Thursday, April 02, 2009

Hangover


Getty

Andy Roddick never believed for a second he could win the match last night, even as Roger Federer was choking, too.

He really ought to just not take the court against Raja anymore. Just give him a walkover and be done with it.

It's too painful.

I must remind myself to never watch this matchup again.

Emotional hangover.

95 comments:

HoiHa said...

What makes it worse is that when he won that 2nd set he got me to believe he could - why is it easier for us to believe he can than it is for him to believe it? I felt like I got sucker punched.

Craig Hickman said...

I was perfectly confident in my prediction that he wouldn't even win a set. After watching the Melbourne disaster this year, why wouldn't I be? He simply doesn't play tennis when he plays Raja. He plays Raja and for Andy, that's a sure way to get humiliated.

And then he won the second set and then Raja was cracking and then he had 3 break points and then he didn't and then he had 30-0 at 4-5 and then he had 40-15 at 4-5 and less than a blink later, he let it all slip away.

Sucker punched is a perfect description.

I feel bruised.

A said...

I don't get it. Was Andy forced to repeatedly hit his approach shots to Roger's forehand? Or was his brain just not able to process the fact that Roger hit perfect passing shots every single time he did -- and yet would miss in the rare instances that Andy would target Roger's backhand as he was moving forward? Did his coach not tell him a million times to approach and serve to Roger's backhand? It's maddening. Maddening!

Karen said...

Craig, please let me know what I can do for you. As a Fed fan I feel your pain deeply. Not being a hypocrite at all. This is exactly how I feel about Roger and Rafa. Just too painful to watch sometimes. I have to say that both men struggled last night and it was the person who wanted the win more who eventually prevailed. In this kind of contest there are no winners. It just brings to the forefront of your mind that these guys are on the way out of the game. I did not celebrate this victory because the match itself pointed out to me that Roger will not dominate again and that everything from here on in will be a struggle of titanic proportions. I will just sit back and enjoy him while I can. That trip to Canada in the summer to watch him play has now taken on epic proportions. *sigh

oddman said...

Hmm. I guess my hangover isn't as bad as yours, Craig. Some good for me - at least I didn't see Andy lumbering in over and over to get passed continually, like I've seen in previous matches. He had the right tactics most of the time. Credit Larry S. for helping Andy try to play that way for most of the match. When he didn't, he got burned. And damn, he was faster than I've seen him for a long long time, getting back returns and racing to the ball - lots of times he got there in plenty of time to hit one back at Raja.

That's what I saw, anyway.

Try two aspirins and a raw egg?

Pamela said...

After the second set I stopped watching. I went to bed thinking that Fed would fold, and that Andy had this win.

Sorry Andy fans, it's a harsh pill to swallow, especially reading comments that make it seem as if it were a winnable match.

Graf_sampras said...

unlike you Craighickman ...I am going to remind myself to KEEP WATCHING this matchup because one day Roddick will redeem himself against roger. just watch.

he will. and you are right -- roger WAS nervous..this was not about "i have beaten him many times before" - in that second set and after , he knew andy was very capable of beating him and was literally hoping for andy to make the silly mistakes MORE (imagine federer ended up with twice the winners in order to win from andy's mistakes?)

and andy "delivered".

thnk about that. and andy isn't about to give up. he will use his anger at himself.

just watch.

i am just as critical of andy as any for these things...but i won't stop watching him try - because one day - in a big way -- he's going to do it.

Graf_sampras said...

Craig Hickman said...

I was perfectly confident in my prediction that he wouldn't even win a set. After watching the Melbourne disaster this year, why wouldn't I be? He simply doesn't play tennis when he plays Raja. He plays Raja and for Andy, that's a sure way to get humiliated.

=========

you were wrong in the second set , Craighickman.

he had some great TENNIS there...2 smashes that were superb. and passing shots.

and yes - after that -- he either pulled the trigger too early or came up with silly approach shots...literally "feeding" roger in the middle of the baseline with short, sitting up volleyes that roger ate up. that's not something tsonga would do at those opportunities or nadal would do.

they are correctable. but andy needs to get out of that "zone" of "playing roger federer".

didn't I say that Muster was CoRRECT?

"these players -- when they see roger hit a few great shots....they just go away....they shouldn't be playing roger federer...they should be playing TENNIS".

and you echoed what muster said last year during the FO on roger's run to the finals before "someone" showed everyone how to play TENNIS against and not "play roger".

i have always said:

SINCE 2004 nadal was showing EVERYONE how it's done..with or without a serve or slice or volley...or with them......


"maybe i don't have their weapons, no? , roger is so complete, no? but i can fight too, no?"

"the reason nadal has been so successful where others are not is because he FIGHTS...these others have no REAL fight in them".......sergi bruguera.

"what people don't understand about nadal is -his real greatest weapon is in the mind...we think it is because he runs and runs and is so physical...no it is because of his mind" .......Mats Wilander

Beth said...

I feel exactly like you HoiHa. I was in the 'believing' mode and it got dashed. What a shame. I feel bad for Andy. I think he has worked really hard and just could not get out of his own way last night. I think he was probably more upset with himself than any of us are. I do think he CAN do this (beat Fed) but he definitely needs to rethink some tactics.

Graf_sampras said...

Beth said...

I feel exactly like you HoiHa. I was in the 'believing' mode and it got dashed. What a shame. I feel bad for Andy. I think he has worked really hard and just could not get out of his own way last night. I think he was probably more upset with himself than any of us are. I do think he CAN do this (beat Fed) but he definitely needs to rethink some tactics.

Thu Apr 02, 12:46:00 PM

Beth said it so well...

"andy just could not get out of his own way".


the biggest rival of Andy Roddick is..............Andy Roddick.

Beth said...

Hey, has anyone heard from Helen W? Haven't seen her on here in a long time and I have always really enjoyed her comments and thoughts.....

Craig Hickman said...

Yes, Graf_Sampras, I was wrong. Andy won a set and played good tennis to win it.

And what did he get for it?

tangerine said...

This was a winnable match and Andy knew it. It's so frustrating to watch. His press conference was like, 90 seconds long. Roger has squatter's rights in Andy's head, so the choking is inevitable. The fact that Roger was practically handing the match to Andy but he still couldn't take it makes it worse.

Blah.

And then Rafa will do the exact same thing to Roger (if the other Andy doesn't get to him first).

I'm looking forward to seeing the WS semifinal, a match that won't include choking.

Craig Hickman said...

Andy needed Brooklyn to be in the stands last night.

I'm sure of it.

Graf_sampras said...

Craig Hickman said...

Yes, Graf_Sampras, I was wrong. Andy won a set and played good tennis to win it.

And what did he get for it?

Thu Apr 02, 01:27:00 PM

===========

the knowledge that he has the game to do it -- and the knowledge that he has only HIMSELF to blame...for all his defeats to roger....

that is was NOT ABOUT ROGER -- or roger's "talent"

but about ANDY RODDICK...

and that it is time to remove the soft , velvet gloves and BE ANGRY .


just like rafa when losing even a SINGLE POINT.

GO ANDY!!!

Graf_sampras said...

andy Roddick needs to talk to Richard Williams and Oracene

he needs a little williams in him.........


forget all these "technical" stuff...

andy can do them ....

what he needs is a DEFIANT attitude like serena and venus show.

Helen W said...

Beth says:

Hey, has anyone heard from Helen W?

I'm chuffed! Thank you so much! And I do have something to say ...

Did anyone else notice that Roger had his monogram painted on the court near his chair last night? Isn't it enough that he has it plastered all over his clothes?

Has anyone seen this before? To me it would be over the top for a World No 1, let alone a World No 2 (and sinking) player. How could he have cajoled the tournament into doing this? Did he threaten one of his trademark hissy fits? Or perhaps he was crying inconsolably in their office until they finally relented?

No wonder Cahill wanted to get the hell out of Dodge -- he probably would have had to sport Roger's monogram on his entire wardrobe.

Arrogance, thy name is Roger Federer.

Karen said...

See that is why some Fed fans do not even bother to come and post around here because they have to read vitriol like what HelenW just spewed. There was no need for this. Absolutely no need. I consider Craig to be a friend of mine as we got to know each other really well during the USO 2007 and I think everyone who posts here are reasonable people. For Helen to come here and post things like this when no one has even come to Craig's blog, knowing how Craig feels about Andy and try and talk down about Andy says a lot about the folks who come here to let their views be heard. I am extremely disappointed in you Helen. I expected much better.

dapxin said...

To have lost the game last night the way mr Andy did is so much of a pain, for everyone of his fans, including massive neutrals like me.

He had him. But he just didn't have himself enough.

pain pain and more pain. But I will continueu to watch him, and I think he will do it, except that it may not really matter, as Rog is cleary past the buzz now.

He aint no invincible no more. no way!

Karen said...

@loverboy, while you have made points in defending your case, you have basically gone down the same road as HelenW. Sometimes it is just best to let sleeping dogs lie. Craig is a huge fan of Andy Roddick. He makes no bones about the fact that he loves Andy. However, in the spirit of discourse and as lovers of the sport Craig and I have disagreed on many occassions but respectfully so, which is one of the reasons why I love to come here and share my thoughts. I am not into the tearing down of players, no matter how much I do not like them (except for maybe Dementieva, who I just cannot stand), but I try my best to leave the vitriot elsewhere and try and focus on the positives in relation to this sport that I love even moreso than I adore the players. Everyone here knows that I am a Roger KAD, but as someone who has to suffer in silence when Roger loses, I can understand what Craig must be going through right now as well as other Andy fans, and frankly speaking now is not the time to kick someone when they are down. When Andy who is usually so positive in his press conferences could only give a 90 second press conference you can only know how he must feel. This is how Roger felt when he lost at the AO this year. I could never as a fan of tennis come around and villify someone just because he beat my guy. Hell no. I love tennis too much.

Craig Hickman said...

This blog does not tolerate personal attacks on the content of character of those who participate in this community.

I have removed loverboy's comment for no other reason than that it attacked another poster personally.

We can disagree without being disagreeable.

Christopher Crocker said...

Last nights match, as well as the match that is going on right now, demonstrates exactly how huge the mental factor, that other tier match that is floating somewhere above the court, is a part of tennis. Nadal holds this over everyone right now in the tennis world. And this is why his beatdowns on Federer are so lopsided. There is no doubt now that his on court game is better than anyone in the world(Murray is coming very close though now), but his mental strength is surely his greatest asset. The way he turned it around so quickly on Del Potro has much more to do with the psychological aspect than the physical. To avoid goming completely off topic, this likely had a lot to do with Roddick's loss last night. He probably did outplay Federer in the physical game, but the mental advantage than Federer has held over him for so long played a bigger factor.

All of these top 5-10 players are capable of winning against each other on any given day(based purely on physical play) but the mental match sometimes supercedes whatever your body might tell you to do on the court.

edma1022 said...

Way to go, Karen!

oddman said...

Why is asking a question 'why is Roger Federer's monogram painted on the court' considered vitriol? Karen?
I'm curious as hell too. Why is that there? Has there ever been another player's monogram painted on the court? Does anybody know? I've never heard of this before...

It smacks of favoritism and arrogance, imho. Any other explanations?

Beth said...

Not to change the subject....but since we don't have a new post for it.....is anyone watching the Nadal - DelPo match? Holy shit!! It's a total nailbiter right now!! Third set tie break!

Christopher Crocker said...

Amazing performance by Del Potro - what a great match.

Helen W said...

A nail-biter no more, Beth -- DelPo just won in the tie break.

I watched it on and off and found it very difficult to watch. Hard to believe that Rafa was up a double break in the 3rd and still lost it. His game just sort of disappeared and he was defensive and hit a ton of short balls. But his play was streaky throughout the match -- in fact, I've found it streaky throughout this tournament. It's like he has been hanging in there on sheer force of will, but to me he has looked very uncomfortable through the whole tourney.

Anyway, full marks to Delpo for gutting it out -- a nice win for him. I think it will be a real confidence-booster for him.

Karen said...

@oddman - you are a very sensible fellow - it was not the monogram part that irked, it was the rest of the post and "tone" of the post that hurt. If a Fed fan had come here and said nasty, negative cutting things about Rafa or Andy or anyone else's fave, then you too would be offended. People need to realise that words wound and even though we do not know these players, we are acquainted with their fans, most of whom are good decent people. It hurts when people say negative nasty things about someone that you care about. I know I hate it when I go on message boards and see the nasty things that are said about players that I do not even root for. How then could I put myself in that position and say vicious things about anyone else. Maybe the reason why the RF monogram was there is as a result of IMG being a sponsor and IMG representing Roger. It could be any number of reasons we will never know. Wrong forum to ask that question in my view.

Beth said...

Yes, Helen W, it was very hard to watch. I agree that Rafa has not been 100% this tournament. I am partly glad for him that he is out early. Maybe he'll allow himself some REST. He said he was a little tired coming into Indian Wells after The AO and he hasn't had a break since. I think he pushes himself so hard and really needs to rest more, when feasible. Kudos to DelPotro for a gutsy performance. He has to be pumped after that!

edma1022 said...

Way to go, Karen!
(part II)

Helen W said...

Beth I also think that Rafa is tired -- at least he appeared to not be chasing down balls he normally would try to get, and also he seemed a step slower. So I agree with you -- a bit of r & r at home with his family & friends will do him a world of good.

Tennisfan said...

Well said Karen. I don’t know Craig personally. When I discovered this blog about 2 years ago, there were more well balanced commenters. I maintain being a reader today because I still enjoy Craig’s writing. But every Roger’s move, word, things that are not even about Roger were put under microscopic view and turned into Roger’s arrogance or one of his 985481277688 faults over and over is getting redundant and disappointing.

I didn’t notice the Roger’s logo on court but I sure saw RAFA engraved shoes, his bull cap. Rafa logo could very well be coming in near future, but I see nothing wrong with it. It is just commercialism.

If a player loses before they step on court before playing Roger, they will do the same when they play Rafa. That is why there are champions and there are good players. When Tipsy played a good match against Roger, he was being called standing up against Roger. OTOH, Stan was painted as Roger's assassin on this blog for playing a good match against Rafa as if Stan has no backbone or no brain. Stan played 2 good tournaments in case some of you didn't see his matches. It wasn’t about how well he played, but how he uncharacteristically gutted out for his standard in at least the 3 matches that I saw.

May be Del Potro just played a terrific match against Rafa for his compatriot Nalby? Or did he play in the name of Roger also?

edma1022 said...

Way to go, Tennisfan!

oddman said...

I was going to say something in reply to tennisfan, but why bother.

Craig Hickman said...

Who painted Stan as Roger's assassin other than Stan himself?

I admired Stan's fight against Rafa the other night and said as much in my post.

So when you say "this blog" what do you mean, exactly? People have opinions. I don't delete comments unless they include personal attacks. As far as I'm aware, no blog contributor in any front-page post has ever even suggested that Stan is Raja's assassin.

But a reader did point us to Stan's own words which I, for one, never digested until the other day, and found quite intriguing, to say the least.

Here's what I have to say about the latest set of comments on this post and a few others:

People. Take criticisms of your faves personally if you have to. But you really don't have to, do you?

I consider myself one of the harshest critics of my faves and spare them no punches when I feel they deserve it.

I think our dialogue would be heightened even more than it already is if more folks did the same.

oddman said...

Thanks Craig. Go back and read what I said about Stan, Tennisfan...


(rolls eyes, and swears sliently.....)

oddman said...

IMHO, a cap with a stylized bull symbol on it is different than a monogram, initials clearly RF.

Did you see a stylized bull symbol on the court today? I didn't see the match.

edma1022 said...

Nice touch, Craig.

"...As far as I'm aware, no blog contributor in any front-page post has ever even suggested that Stan is Raja's assassin."

er, mayhap it's sitting in the back? (the "comments" portion)

"I consider myself one of the harshest critics of my faves and spare them no punches when I feel they deserve it."

er, that's right, mate. but alongside this is - you're also the harshest critic of their sworn enemy (one particularly nasty one), AND the you spare no punches in defending the legions of posters who are on the opposite fence of this particular nasty enemy of your fave.

Just like what you're doing now. You're crossing one side of the fence to the detriment of the opposite side. Instead of being the calming voice of reason as the owner and writer of the site.

For what it's worth - there are 2 consolation prizes in this topic:
1) Roddick played lights out and lost the match (RF did not win it - and you know which side of the fence I'm on).
2) Roddick still owns a better W/L record among the top 6-8 going into Miami. I wish we could say the same for RF - his last shield was a far far distant memory.

Bye. I'll be back in, oh, 4 months to check things out again.

-e

Tennisfan said...

I remembered what Stan said when he beat Nalbandian last year. It is understandable how his words could be interpreted. But I was only pointing out to the fact that Stan played 2 good tournaments, not one match against Rafa.

Of course, people are entitled to their own opinions, and I am merely stating mine. I don't take criticism towards Roger personally, at least I try to. He is who he is. I don't know him to say what is and what is not. Trust me, I never not think Roger is not arrogant. But when he is repeatedly attached on speculations (such as why he wears a cardigan, his monogram, how players fold against him all the time but never towards Rafa??? etc, etc, etc,,), it becomes just sad. AND I am not talking about Media.

Ok. If the bull cap wasn’t custom made for Rafa, I apologized. For some reasons, I thought it was. I don’t normally pay attention to these stuff, unless I find them nice looking. I do think RF is a stylish logo.

Here is my wish. I would like see a tennis blog than Roger does what crap again blog.

Tennisfan said...

And Craig,

Please don't say "go somewhere else". I am a bit addicted to your blog still.

oddman said...

Tennisfan, the Bull logo IS for Rafa, I'm sure... not just any old Bull logo. I'm merely pointing out that imho, it's not quite the same thing as your own monogram. No RN seen, yet anyway.

OK, issue done for me.

Graf_sampras said...

I am extremely disappointed in you Helen. I expected much better.

Thu Apr 02, 03:46:00 PM

========

I don't understand this at all.

IF someone like HelenW shows to have no love for Roger Federer - which is just the opposite of the head over heels love of fedfans for roger -


what is wrong about HelenW putting out something about ROGER being arrogant and other things concerning HIM --

while its OPPOSITE - the love of roger fans for roger which not everyone agrees with -- is supposedly "acceptable" and NOT 'vitriolic?'.

is "no love for roger" VITRIOLIC just because fedfans say so?


i admire some things about roger federer but I have NO patience for the kind of "roger is the most beautiful ever" tennis player stuff which I consider utter NONSENSE.


is THIS vitriol? \

inquiring minds wanna know....


lol.

Craig Hickman said...

Just like what you're doing now. You're crossing one side of the fence to the detriment of the opposite side. Instead of being the calming voice of reason as the owner and writer of the site.

::

I'm flattered that you expect me to be a calming voice.

Sometimes, I'm just a human being with a chip on my shoulder.

Surely, you can relate.

You're cheering comments that you agree with. That's perfectly fine.

But I'm crossing one side to the detriment of the other, in your opinion, because the only vitriol I've seen in this thread I've removed.

In other words, I simply disagree with Karen, with you, and with Tennisfan.

When Andy plays and loses to Raja, which is almost always, I see the match mostly from Andy's side of the net. For that, I make no apologies. Raja has plenty of fans. He doesn't need me to defend him.

::

Tennisfan, when it comes to Raja, I will remain irreverent.

But I will also remain fair. For me, it's fair that a player such as Roger Federer who, to his credit, has been front and center of tennis for so long, would attract so much attention, negative or positive, from all spectra of opinion.

Thanks for being addicted.

Graf_sampras said...

well--if no blog contributor has used the word's "roger's assassin" for STAN ---

here i am -- i will use it.

this is talking about tennis.


STANISLAS WAWRINKA is Roger's Federer's assassin.

not only that -- stanislas is so in love with the hero of switzerland and probably thinks roger is god's gift to tennis and invented the shots of tennis --- that he can't BEAR to watch his wonderful friend NOT SMILE in that beatific way only roger the great can --- whenever he marches through titles beating the likes of roddick, berdych , ljubicic, and sundry other has-beens or injureds and oldies all these years -- and roger loses that smile of his divine magnificence


coz of some INTERLOPER from spain who INTRUDED onto roger's wonderful world of "greatest everness" by actually standing up to HIM ...just like sometimes the often injured, disinterested, flaky and beer-loving nalbandian would..............

\
so it is only NATURAL -- we understand -- that STANLEY dearie would do all he can - go to the gym and make his upper body so strong and his legs so strong so he can outlast these few players that have NO RESPECT at all for the "greatness" and beauty of roger......

how dare THEY? how dare THEY?!!!!


not only is stanislas serving as roger's assassin if he can...stanislas is definitely one of roger's SWISS GUARDS -- and Roger is Stanislas' POPE!!


and the courts are their VATICAN!!!


in the HOLY ROGER empire of greatness straight from the wonderful heavens above....

amen!

Graf_sampras said...

Stanislas wawrinka is Roger's Federer's PERSONAL ALTAR BOY........



and sometimes the high priests like to do something with their altar boys.......

has anyone seen the movie with Meryl Streep?


DOUBT?


Roger and his Altar Boys.......

Graf_sampras said...

Craig Hickman said...

Just like what you're doing now. You're crossing one side of the fence to the detriment of the opposite side. Instead of being the calming voice of reason as the owner and writer of the site.

::

I'm flattered that you expect me to be a calming voice.

Sometimes, I'm just a human being with a chip on my shoulder.


============

oh -- this is just pure nonsense to say that Craighickman is "crossing over" to whatever SIDE it is that fedfans do not like to be allowed to show views that are NOT exactly glowing about roger federer.

it is like a thinly veiled "appeal"to craighickman to be the "calming voice" but IN REALITY is wanting him to STOP and DESIGNATE "anti-roger" diatribes -- from the view of fedfans to be

EXORCISED like so many demons from the "body of glowing remarks" about roger federer....

Graf_sampras said...

Craighickman is SEVERE on his favorite player -- roddick -=-


and fedfans have NO problem with it........


but when craighickman isn't SEVERE on posters and posts that are SEVERE on roger --

craighickman has "crossed" over to the "dark side"......



that is just too funny....

Graf_sampras said...

i'm not over the match of roddick yet :

i want to know what people really think roddick needs to do at this stage:

we saw him revert a number of critical times - with the chances on HIS raquet to close a point well - to thoughtless shot selection, particularly placement (such as center of the baseline just in the "route" of roger!!) -

and yet andy showed some spectacular, even beautiful , difficult shots that won a point.

what does he need to do to "cross" that gap? not only against roger but against others?

the shots ARE there..

rabbit said...

No matter how Federer fans are portrayed as being head over heels in love and delusional to reality and disrespectful of other players, it is pretty plain to notice that on this blog, Roger is the only one who is so brutally and crudely mocked over and over again. None of the regular Federer fans on this blog consistently snipe at Rafa, for example, caricature him with his many obsessive behaviors or call him names. It is only Roger who is subject to this. And yet, the defense is always that FedKADs are unbearable. Graf_sampras, this is not about calling Roger the best or most beautiful player; it is simply about maintaining a sense of fairness.

I dont know; I would just feel uncomfortable spewing hateful words about a player based on an incident there is no info about. It is now so predictable. Whenever Roger wins an important match, he is an arrogant bastard, even based on some make-up incident. Whenever Roger loses, he has been eclipsed and he is a nobody. Rafa loses to many; he withdraws from DC ties; he cites injury after losing finals; he whines about the schedule that everyone follows. On this site, nobody makes these an issue, because even non-fans of him here respect and try to see his reasons. What Karen and edma and Tennisfan are are saying that there is a pretty obvious double standard here. I totally agree.

Graf_sampras said...

Craighickman also pointed out "Rafa was CRACKING" and roddick "let things slip".

that is VERY true.

in fact - SELDOM had i seen roger actually "break" his own facade of icy calm - when late in the match somewhere he let out a very angry shout on a lost point.

a murray or rafa might have STOMPED on that chance.

Graf_sampras said...

Graf_sampras, this is not about calling Roger the best or most beautiful player; it is simply about maintaining a sense of fairness.

=======

rabbit -- "sense of fairness" is not about tit for tat :


"because roger fans in THIS blog don't rag on against rafa or roddick or someone else...it is ONLY FAIR that others NOT rag on so much against roger"........


that is ARTIFICIALITY "sense of fairness".

you can no more decide how those that DO post here or elsewhere feel or think -- as we or others can not decide how fedfans feel or think here or elsewhere.

it is just reality that people express what they like to express.

what do you want:

that people who simply DON"T like roger as much as you do DENY themselves what they think is the case about roger -- just because it is "unfair" to roger according to YOU?

if there happen to be things that others say about roger that a fedfan thinks is "over the top criticism" -- it is because in the minds and views of those people, such as myself -- they EXIST.


roger HAS made them so HIMSELF!

it is HE that created the origins of such things:


calling other players one-dimensional when he thought everything was his oyster in this world

it is HE that has come up withe xcuses to render the wins of others over him subject to "speculation" to be picked up BY fans and the media- THUS CLOUDING that player's OWN hard-earned victories over him..

it is HE that splashed himself all over the front pages with his Big White Shiny Bag and cardigan and wanna-be-perrywhite trousers in wimbledon in a display of self-adoration

it is HE that said such things as :
"i don't know how i win so many titles.........maybe it's just my TALENT"....as IF there were no such things as VERY OLD PLAYERS, injured players, soft draws, choking players like baghdatis, berdych, etc. etc. etc.

and sycophantic ones like berdych, wawrinka, ljubicic, etc....

do you think it is FAIR to the OTHER players roger beat in his march to glory -- for people to just "kindly" and "calmly" pretend that they were NEVER


OLD, INJURED, BURNEDOUT, DISINTERESTED, mental midgets , or in "awe" against THEIR own self-interests -- in order to just say

"IT WAS ALL BECAUSE OF ROGER"S all-ecompassing greatness"?

that is silly!

edma1022 said...

Thanks, Rabbit. Yet another kindred spirit to keep the flame alive. Good thing I read your post. G_S, will soon hijack this thread I'm afraid.

G_S, good to see you again. Been a long time.

Two words for you: Cedric Pioline.

:-)

(bye, gotta sleep)

Craig Hickman said...

Damn. Everybody is Shakespeare tonight.

The melodrama in this thread is thick as thickets.

Savannah said...

Wait you all are saying that Roger had his initials engraved on the court in front of his seat? Really?

That's not true right? Tell me that's not true.

rabbit said...

Yes, RF was engraved in front of his seat. To say that Federer had it engraved is unjustified speculation.

Craig Hickman said...

I let myself get distracted. This post is ultimately about Andy Roddick.

I wonder how he felt seeing that monogram -- no matter who wanted it there or why -- on the court before Federer's seat. Here in Miami where Andy had his first big career match win, over Pete Sampras of all people, back when he was just a teen and the promise of American men's tennis. Where he won his first big title after winning his first Slam. Where he beat his biggest nemesis for the first time in almost 5 years in the same round just one year ago.

I wonder.

I didn't see the monogram myself. Was it there for his earlier rounds as well?

Savannah said...

I've been looking for pics. Haven't seen one. Maybe tomorrow?

Helen W said...

Exactly, Craig!

I don't know whether it was there for his other matches, but I do know that there was no monogram for Andy Roddick. And I sure didn't see any for either Rafa or DelPo today.

All those folks who think this is all just hunky dory -- why don't you tell us which players should get this special attention and why?

Tennisfan said...

Exactly, Craig.

I would wonder what Andy felt about it too if I had to wonder. Did he feel officials were biased against him? Did he feel left out or hurt?

And Oddman,
If we began to see RN Monogram, NIKE creative people should find different professions. To me, Bull or RAFA or RF, they are all marketing products created for one person. Egg yolk and egg white. Honestly, I like them all.

Why Andy didn’t have a monogram? This question should go to Lacoste and Andy.
Why RF monogram on the court? I don’t know. Does anyone know? May be a ball boy, or a crazed Fedtard official, or a NIKE man put it there. Unless, we knew for sure it was Roger, himself who demanded the logo to be there, why blamed on Roger?

When it comes to Roger, I just have to keep reminding myself to remain irrelevant and be quiet on this site too. So long, at least for now.

oddman said...

The stylized Bull logo appears on the front of Rafa's cap, the back has 'Fundation', I would guess in reference to Rafa's foundation for disadvantaged kids. Andy Roddick also has a foundation, similar, and has a logo with two tennis raquets, if I'm not mistaken.

Just an FYI.

oddman said...

rabbit, where have I ever said on this blog that Federer, after a loss, has been eclipsed and is a nobody?

Where? Please point it out. Thanks.

HoiHa said...

OK everybody - time for a group hug! There - now we can all feel better.

HoiHa said...

Unless of course that dastardly Andy Murray takes the crown :)

Tennisfan said...

Oddman,

Thanks for the info. Obviously I don't know much about Rafa's clothing line. My main point is NIKE wouldn't pay big money to these 2 top sportsmen if they don't think they can market them and they don’t have any says regarding their products. RF items were a success in my opinion.

Just watch, we shall be seeing more and more of Rafa’s merchandise soon enough if Rafa remains top seed and I see no reason why he wouldn’t.

Very nice Rafa cap by the way. I might try to get one if it goes for sales.

http://www.gototennisblog.com/wp-content/gallery/rafaelnadal_iw_2009/

Hoiha,

I agree. :)

Craig Hickman said...

TennisFan said...

I would wonder what Andy felt about it too if I had to wonder. Did he feel officials were biased against him? Did he feel left out or hurt?

::

Only he knows. But it certainly couldn't help to see that monogram on the ground before Raja's throne as he walked by it on the changeovers, especially that last changeover at 4-5, reminding him that he's playing a king. He knows this, already, of course. Raja is already in his head. I don't know if it had anything to do with the curt handshake, the quick disappearance, and the 90 second press conference, but Andy was livid after the match. Livid, I tell you. Because he let that match slip away, to be sure. He didn't lose because of the monogram, but did he really need to see it there on the court in all its glory to remind him of Raja's status?

Everybody knows what I feel about Raja, but I just want to know why a tournament would find it necessary to do this for any player.

NIKE is Serena's sponsor, as well. Did she have a monogram on the court in front of her seat, she of the record-tying five titles and two-time defending champion? Did she? Did she?

The more I think about it the more perturbed I become.

Such things boggle the mind. Raja is Raja. I'm not blaming him. But if, per chance, NIKE insisted on putting the monogram there, well, then, when does a player say NO and insist that such a thing is Just. Too. Much?

Shaking my head.

Helen W said...

The issue is not whether a player has a logo/monogram or not, but whether one player's logo should be painted on the court in front of his chair, while the same is not done for other players.

rabbit and Tennisfan assert that we don't know whether Roger requested this or not. I think it most improbable that this was done without his knowledge (even if he did not request it), but until we get information from the tournament, no-one can be 100% certain.

But regardless, do you think it would have been OK for Roger to request this special treatment? Do you think it is OK that he got it?

Beth said...

I am not very knowledgeable about marketing/advertising, etc. but I do have to comment on this logo thing. Yes, I DID see the RF on the court and thought - this CANNOT be so. You have to be kidding me. Where does it end?! I make no bones about the fact that I'm a huge Rafa fan and that I also very much appreciate the immense talent of Roger. But I am with you Craig 200% on this: why can't a player just say NO.

I would think, as a professional athlete, it is really all about the tennis. Your game, you training, your competition. Who gives a shit if you have an RF logo on your shirt, your bag, your shoes? Same goes for Rafa. Why does he need the bull logo on his Nike's or anywhere else? Do they put their names on their bags for I.D. purposes? I doubt it. And saw Rafa had the equivalent number of his master's shields tatooed on his racket bag. Why?

I just don't get that. As an athlete, I would think you wouldn't give a damn about the marketing stuff and would keep it plain and simple. The logo stuff, to me, is just ridiculous fluff and prissy branding.

And as an athlete, I think I'd be a little bit embarrassed to be walking around with the hey-everyone-look-at-me shirt/shoes/cap, etc with MY name/logo plastered all over it.

I say this for both Rafa and Roger (or anyone else who starts being 'branded'). For me, it takes away from the focus of why they're there. To play tennis. Pure and simple. To compete. To hone their talents and skills. I have NO idea if they are forced, by contract, to concede to these things (clothing with their logo, names painted on the court, etc.) but, why can't they just say NO? Why not??

Helen W said...

Beth I agree with the sentiments you express. I do differentiate between a monogram and a logo (the former is a lot more in your face imho) -- and also whether the placement is really in your face (hat, shirt) or shoes.

But the court should be NEUTRAL TERRITORY with respect to individual players imho. To me it is just wrong to favour one player or another by painting some players' monograms/logos on the surface but not others.

Tennisfan said...

I can’t disagree with Craig. It was Roddick who gave the match to Roger. I certainly have great empathy towards Roddick during that match if he had to see those RFs on the court.

Tournament shouldn’t allow this non-sense and definitely Roger should have said no. I am not here to say Roger is no wrong. All I am saying is to say Roger was the ultimate decision maker on this incident is unfair when we don’t know the real reason why it was there.

NIKE is a sponsor to many tennis pros. I think Roger was the only ATP player with his own clothing-line, now Rafa gets one too. Obviously something is working for NIKE. As for why other players don’t get the same treatment, I would say it is all about sales and profits.

Beth asked excellent questions, BTW.. My last post on this topic, folks

loverguy said...

Craig - fair enough, your blog you make the rules. I am sure there is a good reason why there are more Andy fans here as compared to neutral blogs/forums. You could enlighten me on that. Meanwhile I hope this fits into your blog "rules". I can throw in a "Hail Roddick" in there somewhere if you think this post does not meet your blog requirements!

Those who keep comparing the Andy-Roger dynamics to Roger-Rafa cannot be farther from the truth. In Roger and Rafa, you have two of the greatest players ever to have picked a tennis racquet. Nadal is, by miles, the greatest player ever on clay. (consecutive win streak at 81) Roger is the same on grass (65) and hard-courts (59). The reason Roger-rafa is so skewed is that Nadal is way ahead of Roger on clay (9-1) record. On grass and hard-court, they are about even 4-5.

Imagine if Roger and andy played another 20 matches on clay? You can safely bet, the record would be 36-3 or some such in Roger’s favor. There is a huge chunk of daylight between the leagues in which Roger and Rafa prance around and the one where Roddick resides. There is a good chance Roger and Rafa will end up with 15+ GS while Andy will be stranded with the 1 GS title. To compare Andy to Roger or Rafa is a disgrace to 2 professional athletes who transcend their own sport.

It is like me serving an ace in a club match and comparing that to Andy’s serve. I am sure most andy roddick fans would cringe at that.

Craig Hickman said...

Helen W said...

But the court should be NEUTRAL TERRITORY with respect to individual players imho. To me it is just wrong to favour one player or another by painting some players' monograms/logos on the surface but not others.

::

Exactly, Helen. I could give a damn about the logos and monograms and Slam emblems and Masters Shields on shoes, bags, earrings, shirts, caps, name placards, etc..., but on the TENNIS COURT??

They are competing in Crandon Park, not RF Park. I'd say the same if Andy or Serena had their monograms on the court in front of their chairs. It's ostentatious. It's unnecessary. It's ridiculous.

I almost wish I didn't even know about it now.

Helen W said...

Tennisfan imho bringing Nike into this is a red herring. If Nike persuades the players they sponsor to deck themselves out in clothing advertising themselves, I suppose that is their right, although I find it mammothly unappealing, and my disdain is directly proportional to how in-your-face the clothing is.

But the court is a completely different matter. No player should have preferential treatment there, as far as markings, etc. I really don't see how anyone can argue differently.

And as far as I know we have not heard a peep from Roger on this subject, although (again as far as I know) he is the only player to have been given such preferential treatment. (I know I will be sternly corrected if I am wrong :))

Craig Hickman said...

loverguy said...

To compare Andy to Roger or Rafa is a disgrace to 2 professional athletes who transcend their own sport.

::

Really? Is Andy, like Rafa and Raja, a professional athlete? Yes, he is.

Does he, like Rafa and Raja, transcend his sport? Yes, he does.

Those are both facts. Hell, whatever his accomplishments, Roddick transcended the sport the minute he started dating actress and singer Mandy Moore and ended up being introduced to the television, music, and film industries. Their relationship became a punch line on the popular comedy series "Will & Grace". Like him or not, that's transcending the sport.

I can count the Andy fans who comment regularly on this blog on one hand, so I'm not sure where you get this notion that if people don't praise him, they can't comment here.

I don't care if you think Andy is the worse player to ever make the Top 10. Comment away. Tear him apart. Call him names.

It really doesn't bother me.

But there's no need to lie in order to make your point.

Andy is a professional athlete who transcends his sport.

And I'd bet the farm that neither Raja or Rafa would feel "disgraced" to be compared to another champion, a great sportsman, and a good person, flaws and all.

loverguy said...

I think if anyone is at fault, it is the atp/miami tournament. I am sure Wimbledon would not allow such a thing. The ATP/ other petty tournaments are not bigger than a huge star like Roger. If anyone thinks Roger/Rafa are not as popular as rockstars, you should see the attention they get around the world. There are people who would worship the ground these guys tread. I am sure Andy has such fanatics too *COUGH* *COUGH* dont want to use names as I watch Troy movie ;)

To blame Roger without having any inside scoop is illogical. If the tournament is bigger than Roger, they should have the guts to say no to Roger. I am sure Roger or his agent did not have tournament directors at gunpoint when they made this request.

I personally think the more bigger Rafa/Roger get the better it is for tennis. It is not often that sport is blessed with such class acts who grab world-wide attention. And everyone of us knows tennis, especially, in the US could use some attention. I am appalled at the sport getting regularly getting sidelined by bowling/ drag racing and other such boring sports limiting tennis coverage to some outdated channels like fox sports. Hell! 3rd world countries have more accessible coverage than a super-power like the US of A. Time for uncle SAM to smarten up!

Helen W said...

loverguy I agree with you that the tournament itself is the chief culprit in all this. A public statement on this issue is overdue.

I would also call out the press -- ever anxious to stir up controversy -- where are they?

But I also think Roger owes us some kind of statement. After all, he was the recipient of blatant favouritism. And it is a real stretch for me to believe that he had no prior knowledge.

IMHO we fans deserve an explanation -- from ALL the involved parties.

Graf_sampras said...

edma1022 said...

Thanks, Rabbit. Yet another kindred spirit to keep the flame alive. Good thing I read your post. G_S, will soon hijack this thread I'm afraid.

G_S, good to see you again. Been a long time.

Two words for you: Cedric Pioline.

:-)

(bye, gotta sleep)

==


like edma -- some fedfans have a habit - in every message board -- of talking about other posters that supposedly "hijack" or "spam" a thread --


while themselves none-too-subtly --

exhorting folks to talk NICELY about roger federer....or else -- it's "unfair" posting...

it's happening RIGHT HERE..even towards craighickman....


see -- the "GRAND IDEA" about threads supposedly is:

if Fedfans can see NICE or TOLERABLE things about roger....

it's a "discussion"....


should someone say things that are INCONVENIENT about rogie -- like i did in espn --

it's "hijacking".....

as they say :

someone's terrorist is someone else's patriot.


lol.

Graf_sampras said...

and craighickman reminds that this is after all about andy roddick in the thread...i had to make my views concerning the criticism of craighickman that he was "crossing over" -- according to fedfans - to , presumably what they see as "the dark side" -- by NOT "defending" roger or being "fair".......

er....who HIJACKED the thread from andy TENNIS - to "unfairness to roger?"

it wasn't ME....lol.

and now -- from edma - there's a NEW subject that just hijacked the thread ....

Graf_sampras' "hijacking".......coz i said something not so nice about Rogie...even if it's true and the world knows it.....cardigans, fred perry trousers, logo on the court, "rafa is one-dimensional i have the arsenal to dismantle him"....and what not.........


back to RODDICK -- i asked a question _ what should he do NEXT? i think he has the shots but comes up with silly selections at the wrong time...how to "fix" that?

Graf_sampras said...

it's really irrelevant whether roger knew or agreed or did not either.

the point is -- it is, imo, WRONG for tournaments and sponsors to effectively beat people with such things -- as if they're RUBBING in the idea that "roger federer"

or if it's nadal -

are SOooooooooooooooooooooooo great


that "the other guy" is only some kind of foil .

that is an INSULT to the opponent...and in this case - to Andy Roddick.


of course it is about MONEY and advertising.

in this case - the advertising and promotion -- trying to keep it alive -

that "roger federer" is Mister Immaculate...and everyone else on the tennis courts are just GRUNGIES ....

this is what I have always called PURE, UTTER NONSENSE - which began from 2000 when roger was "supposedLY" the greatest ever to come......

and everyone was supposedly WAITING for the


ARRIVAL that will bless the earth with his Divine Countenance......


and most folks ATE IT UP , including the soon-to-be-proven SYCOPHANTIC players and frightened and awed ones --


which now included roddick himself......


what a MESS such "advance" notices make, don't they?

the TRIUMPH of Mass Consciousness


SALESMANSHIP....

it is NO different from Selling WARS....like iraq...

"you bring out the new product in october" as a bush aide said.......

same as in "roger is the best and most complete ever...everyone be prepared to BOW in his presence"......

and they DID........





lol.

Graf_sampras said...

HoiHa said...

Unless of course that dastardly Andy Murray takes the crown :)

Fri Apr 03, 08:05:00 AM

===========


DENTAL SALES and ADVERTISING , especially in england, will go through the roof.........

Craig Hickman said...

G_S, I don't know what Andy can do. When panic takes over, panic takes over and he reverts to automatic pilot.

As someone wrote elsewhere, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Sigh.

Graf_sampras said...

G_S, good to see you again. Been a long time.

Two words for you: Cedric Pioline.

:-)

=========

i got MORE words for you:

"VERY OLD, INJURED< BURNEDOUTS, MEDIOCRITIES, CHOKERS"

you got Cedric Pioline?

i got Baghdatis, Gonzales, Berdych, Ljubicic, and sundry others.......

perhaps you wanna recall since WHEN safin PLAYED any tennis? or nalby? lol.

i got a few words for you:

ANDRE AGASSI - 34/35 years old - USO semis and Finals...bad hip , sciatica...pain shots..can't run...ewe....

loverguy said...

Helen :

Are we sure that most fans are outraged by that? I donot see the same outrage in all the forums. Much like Roger's apparel at the big W, the opinion is still divided. I dont think the Miami tournament or any other tournament will bend over for a star, if it hurts their popularity. We live in a world that is mainly driven by economics. As a fellow human being, I can see Roger's gain in this - which is no worse than him or Rafa having their names on caps and shoes.

I really do think Tennis has bigger problems than one of its stars having a monogram on a court owned by the tournament that has cashed over his popularity for the past 5 yrs.
Tennis' death in the US of A worries me more than anything. To see youth take-up to much less smarter games is sad, but then again that is how a economy driven world runs! The more money/clout there is, the bigger you are...

Graf_sampras said...

Craig Hickman said...

loverguy said...

To compare Andy to Roger or Rafa is a disgrace to 2 professional athletes who transcend their own sport.

::

Really? Is Andy, like Rafa and Raja, a professional athlete? Yes, he is.

Does he, like Rafa and Raja, transcend his sport? Yes, he does.


===============

this is nonsense....that Andy or other players shouldn't be "compared" or presumably , be recognized as equally legitimate players as rafa and roger .


they are there to compete and play ..

the reputations are built by their results and how they are ":sold".


but in a supposedly "level" playing field - where both players are seen as having their chances to win or lose - treating another , even more accomplished player, as if the other one doesn't exist is simply wrong.

this was not done in the days of navratilova, nor graf, nor sampras, nor agassi ...

and when the ball started -- they were equals.

before the ball started - their reputations preceded them and that was enough....

when they were introduced they were introduced for who they were and what they had done, as well as their rivals.

but no need to PUSH the envelope like some "constant" reminder such as these insignias on a chair

while having none for the other.

that is like treating the other players as if they were doormats.

that is WRONG. that is INSULTING and even dehumanizing as it was to andy .

someone ought to kick whoever came up with these "brainy" STUPIDITIES

Graf_sampras said...

loverguy said...

Helen :

Are we sure that most fans are outraged by that? I donot see the same outrage in all the forums. Much like Roger's apparel at the big W, the opinion is still divided. I dont think the Miami tournament or any other tournament will bend over for a star, if it hurts their popularity. We live in a world that is mainly driven by economics. As a fellow human being, I can see Roger's gain in this - which is no worse than him or Rafa having their names on caps and shoes.

I really do think Tennis has bigger problems than one of its stars having a monogram on a court owned by the tournament that has cashed over his popularity for the past 5 yrs.
Tennis' death in the US of A worries me more than anything. To see youth take-up to much less smarter games is sad, but then again that is how a economy driven world runs! The more money/clout there is, the bigger you are...

Fri Apr 03, 12:02:00 PM

everyone can see that this is about MONEY. yes, it is abotu "advertising" that "roger federer is Divine".......


BUT it is also - here is the word some fedfans LOVE TO USE recently -

"HURTFUL".

it HURTS the opponent in ways that dehumanizes them as "opponents"..

it is POSSIBLE ,POTENTIALLY , that the use of "bigger money" to advertise roger , implying, his "superiority" - beyond what the news say in results -- over andy roddick or a rival , to negatively affect his opponent because of what it implies for "everyone to see: namely: Andy...you're a NOBODY compared to roger...so when the TIME COMES -- you BETTER CHOKE"......


there is a good part of that that IS possible , u know. the advertising affects not JUSt the fans but the PERSON that was "excluded" by way of "raising" roger's profile over the other person:

his opponent, in a way that is artificial and unnecessary in a game of tennis.


this was an insult to andy roddick or the opponent and MAY have been intended to become a "crutch" for roger to "remind roger of who you are --"......

and MAY have tipped the advantage to roger in ways that were actually unfair TO andy roger as an opponent.

it is the equivalent, in a "silent" but VERY LOUDLY implied way

of a NOISY cheering squad for roger that goes beyond what actual live human beings do to cheer on a good game.

where a human audience sits quietly while a player prepares to serve or receive or hit.....


the "RF" logo speaks LOUDLY through that silence....

against Andy Roddick.

tell me if THAT is "fair competition".

Helen W said...

loverguy I have not time nor inclination to check out other forums to see how people feel about the monogram issue. The little I have read suggests that a lot of people were simply unaware of the whole thing.

I continue to have a huge problem with tournaments blatantly favouring individual players in the way they did with Roger. What's next -- Roger's monogram on the net beside the net posts (like Kia's logo for example)?

I agree with you that tennis in North America is in trouble as far as competing with other sports. But this kind of thing is not the answer, and is still wrong imho.

Graf_sampras said...

one way to look at it :

what would roger fans say IF

Roger was defending the USO -- and his opponent was Rafa or Murray - and THEY had LOGOs on the chair and someone "forgot" to put a "corresponding answer" logo on Roger's chair-- and he LOST?


one wonders....

Graf_sampras said...

Craig Hickman said...

G_S, I don't know what Andy can do. When panic takes over, panic takes over and he reverts to automatic pilot.

As someone wrote elsewhere, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Sigh.

Fri Apr 03, 11:58:00 AM

=========

for me -- he has to KEEP working at his shots...and JUST KEEP competing hard..the result will be to take "scalps" of others -- and build his confidence and even ARROGANCE...


and one day -- just watch, he'll get roger in ways that will be so sweet.


that's all i have to say. i don't give up on andy on this one. he should be winning the USO again or wimbledon and ao. it's nonsense that he hasn't .

with or without roger.

Craig Hickman said...

I'm looking really hard and I don't see any monograms on the court today.

Am I missing it?

Craig Hickman said...

No, I'm not missing it. There is no monogram on the court in front of Raja's chair today.

It would seem, then, unless this monogram was on the court before the round of 16 or unless my eyes are deceiving me and it's there today but I just can't see it, that the monogram was placed on the court solely for the Andy Roddick match.

Even with a 16-2 advantage over his opponent, someone felt it necessary, I would presume, to remind Andy Roddick of his place this relationship.

If that is indeed the case, it is both disgusting and revealing at the same time.

Helen W said...

Craig it is also possible that there were some complaints and the decision makers beat a hasty retreat.

IAC, the whole thing is ugly (imho). And, as is so often the case in these things, I doubt we will every know much by way of details.

Craig Hickman said...

Yes, Helen. It doesn't make it any less disgusting.

rabbit said...

rabbit, where have I ever said on this blog that Federer, after a loss, has been eclipsed and is a nobody?

Where? Please point it out. Thanks.


Sorry, oddman, for not replying earlier. I was not online for a while and then after the Djokovic match disaster, was too depressed.

I did not mean you specifically, oddman. You are openly a Rafa fan but dont find the need to constantly mock Roger. I meant some others who after nearly every defeat claim that Roger was never that good to begin with.

But anyways, after that SF showing, I dont really care about what is said.

Graf_sampras said...

Rabbit -- i don't know why there is a problem with the notion from some others that are not fedfans to say that

ROger was never as good as he was MADE OUT TO BE by the media?......

i mean -- NO ONE denies he is a great player, a great champion etc...


but do you REALLY not wonder that something is wrong about someone winning so many majors against demonstrably handicapped players...whether mentally, physically, agewise -- that is spread so richly in roger's career?..

do you REALLY think that a 30 year old andre agassi - far better in 1999 , 2000, 2001

-- who was stopped mainly by his fading "cortisone" shots and could barely move in a fourth set in USO 2004 or 2005 semis or finals

and was giving roger all kinds of problems


INCAPABLE of defeating roger ? do you really think there is NO substance to the fact that roger federer began defeating andre agassi ONLY AFTER 2003?

when roger "entered" his maturity -- while andre was literally breaking apart physically?


do you REALLY think that a better conditioned, no =surgery Philippoussies would have been such a pushover in wimbledon at age 29? literally a bag of barely heldtogether ligaments?...

do you REALLY think that a MURRAY with more experience and strength SINCE USO 2008 would have even ALLOWED roger a SET?

do you REALLY think that there was NOTHING to the rains and schedules that worked against nadal in 2007 wimbledon?

you REALLY think Roddick was such a nobody that a rain delay might not have caused havoc in his mind after what roger said:

"he was KILLING ME....the rain really helped me calm down?".......or that would have been STRAIGHT SETS demolition of roger by Andy?

you REALLY think these or the majority of 13 majors are ALL due to Roger's talent being SO superior?

so -- when other EYES look -- we acknowledge he is very talented - AND great --

just NOT as great or talented as he has been made out to be. or "ROGER AS A RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE" as that late NY times writer said in some nearly - embarrassingly hoaky article years ago.......

Graf_sampras said...

well -- if that Monogram was put there just during the Roddick match -- and if so , meant for "roddick's eyes"........


that was really underhanded.....

i won't jump to supposing it is definitely the case....

but if SO -- it's almost pitiful that they , or "someone" would have to resort to this to "salvage" roger's early half of the year...

if roger had nothing to do with it -- but it WAS the intent -- to intimidate roddick and make him think too much --

roger should be embarrassed it had to be done for his sake, just to get "an edge" over an opponent.

Graf_sampras said...

Helen W said...

Craig it is also possible that there were some complaints and the decision makers beat a hasty retreat.

IAC, the whole thing is ugly (imho). And, as is so often the case in these things, I doubt we will every know much by way of details.

Fri Apr 03, 02:46:00 PM

============

if there is any substance to someone doing "federer a favor" with or without his complicity or knowledge - to enhance his "confidence" or tweak the opponent's confidence badly --

this reminds of that USO "affair" - the one which a lady reporter printed on NY times but disappeared just hours later - before the USO formal Drawings...and her photo copy showed handwritten "draws projections"....

with roger


rounds 1-5 -- at least if not beyond even

ALL with "projected" UNSEEDEDS and QUALIFIERS....

as if his "path" was being eased somehow...

it appears that in the "
powers that be" circles -- roger might have been enjoying the "good patronage" of certain deciders....


it is like in businesses -- the ones that hold power -- DO such things as "grooming" someone by somehow influencing the way events unfold towards a certain desired result.

of course roger has sufficient talent to deliver --- BUT likely NOT without SOME assistance of the "invisible hand of fate"......

a little tweak of the schedule here or there, or the draws....and the table shifts a certain way....