Wimbledon

[PhilCastro]

John Isner is my hero right now

[liquidcrystalcompass]

QUOTE (iluvgeddy05 @ Jun 24 2010, 11:46 AM)

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/24/the-t...isner-vs-mahut/ Now over but... HOLY COW!

I'm surprised they didn't need to be helped off the court. Simply amazing.

[Rush Cocky]

Isner beats Mahut 70-68!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

LET THE PARTY BEGIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OR.......you could just let the poor guy sleep. He's earned it.

[treeduck]

Isner will probably get knocked out in the next round after all that...

[workingcinderellaman]

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jun 23 2010, 05:00 PM)

I have heard that some people are proposing changing the rules and adding a 5th set tiebreaker rule because of this outrageously long match. My question is WHY? My understanding is that this is the first time since 1877 that two have gone on like this. You don't make rules because of one instance. You stand up and applaud like the fans there did. You appreciate the effort. Let television take a flying leap. People who like tennis may get some popcorn or soda during the changeovers but PLEASE don't make a new rule so we can keep on schedule. Hats off to both. And especially hats off to Mahut for not giving up on those 4 match points and saying "I have had enough". We are talking true grit here. We are talking something that doesn't happened but once in a hundred and thirty three years. I am guessing tomorrow will be a short one and I am guessing the winner loses in the 2nd round. But right now? I pay tribute!

 

I wouldn't mind if they let those scoreless World Cup games go on until someone wins. Even if it takes 10 hours.

[ReflectedLight]

QUOTE (workingcinderellaman @ Jun 24 2010, 06:19 PM)

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jun 23 2010, 05:00 PM) I have heard that some people are proposing changing the rules and adding a 5th set tiebreaker rule because of this outrageously long match. My question is WHY?  My understanding is that this is the first time since 1877 that two have gone on like this.  You don't make rules because of one instance.  You stand up and applaud like the fans there did.  You appreciate the effort.  Let television take a flying leap.  People who like tennis may get some popcorn or soda during the changeovers but PLEASE don't make a new rule so we can keep on schedule.  Hats off to both.  And especially hats off to Mahut for not giving up on those 4 match points and saying "I have had enough".  We are talking true grit here.  We are talking something that doesn't happened but once in a hundred and thirty three years.  I am guessing tomorrow will be a short one and I am guessing the winner loses in the 2nd round.  But right now? I pay tribute!   I wouldn't mind if they let those scoreless World Cup games go on until someone wins. Even if it takes 10 hours. sure you're not the one running around for 10 hours.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (workingcinderellaman @ Jun 24 2010, 06:19 PM)

QUOTE (Rush Cocky @ Jun 23 2010, 05:00 PM) I have heard that some people are proposing changing the rules and adding a 5th set tiebreaker rule because of this outrageously long match. My question is WHY?  My understanding is that this is the first time since 1877 that two have gone on like this.  You don't make rules because of one instance.  You stand up and applaud like the fans there did.  You appreciate the effort.  Let television take a flying leap.  People who like tennis may get some popcorn or soda during the changeovers but PLEASE don't make a new rule so we can keep on schedule.  Hats off to both.  And especially hats off to Mahut for not giving up on those 4 match points and saying "I have had enough".  We are talking true grit here.  We are talking something that doesn't happened but once in a hundred and thirty three years.  I am guessing tomorrow will be a short one and I am guessing the winner loses in the 2nd round.  But right now? I pay tribute!   I wouldn't mind if they let those scoreless World Cup games go on until someone wins. Even if it takes 10 hours. They won't change anything, first of all it's just a one-off match, the question has hardly arisen before this, so now that it's over and we go back to normal the questioning will fade away. A 70-68 scoreline would have to happen in several matches over several years before they'd even consider changing the rules. It's just an interesting talking point right now.   Secondly Wimbledon is run by the most curmudgeonly bunch of stick in the mud old boys club types, that ever sipped gin with strawberries on a thursday afternoon. They wouldn't change the rules if their first born's lives depended on it, not without 378 comittee meetings about it first. The sliding roof took about 20 years of proposals before they finally bit the bullet on it.

[mazyyz]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 24 2010, 08:32 AM)

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 22 2010, 05:39 AM) I don't see Roddick winning it, he's had three final appearances and never quite made it. I can see him making the semi/quarters but that's it, might even have an early exit. if Fed doesn't win then Nadal will... Why the hell do people like Roddick?! Outside of a massive serve, he doesn't have much going on honestly. Sure, he plays hard but he often doesn't come through with the goods. His serve alone can get him deep in the tourney but you can't be a 1 dimensional player and win Wimbledon or the French. I was shocked when he went all the way with Fed last year but can't imagine him duplicating that amazing effort (but yet again, not coming through). Yeah as usual, it's hard to bet against Fed here. As much as I loathe Hewitt, it is pretty fun to watch that gritty asshole play his heart out Roddick's serve is his forte but he also runs around, avoiding the backhand, to hit a dominating forehand...the best in the biz. This can sometimes be a flaw though.   I will be surprised if Fed gets to the finals this year. He is unusually struggling in the first rounds. My pick is for Nadal to take it.

[treeduck]

Isner had nothing left...

 

 

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (mazyyz @ Jun 25 2010, 12:20 PM)

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 24 2010, 08:32 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 22 2010, 05:39 AM) I don't see Roddick winning it, he's had three final appearances and never quite made it. I can see him making the semi/quarters but that's it, might even have an early exit. if Fed doesn't win then Nadal will... Why the hell do people like Roddick?! Outside of a massive serve, he doesn't have much going on honestly. Sure, he plays hard but he often doesn't come through with the goods. His serve alone can get him deep in the tourney but you can't be a 1 dimensional player and win Wimbledon or the French. I was shocked when he went all the way with Fed last year but can't imagine him duplicating that amazing effort (but yet again, not coming through). Yeah as usual, it's hard to bet against Fed here. As much as I loathe Hewitt, it is pretty fun to watch that gritty asshole play his heart out Roddick's serve is his forte but he also runs around, avoiding the backhand, to hit a dominating forehand...the best in the biz. This can sometimes be a flaw though.   I will be surprised if Fed gets to the finals this year. He is unusually struggling in the first rounds. My pick is for Nadal to take it. The best in the biz? It's powerful but don't agree with 'the best'. And he's not that great of a mover despite moving around.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 26 2010, 04:49 AM)

QUOTE (mazyyz @ Jun 25 2010, 12:20 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 24 2010, 08:32 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 22 2010, 05:39 AM) I don't see Roddick winning it, he's had three final appearances and never quite made it. I can see him making the semi/quarters but that's it, might even have an early exit. if Fed doesn't win then Nadal will... Why the hell do people like Roddick?! Outside of a massive serve, he doesn't have much going on honestly. Sure, he plays hard but he often doesn't come through with the goods. His serve alone can get him deep in the tourney but you can't be a 1 dimensional player and win Wimbledon or the French. I was shocked when he went all the way with Fed last year but can't imagine him duplicating that amazing effort (but yet again, not coming through). Yeah as usual, it's hard to bet against Fed here. As much as I loathe Hewitt, it is pretty fun to watch that gritty asshole play his heart out Roddick's serve is his forte but he also runs around, avoiding the backhand, to hit a dominating forehand...the best in the biz. This can sometimes be a flaw though.   I will be surprised if Fed gets to the finals this year. He is unusually struggling in the first rounds. My pick is for Nadal to take it. The best in the biz? It's powerful but don't agree with 'the best'. And he's not that great of a mover despite moving around. Nadal looked shaky today, got through in five, the second five setter in a row. I don't think he'll get past the soda king in the QF.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 26 2010, 04:49 AM)

QUOTE (mazyyz @ Jun 25 2010, 12:20 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 24 2010, 08:32 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 22 2010, 05:39 AM) I don't see Roddick winning it, he's had three final appearances and never quite made it. I can see him making the semi/quarters but that's it, might even have an early exit. if Fed doesn't win then Nadal will... Why the hell do people like Roddick?! Outside of a massive serve, he doesn't have much going on honestly. Sure, he plays hard but he often doesn't come through with the goods. His serve alone can get him deep in the tourney but you can't be a 1 dimensional player and win Wimbledon or the French. I was shocked when he went all the way with Fed last year but can't imagine him duplicating that amazing effort (but yet again, not coming through). Yeah as usual, it's hard to bet against Fed here. As much as I loathe Hewitt, it is pretty fun to watch that gritty asshole play his heart out Roddick's serve is his forte but he also runs around, avoiding the backhand, to hit a dominating forehand...the best in the biz. This can sometimes be a flaw though.   I will be surprised if Fed gets to the finals this year. He is unusually struggling in the first rounds. My pick is for Nadal to take it. The best in the biz? It's powerful but don't agree with 'the best'. And he's not that great of a mover despite moving around. Roddick is out like a light, and to a man called Lu!   And with Querry getting a straight sets thumping by Murray, the American challenge is over on the ATP side...   Not 1 American in the QF, it never used to be like that...

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 29 2010, 06:11 AM)

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 26 2010, 04:49 AM) QUOTE (mazyyz @ Jun 25 2010, 12:20 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jun 24 2010, 08:32 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 22 2010, 05:39 AM) I don't see Roddick winning it, he's had three final appearances and never quite made it. I can see him making the semi/quarters but that's it, might even have an early exit. if Fed doesn't win then Nadal will... Why the hell do people like Roddick?! Outside of a massive serve, he doesn't have much going on honestly. Sure, he plays hard but he often doesn't come through with the goods. His serve alone can get him deep in the tourney but you can't be a 1 dimensional player and win Wimbledon or the French. I was shocked when he went all the way with Fed last year but can't imagine him duplicating that amazing effort (but yet again, not coming through). Yeah as usual, it's hard to bet against Fed here. As much as I loathe Hewitt, it is pretty fun to watch that gritty asshole play his heart out Roddick's serve is his forte but he also runs around, avoiding the backhand, to hit a dominating forehand...the best in the biz. This can sometimes be a flaw though.   I will be surprised if Fed gets to the finals this year. He is unusually struggling in the first rounds. My pick is for Nadal to take it. The best in the biz? It's powerful but don't agree with 'the best'. And he's not that great of a mover despite moving around. Roddick is out like a light, and to a man called Lu!   And with Querry getting a straight sets thumping by Murray, the American challenge is over on the ATP side...   Not 1 American in the QF, it never used to be like that... Roddick Not surprised one bit though

[treeduck]

Venus took a beat down today and was furious. Bad loser... At 30 it might be time to pack it in...

 

 

[ReflectedLight]

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jun 29 2010, 02:29 PM)

Venus took a beat down today and was furious. Bad loser... At 30 it might be time to pack it in...

sounds good to me.

[treeduck]

Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams...

 

semis:

 

Murray v Nadal

 

Berdych v Djokovic

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM)

Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic

It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.

 

The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).

 

And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 3 2010, 11:44 PM)

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM) Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.   The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).   And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open. Fed didn't play like Fed in the Berdych match, yeah Berdych has a forehand like a tracer bullet and a big serve, but so has soderpop and he handled both of these guys last year and in fact they're fully paid up members of the Fed Whipping Boy Club.   This time Fed's movement was sluggish, he seemed to try to compensate by making un-federer like choices and they backfired leaving Roger out of position lots of times, which was weird to see. As well as that when Fed carved out break points and other important points he made sloppy errors which he hardly ever did. Even so Berdych dropped a set and struggled to finish it off.   Djokovic has gone backwards in the last 18 months and was outplayed, it's got to be a miracle that he's going to go back to number 2 next week. Meanwhile Fed will drop to number 3 for the first time since 2003.   Based on all this I think Nadal will win pretty easily against Berdych, but he might give him a decent game like Murray but probably won't wn a set.

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 4 2010, 03:14 PM)

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 3 2010, 11:44 PM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM) Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.   The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).   And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open. Fed didn't play like Fed in the Berdych match, yeah Berdych has a forehand like a tracer bullet and a big serve, but so has soderpop and he handled both of these guys last year and in fact they're fully paid up members of the Fed Whipping Boy Club.   This time Fed's movement was sluggish, he seemed to try to compensate by making un-federer like choices and they backfired leaving Roger out of position lots of times, which was weird to see. As well as that when Fed carved out break points and other important points he made sloppy errors which he hardly ever did. Even so Berdych dropped a set and struggled to finish it off.   Djokovic has gone backwards in the last 18 months and was outplayed, it's got to be a miracle that he's going to go back to number 2 next week. Meanwhile Fed will drop to number 3 for the first time since 2003.   Based on all this I think Nadal will win pretty easily against Berdych, but he might give him a decent game like Murray but probably won't wn a set. That looked more like a routine 2nd round type match. I was expecting it to be much closer and it going 4 sets (with Nadal eventually winning). Oh well. Nadal is clearly #1 in the world.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 5 2010, 06:17 AM)

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 4 2010, 03:14 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 3 2010, 11:44 PM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM) Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.   The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).   And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open. Fed didn't play like Fed in the Berdych match, yeah Berdych has a forehand like a tracer bullet and a big serve, but so has soderpop and he handled both of these guys last year and in fact they're fully paid up members of the Fed Whipping Boy Club.   This time Fed's movement was sluggish, he seemed to try to compensate by making un-federer like choices and they backfired leaving Roger out of position lots of times, which was weird to see. As well as that when Fed carved out break points and other important points he made sloppy errors which he hardly ever did. Even so Berdych dropped a set and struggled to finish it off.   Djokovic has gone backwards in the last 18 months and was outplayed, it's got to be a miracle that he's going to go back to number 2 next week. Meanwhile Fed will drop to number 3 for the first time since 2003.   Based on all this I think Nadal will win pretty easily against Berdych, but he might give him a decent game like Murray but probably won't wn a set. That looked more like a routine 2nd round type match. I was expecting it to be much closer and it going 4 sets (with Nadal eventually winning). Oh well. Nadal is clearly #1 in the world. Who's your pic for the US open?   Nadal will be the official favourite, by virtue of winning another Wimby/RG back to back and Fed's bad form/decline. The dark horse favourite though must be Murray. He flamed out in round 4 last year with a wrist injury v cillic but I think he burned out on playing too much tennis last year (final Indian wells, winning Miami, winning Queens and canada, semi at wimby/monte carlo, quarters of the french etc), he'll be fresher this year. The men on form Berdych and soda have bad hard court records. And Nadal himself never plays his best at Flushing Meadows.

Edited July 5, 2010 by treeduck

[JohnnyBlaze]

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 6 2010, 04:42 AM)

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 5 2010, 06:17 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 4 2010, 03:14 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 3 2010, 11:44 PM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM) Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.   The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).   And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open. Fed didn't play like Fed in the Berdych match, yeah Berdych has a forehand like a tracer bullet and a big serve, but so has soderpop and he handled both of these guys last year and in fact they're fully paid up members of the Fed Whipping Boy Club.   This time Fed's movement was sluggish, he seemed to try to compensate by making un-federer like choices and they backfired leaving Roger out of position lots of times, which was weird to see. As well as that when Fed carved out break points and other important points he made sloppy errors which he hardly ever did. Even so Berdych dropped a set and struggled to finish it off.   Djokovic has gone backwards in the last 18 months and was outplayed, it's got to be a miracle that he's going to go back to number 2 next week. Meanwhile Fed will drop to number 3 for the first time since 2003.   Based on all this I think Nadal will win pretty easily against Berdych, but he might give him a decent game like Murray but probably won't wn a set. That looked more like a routine 2nd round type match. I was expecting it to be much closer and it going 4 sets (with Nadal eventually winning). Oh well. Nadal is clearly #1 in the world. Who's your pic for the US open?   Nadal will be the official favourite, by virtue of winning another Wimby/RG back to back and Fed's bad form/decline. The dark horse favourite though must be Murray. He flamed out in round 4 last year with a wrist injury v cillic but I think he burned out on playing too much tennis last year (final Indian wells, winning Miami, winning Queens and canada, semi at wimby/monte carlo, quarters of the french etc), he'll be fresher this year. The men on form Berdych and soda have bad hard court records. And Nadal himself never plays his best at Flushing Meadows. It's too early to tell right now since the summer hardcourt season is JUST starting. I had predicted Murray to win a slam (either the Aussie or U.S. Open) last year but that didn't work out. So, it's hard to think of him as a dark horse. He'd easily be in 1 of my top 3 picks to win the U.S. Open. Naturally, the other 2 would be Nadal and Fed...and that's regardless of Nadal's previous lack of success there and Fed's current non-Fedlike results. We'll see how these guys hold up over the summer.   Why Djokovic hasn't done more since his 1 slam victory, I don't understand. He should always be in the hunt with Nadal and Fed since he's got the overall talent.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 5 2010, 08:57 PM)

QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 6 2010, 04:42 AM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 5 2010, 06:17 AM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 4 2010, 03:14 PM) QUOTE (JohnnyBlaze @ Jul 3 2010, 11:44 PM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Jul 1 2010, 04:53 AM) Fed out in the QF twice in a row in Grand slams... semis: Murray v Nadal Berdych v Djokovic It looks like a Nadal and Berdych final. I was expecting another Nadal vs. Federer championship but that's how it goes. Berdych seems to be playing above himself despite his top 20 ranking. I didn't see his match with Fed but he frustrated the hell out of Djokovic. Good for him.   The problem with Federer is that he's accomplished so much that anything less than a tournament victory is seen as failure by most people. It's a damn shame. Fed has 1 slam this year and 2 quarterfinal slam appearances. That's better than everyone else on the tour except Nadal (who is ranked #1). The only thing that Fed hasn't done is win the Golden Slam (winning all 4 slams in the same year) and winning the gold medal in singles at the Olympics ((he won the gold in doubles and he's not even really a doubles player)).   And remember duck-san, not too long ago you thought that Fed wouldn't win another slam. I said he's got at least 2 more in him--after that he surpassed Sampras' slam record by winning the French and the Aussie Open. Fed didn't play like Fed in the Berdych match, yeah Berdych has a forehand like a tracer bullet and a big serve, but so has soderpop and he handled both of these guys last year and in fact they're fully paid up members of the Fed Whipping Boy Club.   This time Fed's movement was sluggish, he seemed to try to compensate by making un-federer like choices and they backfired leaving Roger out of position lots of times, which was weird to see. As well as that when Fed carved out break points and other important points he made sloppy errors which he hardly ever did. Even so Berdych dropped a set and struggled to finish it off.   Djokovic has gone backwards in the last 18 months and was outplayed, it's got to be a miracle that he's going to go back to number 2 next week. Meanwhile Fed will drop to number 3 for the first time since 2003.   Based on all this I think Nadal will win pretty easily against Berdych, but he might give him a decent game like Murray but probably won't wn a set. That looked more like a routine 2nd round type match. I was expecting it to be much closer and it going 4 sets (with Nadal eventually winning). Oh well. Nadal is clearly #1 in the world. Who's your pic for the US open?   Nadal will be the official favourite, by virtue of winning another Wimby/RG back to back and Fed's bad form/decline. The dark horse favourite though must be Murray. He flamed out in round 4 last year with a wrist injury v cillic but I think he burned out on playing too much tennis last year (final Indian wells, winning Miami, winning Queens and canada, semi at wimby/monte carlo, quarters of the french etc), he'll be fresher this year. The men on form Berdych and soda have bad hard court records. And Nadal himself never plays his best at Flushing Meadows. It's too early to tell right now since the summer hardcourt season is JUST starting. I had predicted Murray to win a slam (either the Aussie or U.S. Open) last year but that didn't work out. So, it's hard to think of him as a dark horse. He'd easily be in 1 of my top 3 picks to win the U.S. Open. Naturally, the other 2 would be Nadal and Fed...and that's regardless of Nadal's previous lack of success there and Fed's current non-Fedlike results. We'll see how these guys hold up over the summer.   Why Djokovic hasn't done more since his 1 slam victory, I don't understand. He should always be in the hunt with Nadal and Fed since he's got the overall talent. Djokovic had a really great 12 months between March 2007 and March 2008 where he made two slam finals winning one and a few masters titles. He went into a bit of minor slump after that and he's never really recovered. He's not exactly turned to crap but he's not really been a serious threat either; at best slam semi finals at worst a series of embarrassing early exits.   Also he seems to have developed either a mental or a physical weakness or both. He's always calling the trainer out in the middle of a match, or pulling out of a Wimbledon semi-final with a blister, or having a sudden meltdown of some kind with his game, usually his serve.   He did it again in his 4th round match with Hewitt at 2 sets up, he called the trainer out complaining of feeling weak and having a bad stomach, he lost the 3rd set but managed to pull his shit together to wrap up the 4th.   He needs to have a serious look at himself at the end of the year, get a new coach, a new training program, something, otherwise he might ebd up slipping down the rankings. He's got a ton of points to defend from now to the end of the year too so he might drop out of the top ten by the end of 2010.