Tennis anyone?

[joeybee12]

Congrats to Amelie Mauresemo on winning the WTA year-ending event, although I wish the articles didn't comment on how she now finally won one of the "big ones." There are only four big ones--the four grand slams. A round-robin tournament with only 8 players doesn't count. It's a big win, but not a grand slam. Actually, I was sort of hoping Mary Pierce would win, since she made two grand slam finals this year, and she's come back quite nicely at the "old age of 30."

As for the men, did you know if Roger Federer wins the men's masters this weekend, he'll tie John McEnroe with the best year record ever, something like 82-3. Hope he does it.

[Awsi Dooger]

1. I've watched some of it

Mens and womens. This used to be a much more significant tournament. Now you've got players skipping it or showing up after not playing in six weeks.

I'm rooting for Federer also. But whenever I see that McEnroe record of '84 I can't help think how much more dominant and significant it would have been with one less loss, specifically the French Open final to Ivan Lendl. I've seen McEnroe interviewed saying it was the one match he'd like to try again. He thought it might have discouraged Lendl somewhat and held him off for a couple more years while McEnroe was still at his peak.

A win like that would really have added to McEnroe's historical standing, a serve and volleyer triumphing on clay. None of the others have managed it in the recent decades, not Sampras or Becker or Edberg. Connors failed also and so far Federer hasn't won at Roland Garros.

McEnroe was up 2 sets to none in that French final. Two of my friends who were watching with me left the apartment and insisted the match was over.

[joeybee12]

2. I really wish Edberg had beaten Chang when they played...Chang

was a fluke who should not have beatn Lendl earlier in the tournament.

I think Federer has a good chance of winning the French sometime--he has a more all-around game than a lot of the players today, who are more into power.

On eidt, you're right about so many players--men and women--skipping it. It's clear they don't think it's as big a deal as it used to be. A lot skip just because they're so dman tired--nobody would skip a grand slam for simply that reason.

[Awsi Dooger]

3. I agree, and Edberg doesn't get enough credit

He won 2 of 3 Wimbledon finals from Becker, two Australian Opens and two straight US Opens. Many huge wins over top players in those matches, including Sampras and Courier along with Becker. Edberg's volley was penetrating and decisive, much better than Becker's IMO. Becker placed it well but without the pop.

But for some reason his name doesn't come up quickly when the greats are mentioned. That final over Chang would have really helped, similar to McEnroe in regard to clay and giving Edberg wins in all the Slams. I remember rooting for Edberg but somehow doubting he would win, even when he took a 2-1 lead in sets. It just looked like little Chang's destiny to win after the underhand nonsense while beating Lendl.

Federer SHOULD win the French on class and sheer ability, but this era has tons of European clay specialists who come in waves, one peaking this year and someone else the next year. Federer has the best overall game I've seen since Laver (when I was a kid and from tapes) so I hope he breaks Sampras' Slam record. Tennis is somewhat down in popularity so it's going to take something special for him to earn a rightful place in history, among sports fans in general if not tennis fans. He needs to roll the backhand more often and not rely on the slice so much. That's effective at Wimbledon but not on the bouncy surfaces.

[joeybee12]

4. Could be Edberg's personality....and his nationality....Becker had the

name from the start because he won at such a young age. Edbrg was very unassuming, but he had a spectacular overall game.

Nonsense is right about the underhand crap.

You're also right about all the really good clay court players--it'll take a year when none of them is at the top of their form for Federer to win it all. As good as he is, he'll need a little help to get the French. I hope he does, because his game--oveall--is so much better than Sampras' ever was, and I think Roger will catch and pass him in number of Grand Slams, but he'll never be considered the greatest uinless he gets the French Open title.

Did you see when Chris Evert hosted SNL? In her opening monologue she comared SNL to tennis, saying both peaked in popularity in the late 70's..too true, too true!

[Awsi Dooger]

5. I didn't see it, but that's a great line!

Somehow I doubt she came up with it. But if not that's even better, since they were comfortable chiding themselves.

I was in junior high in Miami when Chrissie Evert came onto the scene. It was big local news The local CBS affiliate would practically camp out at her parents' home in Ft. Lauderdale when she played big matches. One afternoon when she beat Billie Jean King for the first time it was spreading news all over school even before the bell rang to end the day.

[joeybee12]

6. Her entrance onto the scene really changed tennis...that's when it

started getting popular. Can you imagine how she would have been followed around today with the media much more prevelant? I think that's partly how Jennifer Capriati went nuts for a while--she was a millionaire before she even played her first professional match--the hype has gotten so insane. And it's also why I think no women players will last as long as Chris and Martina did--wya too much pressure too soon.

[joeybee12]

7. Yikes! And did you see the score of the Federer--Gaudio match today???

Spoiler below...........










Federer won 6-0, 6-0. Poor Gaudio, really got creamed.