Wimbledon Day 2 - Muzza, Federer et (Nad)al

And Laura Robson and Heather Watson - yay!

Order of play
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/22713811

Wacky title JHM ......

Hope the 'et al' bit doesn't imply that you see Rafa as a mere also-ran .....

I'm about to put a little wager on him for a dramatic title-winning return to form.

Am I throwing my money away ....?

Nope, I'm hoping for the same, however slim his chances are.

Rafa could do well this year. He must be due a good Wimbledon.

Rafa's biggest problem will be Andy.

On grass, I think Andy has the beating of him.

I think Andy has the beating of everyone on grass this year.

Too bad to hear that on grass Andy has the beating of Rafa, when in the past its Rafa having the beating of Andy on grass! That shows how much Rafa's game has deteriorated, that he even lost to Andy on clay in a final!

Did you enjoy your time at SW19 yesterday sfp .....?

Easy to forget that nadal and Murray have played each other 3 times at Wimbledon and nadal has won all three matches.

Would probably favour Murray this time but if nadal could get there and build his confidence each round he plays, you never know!

It's pretty depressing watching the other British player's ,no killer instinct. Happy just to be there, just far to pampered on the way up and a complete lack of competition.

monty junior wrote:It's pretty depressing watching the other British player's ,no killer instinct. Happy just to be there, just far to pampered on the way up and a complete lack of competition.

Or perhaps they're playing against good players who also want to win very much?

Not sure who you're talking about, but if it's Edmund, I feel your comments are rather unfair.

Konta? 2 and 2 against Sharapova? What else did you expect?

I went yesterday.

Had tickets for court three. My highlight was turning round and bumping into Ana Ivanovic as she walked to court for her match. It probably wasn't her highlight.

Cilic looked good for two sets. Not convinced by his slice backhand though. Raonic isn't back to his best yet. Enjoyed Naomi Broady's backhand...proper single hander.

Watched sets 4 & 5 of Herbert v Chung. Herbert is good at the net and Chung is worse than I am at the net. Herbert was rude to the ballgirl throughout. Shame as quite like his game.

Watched a bit of Zverev v Gabashvilli. Zverev needs to fill out a bit...very skinny.

Naomi Broady yesterday from a good position, not really just this year but just a constant stream of 1st round straight set defeats year after year after year. Just hard to watch, i know they are trying but i just feel the wildcards on more than a couple of British players is a complete waste. The problem is the incentive's, so many of these players can make a solid living off the LTA,player from countries of tougher upbringing's who have the opportunity to play in Grand Slam's see it as an opportunity rather than just a kind of "happy to be here" mentality. I'm probably being too harsh it's just a shame at the biggest tennis tournament in the world the domestic talent is absolutely dreadful bar one player who became a class player by moving abroad and testing himself in far more competitive surroundings.

Murray became a class player because he's a class player. The whole went abroad and became a superstar thing is just a fallacy.

I think the Broady's are very bad examples to use of players who've been pampered by the LTA.

He won by the way, in case you didn't notice.

I said Naomi not her brother, sure we have one or two "success" stories a year who get through to round 2 only to be hammered but it's way to few in between for the amount of money wasted by the LTA the last 20 years.

Thats very unfair. What you have to understand i that the british players bar andy who come in are very low ranked. At their rank, you would expect them to be beaten first or second round. Its nothing to do with lack of desire, theyre just no really gs level yet. The lta can throw what money they want, you cant "buy" world class players

Tsonga Muller a good match, Nadal looking alright tbh, hes hitting it pretty hard, looks better than I thought he would

I would say Nadal looking much the same as he has most of the season. Which is not nearly as good as he used to play but better than many seem to think he plays these days.

Wildcards will nearly always be lower ranked (sometimes significantly) than their opponents.

It's the same in any event, from ITF Juniors, 10k, Challenger, ATP and Slam level.

Most of them lose. It's not something unique to Wimbledon or British events.

Also, it's a bit unfair to say all British wildcards are hopeless and don't try, except those that win, but they don't count. (but as you said, when they invevitably play a top 30 player in the second round, they lose so let you and their country down in the end)

djlovesyou wrote:Wildcards will nearly always be lower ranked (sometimes significantly) than their opponents.

It's the same in any event, from ITF Juniors, 10k, Challenger, ATP and Slam level.

Most of them lose. It's not something unique to Wimbledon or British events.

Also, it's a bit unfair to say all British wildcards are hopeless and don't try, except those that win, but they don't count. (but as you said, when they invevitably play a top 30 player in the second round, they lose so let you and their country down in the end)

I would agree, you cant expect challenger level British players, most of whom havent ever played or qualified for any other slam to be given a wc and say "we pay top dollar for you, go and make a magic run to the Quarters". It just doesnt happen

Ryan Klein just lost to Seppi for example, its not because he was just happy to be there or rubbish, frankly he was just nowhere near Seppis class

Regarding British wildcards, I can see it both ways:

On one hand, it feels somewhat unfair to them individually - they are ranked lower than their opponents, of course they will struggle in their matches.

On the other hand, British tennis is by and large very very weak - almost shockingly so.  So from that perspective there is this question as to why say British #5 is always massively below French #5 or German #5 or Spanish #5 etc etc.  And one possible (though admittedly not the only possible) answer is that British talent does not work as hard as their counterparts in other countries.

Could be a few things.
Tennis is still mostly an upper class sort of sport in Britain, still sort of a hobby sport. Britain is world class in many worldwide sports, boxing, cycling, athletics etc because its taken seriously, played by a lot more lower class people, who have heavy financial pressure. In Spain, tennis is taken very seriously.
British players practice more on grass and fast hard courts, which arent the sort of conditions to give you the model successful player nowadays either.

Annoyingly, my video stream lags behind my live scoreboard. So if I want to check how other matches are going I am at risk of also seeing the score from the match I am watching before I see the point played

Very average stuff from Federer so far, and the 6-1 first set flatters him. The 1st serve ratio was just 40% with plenty of UE's thrown in for good measure.

But if tennis is more upper class - and hobby - sport in Britain than elsewhere (I did not realize it was) then I can see why people may feel unhappy about LTA pumping money into it without successfully expanding it to a wider population.

I wonder how the LTA funding in Britain compares to similar government funding in other large European countries - does LTA have more money, less money, similar amounts?

lags72 wrote:Very average stuff from Federer so far, and the 6-1 first set flatters him. The 1st serve ratio was just 40% with plenty of UE's thrown in for good measure.

Hard to judge him on the performance so far. I get the feeling he does not feel threatened at all and is maybe not fully focused.

summerblues wrote:But if tennis is more upper class - and hobby - sport in Britain than elsewhere (I did not realize it was) then I can see why people may feel unhappy about LTA pumping money into it without successfully expanding it to a wider population.

I wonder how the LTA funding in Britain compares to similar government funding in other large European countries - does LTA have more money, less money, similar amounts?

From the last figures, they get loads more. However I dont see why that angers people. The money they get comes directly from wimbledon for the most part.

Unlike say, the ECB, which gets a lot of moeny for what is often seen as an upper or middle class sport, the LTA doesnt spend as well by most peoples accounts.

I'm not convinced about the whole class argument. There are a lot of talented kids in this country, but there's a lot of competition at a young age between sports to get these kids.

Just not that many of them choose tennis.

Although, on the whole, recent British tennis players come across as articulate and perhaps above average intelligence, I'm not sure I'd call many of them 'upper class'. Although there does seem to be a bit of inverse snobbery when anyone who doesn't answer a question with a response such as 'I fink I dun like really well init' gets classed as 'posh'.

Oh sure, no threat for Fed today summerblues, so it's not really much of a barometer for future rounds.

I had to google ECB

Yeah, if the money comes for the most part from Wimbledon, then I can see it as less of a concern. Still, surprised that tennis is not better (or bigger?) in the UK. Tennis is quite popular throughout most of Europe and you even have the biggest tennis tournament, yet it seems like other countries are more into it.

Tennis is very expensive, most lower class (in money, not necessarily in any other way) therefore go into other sports a lot, indeed thats true. The LTA tends to "prop up" its players with grants, when what they should be doing is give them the best facilities, for little price (which they DO do) but then let them make their own money. It instills that pressure other places have.

summerblues wrote:I had to google ECB

Yeah, if the money comes for the most part from Wimbledon, then I can see it as less of a concern.  Still, surprised that tennis is not better (or bigger?) in the UK.  Tennis is quite popular throughout most of Europe and you even have the biggest tennis tournament, yet it seems like other countries are more into it.

Sorry about that. Hopefully you dont think I meant the European Central Bank.
Cricket has the Major advantage of the county based system. Means players can easily get top class competition long before nationla call up, it its own talent scouting system, an equivalent of the Us college system, which we dont have in tennis.

Part of it might be a bit of national rivarly, that we miss in tennis. Its very much just the man vs the man. Cricket has the ashes, which is just as big a summer event as Wimby, a big part of that is its a national ding dong between two very old sporting foes. The six nations has it too. That gets people into it.

Not much drama on the top two courts, so time to check out Tsonga who is going into the 5th set.

Mhm Muller Tsonga is a ding dong, worth a watch

Nadal looks more comfotable than he did at Quenns, and in particular the last few years here. Maybe the QF of my dreams WILL happen...

Sock is out. Fognini through in easy straight sets.

67 minutes to complete 3 sets with only one breadstick? Wow. That's 2.68 minutes/game, including changeovers.

Safe to say there were no time violations.

temporary21 wrote:Tennis is very expensive, most lower class (in money, not necessarily in any other way) therefore go into other sports a lot, indeed thats true. The LTA tends to "prop up" its players with grants, when what they should be doing is give them the best facilities, for little price (which they DO do) but then let them make their own money. It instills that pressure other places have.

out of interest, how expensive it is in Britain? over here it would cost me around 300 euro per year to get my 6 years old son to learn tennis at my local club (20 hours of lessons per year and acess to the courts I think) and that's probably high versus the french average. most faiclites being usually subsidised by the local town.

Tsonga wins.

Heather Watson battling it out in the decider and has just broken to go 6-5 up. Just one more game Heather ........

Stakhovskys on for those wanted to see some s and v. Hes up against Coric

whocares wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Tennis is very expensive, most lower class (in money, not necessarily in any other way) therefore go into other sports a lot, indeed thats true. The LTA tends to "prop up" its players with grants, when what they should be doing is give them the best facilities, for little price (which they DO do) but then let them make their own money. It instills that pressure other places have.

out of interest, how expensive it is in Britain? over here it would cost me around 300 euro per year to get my 6 years old son to learn tennis at my local club (20 hours of lessons per year and acess to the courts I think) and that's probably high versus the french average. most faiclites being usually subsidised by the local town.

7
I wont lie I dont know the exact expense, apparently it can get into the tens of thousands for the sort of coaching you might want for a career. Its not cheap in any country really, but its often talked as a pricey one

Yes, I was watching Stakh just now. Coric took the second set. But nice to see some S&V. Muller also S&Vs fair bit.

V interesting stat on Murray's 2nd serve.

In 2005 Wimby he averaged 99mph.
Now at 85mph!

That is a big drop. Odd how it went down so much and is maybe now more of a weakness than it was aged 18.

The back might have a lot to do with that. He arches a lot on his second serve.

Watson comes through

Heather saves 3 mp's and wins 8-6 in the third. Is she the last british women left?

Murray who served for the set at 5-3, now breaks back as Kuk served for the set. Tiebreak.

topsy turvy. Murray playing terribly to be 5-6 0-30 down but cleveryly took the pace off the ball and got the break back.

Stakovsky coric turning into a real good un

Bouchards 12th seed, and is in major trouble. How far would she tumble down te rankings if she lost first round?