El Dude said:There's a feeling of inevitability about Slams these days - the final will always be Novak vs. either Roger, Andy, or Stan. So while I think, "Tsonga vs. Nishikori - great match," I then think, "Who gets to lose to Novak?"
Hoping things diversify soon.
Riotbeard said:El Dude said:There's a feeling of inevitability about Slams these days - the final will always be Novak vs. either Roger, Andy, or Stan. So while I think, "Tsonga vs. Nishikori - great match," I then think, "Who gets to lose to Novak?"
Hoping things diversify soon.
These days! While Novak's dominance is admittedly boring for those who are not huge fans, the slams have largely been contested by 5 guys for the last five years. I think the biggest difference now, is anybody winning but Novak is a huge upset...
Riotbeard said:El Dude said:There's a feeling of inevitability about Slams these days - the final will always be Novak vs. either Roger, Andy, or Stan. So while I think, "Tsonga vs. Nishikori - great match," I then think, "Who gets to lose to Novak?"
Hoping things diversify soon.
These days! While Novak's dominance is admittedly boring for those who are not huge fans, the slams have largely been contested by 5 guys for the last five years. I think the biggest difference now, is anybody winning but Novak is a huge upset...
El Dude said:Riotbeard said:El Dude said:There's a feeling of inevitability about Slams these days - the final will always be Novak vs. either Roger, Andy, or Stan. So while I think, "Tsonga vs. Nishikori - great match," I then think, "Who gets to lose to Novak?"
Hoping things diversify soon.
These days! While Novak's dominance is admittedly boring for those who are not huge fans, the slams have largely been contested by 5 guys for the last five years. I think the biggest difference now, is anybody winning but Novak is a huge upset...
Yes, although I would include the last five years or so, but the thing is that it has narrowed to just "one and a bunch of other guys" - not unlike 2004-07, really. 2008-14 at least had a rotating rulership of Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic, with a few contenders now and then.
While I've always liked Roger, I was a pretty casual fan during his "Reign of Terror" and didn't get really serious until maybe four or five years ago. But regardless, I think the sport is more enjoyable when there are several contenders for big titles. Actually, this gives me a thread idea...
herios said:Today I read ion twitter that Gilles Simon mentioned, the whole locker room will be behind him in the match with Nole.
Is this indeed the sentiment there, or was he just joking?
Either way, he will need more than just their support to take down Nole.
nehmeth said:herios said:Today I read ion twitter that Gilles Simon mentioned, the whole locker room will be behind him in the match with Nole.
Is this indeed the sentiment there, or was he just joking?
Either way, he will need more than just their support to take down Nole.
Simon and Nole are friends. Still he is correct. The players remaining would all be happy to see the #1 go home. Nothing malicious about it, just the truth.
golds girl said:nehmeth said:herios said:Today I read ion twitter that Gilles Simon mentioned, the whole locker room will be behind him in the match with Nole.
Is this indeed the sentiment there, or was he just joking?
Either way, he will need more than just their support to take down Nole.
Simon and Nole are friends. Still he is correct. The players remaining would all be happy to see the #1 go home. Nothing malicious about it, just the truth.
This is so odd to me. The only people who should have all fingers and toes crossed are those who have a chance to make the final. IMO:Fed, Stan and Murray. I mean why would Ferrer or Kuznetsov (???) care, their time will be soon up, just be happy you're in the 2nd week.:huh: