordinary shot for six, into the stands -- and, although Anderson did show that he can, in fact, play a bit of tennis in the third, he was still slaughtered in three sets and the Serb hardly had to extend himself to do it.

He did not bring out Novak's A-game and the end result made for very poor viewing.

 

 

 

In reply to Xharlie:

It was actually the only Wimbledon Men's Final I haven't watched in the last, ooh, twenty years...I knew it would be cr*p and so it turned out.

 

As for the Women's, don't get me started....three sets, lame playing (Kerber was serving at 75mph for Christ's sake...I regularly serve at 100mph+ and I'm just a bog standard club player, albeit with a decent serve for my level helped by climbing-related shoulder muscles! No variation (where were the drop shots, slice, volleys etc.).

In reply to Gone for good:

Really? You can't lay blame at both doors? She made the decision she would rather make (more) money for her appearance than focus on being the best tennis player that she could.

It took a drug ban to knock her off the top earning sports women in the world. Serena Williams now has that spot I believe and as she has dominated the sport for pretty much 15 years it seems deserved recompense. Thankfully she has earned that money through being a fantastic tennis player and doing everything she could to be the best she could, not worrying about a bit of muscle putting off potential sponsors. 

In reply to galpinos:

 

 

Me going off on a tangent related to women, muscles, and not working to the be the best that they could - what are your thoughts on Hingis' first retirement where she (fairly gracefully) stated that she can't compete against the sheer power that the Williams sisters (and others in their wake) brought to the game and she would rather bow out than spend two years in the gym doing weights to try to get all pumped up and totally change her game?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Do you mean the 2002 or 2007 retirement? I don't remember the comments but thought both were due to injuries and one had an added drugs issue. I will have to have a google to remind myself.

Regarding the comments, I'm not sure really. Regarding Hingis in particular, for starters, I didn't think they met that many times in Grand Slams (I don't really watch/follow tour tennis) and I'm sure Williams didn't win all of them? I've never thought Serena was all power, there's a lot to her game and her athleticism is one of the many strings to her bow. When you look at the men's game, it's not being won by massive brutes blasting their opponents off the court. Henin always seemed to do ok against Williams and she's not exactly stacked.

I thought the women's final showed this up. Williams second serve (a big weapon that makes her hard to break) was uncharacteristically misfiring, Kerber did a great job of capitalizing on that and on her own serve putting the ball into Serena's body and then moving her all over the court and Serena's response, to try and blast her off the court, fell well short.

The best sports require a multitude of attributes to be the best. Tennis is one of them and neglecting one (athleticism) for whatever reason seems remiss.

 

In reply to galpinos:

Very good point about Henin. And I did not mean to imply that the Williams were only about power, sorry if it came across that way. I don't Hingis was referring to them specifically either - again, apologies for not having a verbatim and referenced quote. 
I didn't watch yesterday, really I stopped actually watching tennis quite a while ago so maybe I shouldn't comment much! Regarding Hingis, I was on about the earlier retirement, not the one regarding cocaine allegations.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

No need to apologize, I was just typing quickly as I'm at work so might have come across as terse when I wasn't, just brain dumping in clipped thought! I always liked Hingis as a player, winning three Grand Slams and getting to the final in the fourth in the same year at 16/17 was pretty incredible. Her first "retirement" was driven by the ankle issues I think, operations on both and struggling to regain form. Having been so dominant, I can imagine that was hard to deal with, especially at that age too.

In reply to galpinos:

I wasn't referring to the tennis system specifically. I was thinking more of marketing and paying vast sums of money to famous slim pretty women to market products to boost sales to increase market share to increase profits to incease share price to increase value for shareholders and senior management. Ah, capitalism, that's the system I'm referring to.

In reply to galpinos:

I Googled and it seems that the official line in 2003 was injuries on both ankles. I definitely remember some soundbite about not wanting to get all bulked up though! She was always good for a scathing, pithy yet somehow gracious and diplomatic quote (e.g. when challenged over her lack of formal education by Richard Williams, she said "I'd like to see them speak several languages fluently" )

In reply to galpinos:

They talked right over Henin pretty much cruising the first set, I think taking the first set of the whole championship from Williams that year. THEN they started paying attention to her (as Williams cruised through the next two sets...) As a casual viewer I didn't know who Henin was and it was amazing to see this relative "waif" returning such hard balls with seeming ease. 


edit - it was Williams' second final and Henin's first, in 2001. 

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Aren't *all* these tennis players on drugs like Lance Armstrong or is that just a cycling thing?

 

In reply to JLS:

I think the Federations just work on the principle that if you do the minimum of testing you won’t have to sort a problem that you’re not going to find. 

It’s shocking how little effort is made in drug testing tennis players and footballers. 

In reply to Blue Straggler:

NB something went wrong with the edit on my previous post in this thread, and it looks like the first paragraph is me quoting galpinos. It's not. Just wanted to clarify