US Open Day 4: Thursday, August 29 - Order of Play

[Johnsteinbeck]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

good point there. some of it will probably be the 'cosmopolity' of NY. whole lotta nationalities and backgrounds in that crowd, for sure.

plus, generally european sports audiences have much stronger nationalist tendencies, soccer can be horrible at times for it, while Americans are usually seeing pros match up without such connotations (a Canadian athlete born in South Africa, raised in Europe playing for a Los Angeles Team that's originally from Minneapolis - compare that to Del Piero in Juve)... so that might another reason why US crowds are more able and willing to show some love for international competitors.

 

[Denis]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

I guess you are forgetting all the past American USO champions - the likes of Connors, Sampras, Agassi etc.

Comparatively speaking I find the American crowd less chauvinist. I don't know what they did back then, I only watched RG and Wimbledon in those days (no streams). Did they like Connors? Seems a very unlikeble guy. Can't blame them for liking Agassi, he was pretty cool, always rooted for him.

@JS you're posting in the wrong thread buddy, Haas match is today and he is a break up in the second again.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

Haas is going through quite a rough game vs Lu serving at 2-3 in the second. he looked quite in command, going a set and a break up, but seems to be mightily struggling now, bickering about his equipment and so on. and Lu is getting into a nice rhythm.

quite entertaining match, crowd is packed... they always like Tommy here, don't they?

They pack it in for Haas because he is supremely talented and a real professional. He is better technically at 35 then at 25.

I know his assistant coach..he is a local guy.

he is indeed. gotta love the guy and his game. unfortunately, the struggle continues. he held in that looong game, then managed to break Lu, but got broken right back, courtesy of yet another df.

also, how fast is Lu? quite some wheels on that guy.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

I guess you are forgetting all the past American USO champions - the likes of Connors, Sampras, Agassi etc.

Comparatively speaking I find the American crowd less chauvinist. I don't know what they did back then, I only watched RG and Wimbledon back then. Did they like Connors? Seems a very unlikeble guy. Can't blame them for liking Agassi, he was pretty cool, always rooted for him.

@JS you're posting in the wrong thread buddy, Haas match is today and he is a break up in the second again.

whooops, sorry.

 

[Emma]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

I guess you are forgetting all the past American USO champions - the likes of Connors, Sampras, Agassi etc.

Comparatively speaking I find the American crowd less chauvinist. I don't know what they did back then, I only watched RG and Wimbledon in those days (no streams). Did they like Connors? Seems a very unlikeble guy. Can't blame them for liking Agassi, he was pretty cool, always rooted for him.

@JS you're posting in the wrong thread buddy, Haas match is today and he is a break up in the second again.

I've started watching (all the Majors) since the mid-90s so I've seen my fair share of both Agassi and Sampras loving crowd at the USO. I was a big fan of Sampras so I didn't mind it - just like I don't mind the support Murray gets at Wimbledon. He's worked very hard to get that and they had been extremely critical of him in the past, so right now, he deserves the total attention he gets from the Wimbledon crowd. I never liked Agassi because I, on other hand, never found him cool. He'd always talk down to his opponents. He pretty much humiliated Kucera when he was losing to him at the USO by mocking him with his ball toss. I've warmed up to quite a bit lately though.

I've seen some matches of Connors on youtube not so long ago and he'd always engage the crowd like nothing else by going overboard. The crowd seemed very pro Connors so USO crowd has their fare share of biasness as well when it comes to their own players. Even Roddick was quite popular and got a lot of support by the crowd.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

I guess you are forgetting all the past American USO champions - the likes of Connors, Sampras, Agassi etc.

Comparatively speaking I find the American crowd less chauvinist. I don't know what they did back then, I only watched RG and Wimbledon in those days (no streams). Did they like Connors? Seems a very unlikeble guy. Can't blame them for liking Agassi, he was pretty cool, always rooted for him.

@JS you're posting in the wrong thread buddy, Haas match is today and he is a break up in the second again.

I've started watching (all the Majors) since the mid-90s so I've seen my fair share of both Agassi and Sampras loving crowd at the USO. I was a big fan of Sampras so I didn't mind it - just like I don't mind the support Murray gets at Wimbledon. He's worked very hard to get that and they had been extremely critical of him in the past, so right now, he deserves the total attention he gets from the Wimbledon crowd. I never liked Agassi because I, on other hand, never found him cool. He'd always talk down to his opponents. He pretty much humiliated Kucera when he was losing to him at the USO by mocking him with his ball toss. I've warmed up to quite a bit lately though.

I've seen some matches of Connors on youtube not so long ago and he'd always engage the crowd like nothing else by going overboard. The crowd seemed very pro Connors so USO crowd has their fare share of biasness as well when it comes to their own players. Even Roddick was quite popular and got a lot of support by the crowd.

You know, I am getting sick of Mac and the ESPN crowd droning on about the crowd rooting for Monfils. This phoney outrage is a bore. They should just deal with it. It is not that unusual.

Isner, to his credit, was a real class act. I have always liked him, and he proved him self to be a great person and a player.

Now they need to let it go.

I was at a the Mac/Shlomo Glickstein match in 85 and they were 100% behind the Israeli. Mac was the defending champ.

 

[Emma]

You know, I am getting sick of Mac and the ESPN crowd droning on about the crowd rooting for Monfils. This phoney outrage is a bore. They should just deal with it. It is not that unusual.

Isner, to his credit, was a real class act. I have always liked him, and he proved him self to be a great person and a player.

Now they need to let it go.

I was at a the Mac/Shlomo Glickstein match in 85 and they were 100% behind the Israeli. Mac was the defending champ.

For what it's worth, Federer did get more support than Murray at WTF in London just last year which is a home event for the Brits. So it does happen.

It just so happens Monfils is more popular than Isner or a lot of other players perhaps because he loves to entertain. Isner is more into business so he doesn't like to clown around too much. Besides, it's not his personality anyway.

Patrick M. just said yesterday after the Querrey/Mannarino match that the crowd didn't enjoy the match much, because they (read Mannarino) didn't bring much energy to the match. I, on the other hand, thought Mannarino played well enough to beat Querrey and it was a big win for him, so let's have a round of applause and yet, the crowd remained quiet.

I did want to tell Patrick M that I find their commentary equally boring and that they should bring more energy to it as well - why should only the players be the victims? It's only for Darren Cahill who saves the day for me as far as the commentary goes.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

You know, I am getting sick of Mac and the ESPN crowd droning on about the crowd rooting for Monfils. This phoney outrage is a bore. They should just deal with it. It is not that unusual.

Isner, to his credit, was a real class act. I have always liked him, and he proved him self to be a great person and a player.

Now they need to let it go.

I was at a the Mac/Shlomo Glickstein match in 85 and they were 100% behind the Israeli. Mac was the defending champ.

For what it's worth, Federer did get more support than Murray at WTF in London just last year which is a home event for the Brits. So it does happen.

It just so happens Monfils is more popular than Isner or a lot of other players perhaps because he loves to entertain. Isner is more into business so he doesn't like to clown around too much. Besides, it's not his personality anyway.

Patrick M. just said yesterday after the Querrey/Mannarino match that the crowd didn't enjoy the match much, because they (read Mannarino) didn't bring much energy to the match. I, on the other hand, thought Mannarino played well enough to beat Querrey and it was a big win for him, so let's have a round of applause and yet, the crowd remained quiet.

I did want to tell Patrick M that I find their commentary equally boring and that they should bring more energy to it as well - why should only the players be the victims? It's only for Darren Cahill who saves the day for me as far as the commentary goes.

Nice post. I don't mind PMac when he gets down to business. When tries to "entertain" it is a disaster. He is SO partisan it is ridiculous too.

I like Cahill, Leather Face Gilbert (again, when he concentrates on business) Gimelstob....and the guys not working US Tv right now like Nick Lester and Robbie Koening.

Carillo is horrid disaster. I like Courier.

And as far as crowd support..the player has to get the job done regardless. And that is what Manarina sauce did. Querry can slap all the forehands he wants with those tiny shoulders, he is NOT a complete player. Period.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Honestly, American commentators just don't understand how to call tennis action. That's not to say that they don't understand the sport. They just don't understand how to commentate on the sport.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Honestly, American commentators just don't understand how to call tennis action. That's not to say that they don't understand the sport. They just don't understand how to commentate on the sport.

It is really simple. Here, it is the land of the Celebrity Analyst. It is ALL about them, not the action on the field or court. In Europe, NOTHING is bigger than the sport.

The non stop blather that goes on is unforgivable.

I truly miss Bud Collins. What a class act. Not to mention his BBC counterparts of the day.

 

[Riotbeard]

As far as commentators go, I like Robbie K's crew too.

I think being chauvanistic (in terms of nationalism not gender) in sports is fine. I think it is the only place where it is appropriate. Sports should bring communities together, where we can cheer for people who rep our country. Andy's support at Wimbledon never bothered me. The French rooting for their guys makes total sense. While there is a difference between rooting for your guy and treating his opponent badly, home team favoritism makes sense and in my opinion should be encouraged.

 

[Iona16]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

Do you root for your country in the Olympics or in Davis Cup? I support my home town and country in football. I root for British athletes in the Olympics etc. That is not to say that I don't appreciate athletes from other countries. Nadal, Messi, Bolt and Phelps - love them all.

I would support Murray regardless of what country he was from but I'm proud that he's from Scotland. I see absolutely nothing wrong in getting behind an athlete from my country. If that makes me a 'blind Brit' then guilty as charged.

 

[Iona16]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

good point there. some of it will probably be the 'cosmopolity' of NY. whole lotta nationalities and backgrounds in that crowd, for sure.

plus, generally european sports audiences have much stronger nationalist tendencies, soccer can be horrible at times for it, while Americans are usually seeing pros match up without such connotations (a Canadian athlete born in South Africa, raised in Europe playing for a Los Angeles Team that's originally from Minneapolis - compare that to Del Piero in Juve)... so that might another reason why US crowds are more able and willing to show some love for international competitors.

I'm sorry I don't agree with that at all. Pick any huge football team in Europe and I will give you the name of a foreign player that is adored in that team. The Argentine Messi springs to mind. He's loved in Barcelona. Zidane and Nedved were both adored at Juventus. The English premiership is full of foreign coaches and players. If you perform for your club the fans will love you.

 

[Iona16]

You know, I am getting sick of Mac and the ESPN crowd droning on about the crowd rooting for Monfils. This phoney outrage is a bore. They should just deal with it. It is not that unusual.

Isner, to his credit, was a real class act. I have always liked him, and he proved him self to be a great person and a player.

Now they need to let it go.

I was at a the Mac/Shlomo Glickstein match in 85 and they were 100% behind the Israeli. Mac was the defending champ.

For what it's worth, Federer did get more support than Murray at WTF in London just last year which is a home event for the Brits. So it does happen.

It just so happens Monfils is more popular than Isner or a lot of other players perhaps because he loves to entertain. Isner is more into business so he doesn't like to clown around too much. Besides, it's not his personality anyway.

Patrick M. just said yesterday after the Querrey/Mannarino match that the crowd didn't enjoy the match much, because they (read Mannarino) didn't bring much energy to the match. I, on the other hand, thought Mannarino played well enough to beat Querrey and it was a big win for him, so let's have a round of applause and yet, the crowd remained quiet.

I did want to tell Patrick M that I find their commentary equally boring and that they should bring more energy to it as well - why should only the players be the victims? It's only for Darren Cahill who saves the day for me as far as the commentary goes.

Emma: Did you ever see this interview with Chris Kermode, the Managing Director of the World Tour Finals?

http://www.thetennisspace.com/no-mystery-over-boos-for-murray-in-london/

On Murray being booed by sections of the crowd when he played Federer at last year’s Finals: “I was sitting there when that happened. I had never seen anything like it, with a national player competing at home. It wasn’t an anti-Murray thing, it was definitely pro-Federer. We worked out why, and it’s actually quite simple. It’s actually difficult for Roger’s fans to see him en masse, and to get tickets to a tournament, as it’s not easy at Wimbledon and Basle is a relatively small venue and it’s quite corporate. So the Swiss fans come to The O2, where there are 15 sessions, and they come over for the whole week as they’re assuming that he’s going to be around in the later stages. It almost becomes a festival for them. There’s a very strong Swiss presence.”
--------------------

I've been to the French Open and fingers crossed I'll get to the US Open in the next year or two but I have to say I have never booed any player. I certainly wouldn't think it was acceptable to visit another country and boo their home player. Perhaps that's just me.

 

[Denis]

The thing I like about the US Open is that it is less chauvinist than Wimbledon and RG. Rooting for someone because he or she happened to have arbitrarily been born in the same geographic space makes absolutely no sense. Root for someone you enjoy watching or enjoy listening to in interviews or something related to the actual person, but not because of nationality. The blindness of the Brits is particularly appalling in that respect.

Do you root for your country in the Olympics or in Davis Cup? I support my home town and country in football. I root for British athletes in the Olympics etc. That is not to say that I don't appreciate athletes from other countries. Nadal, Messi, Bolt and Phelps - love them all.

I would support Murray regardless of what country he was from but I'm proud that he's from Scotland. I see absolutely nothing wrong in getting behind an athlete from my country. If that makes me a 'blind Brit' then guilty as charged.

Olympics: I don't actually. Not a huge fan of the Olympics, although I do like it when amateurs (as in non-professionals) who set everything aside for their sport get their moment of fame.

I don't particularly like Davis Cup, although it's nice to see players play for something else than money.

As to chauvinism and the Brits at Wimbledon: it's a matter of degree. I understand that some support for your country in sports is normal these days, but I start to dislike it more if it becomes something negative (booing the opponent) or obsessive (the Brits at Wimbledon). The 'Murray-mania' is a bit too much for me to take, it's just tennis, there are more pressing problems in the world.

To be honest, I strongly dislike Murray for his on-court behavior (and his silly tennis-mom), which makes my reaction towards the Wimbledon crowd stronger.

 

[brokenshoelace]

To be honest, I strongly dislike Murray for his on-court behavior (and his silly tennis-mom)

Coming from a Djokovic fan, I find this a bit ironic...

 

[Denis]

To be honest, I strongly dislike Murray for his on-court behavior (and his silly tennis-mom)

Coming from a Djokovic fan, I find this a bit ironic...

I know someone would jump on it It's very subjective I know, but I find the 30 year older female version of Murray infinitely more irritating than Djokovic's mom. I don't think she is also as present as Judy Murray. And yes, I know about the infamous comments after AO 2008 semifinal.