Andy Murray to win Wimbledon

What kind of idiot would bet on this happening?

Apologies if it happens and this convinced you to not bet on him.

Yeah can't see it IMO.

Will be interesting to see if Federer can get on a roll now he's won 2 tournaments in a row on his least favoured surface. With Nadal out of action he could steamroll 2009.



gc.

No Nadal...

Can't see anyone stopping Federer, I don't think Murray's first Grand Slam title will be Wimbledon, too much pressure and expectation.

W00t!



gc.

So...Andy Murray wasn't exactly dominant in his first round match.. altho the pressure on him must be huge.

As for this.... Not sure whether it's kinda cool or whack.

The whole outfit was crazy!



gc.

It's completely styling.

Federer to win it. Roddick to fail. Verdasco to finish ahead of Djokovic.

You heard it here first

Just had a look at Larcher de Brito and that fucken grunt is ridiculous no wonder they want to ban it. Urgh it made my toes curl ... I thought its something like Seles or Maria but nah ... this fucken chick is going mad

Ddel Potro was downed by Hewitt 6-3, 7-5, 7-5.. showing yet again why he's so overrated. He just fell to bits and had no answer to Hewitt gutsing it out.

Federer, Djokovic and Murray all looking good this round. Dominant victories for all really. Federer dropped a set, but it seemed more a random blip on an otherwise majestic performance.

Women's still sux0r. Fucking Azarenka is such a chore. If I'm forced to watch V.Williams vs Azarenka I think I will gouge out my eardrums.



gc.

Can't be that overrated if he's ranked 5th. Still has to win games and earn that position. Speaks to the depth of talent in the game that I was referring to in the French Open thread.

That said, I think Hewitt is easily good enough to return to the top 20, maybe the top 15, and will make it there in the next 12 months or so- especially with hard court season coming.



gc.

The thing is Hewitt didn't actually play that well, he struggled to get his first serves in and relied on del Potro not putting away his winners (either out/net or able to be returned).

Ick. White vest on white top is hideous. Fuckin Swiss have no taste.

Tsonga gone. No answer to the big serve... the very big serve. 45 or so aces rained down by that guy is pretty impressive... reminds me of some Goran Ivanisevic games from back in the day.

Karlovic to face Federer now after taking down Verdasco and Tsonga as you mentioned.

Murray under pressure atm from Wawrinka. Excellent game. I am entirely sick of the fist pump + "come on!" from every single fucking player (men and women) on at least 50% of the points these days. It's getting stupid.



gc.

I think Anna Ivanovic has got to be the worst offender in that regard, I remember watching her at the French and she would break out the fist pump when her opponent made an unforced error at 15-0 points. As nice is she is too look at it was a bit over the top when she is doing on on almost point she wins.

That was the thing I loathed the most about Leyton Hewitt.

Most guys are just waiting for her to finally end the sentence with "...my face".

She can get away with it imo. Hewitt however just makes a mockery of self encouragement.

First match on tonight: Roger Federer vs Ivo Karlovic. This is one worth watching to see the big guy's serve.

Karlovic is 208cm (6' 10'') and served 46 aces when beating Tsonga a few days ago.

Head to head Federer leads 8 - 1.

In the tournament so far Karlovic has only faced four break points in the entire tournament - but has yet to be broken.

If it goes on serve, Federer has the tie-break edge usually. Winning 9 of the 12 they've played.

Gotta feel for Roddick after that, what a match though... Longest set ever in a grand slam final.

Yeah.. there was a feeling he just wasn't ever going to raise his game for those couple of points to win like you knew Federer could do. In the end I think the light/shaddow on the court affected both of them right at the end. Both miss-hit a couple in the last few games.

As for it being the longest set... I heard them say that on TV and they're dead wrong. It was only the longest 5th set in modern era mens singles since the introduction of the tie-breaker in games terms. (Considering Wimbledon is the only tournament to play advantage in the 5th set it's not at all surprising it'd be there).

Pancho Gonzales vs Charlie Pasarell 1969 (open era) had the famously longest set at 20-18 (for their first set). Another set in the match went to 16-14 too. There have been quite a few others too in doubles and women's draws.

Pretty sure they said it was the longest set in a Grand Slam final, not the longest set ever.

Which would still be wrong - as per my example above.

Think he forgot to add '5th' to the sentence... i.e. the longest 5th set in a men's singles grand slam final.

He might be right in terms of length in time but I'm pretty sure he mentioned 'number of games'.

In any case, the commentators made about a dozen pretty simple errors in their commentary last night. It's not as though the pundits like Becker/Henman are held to the scrutiny of the statisticians. They weren't majors. Hell, even the scoreboard showed the wrong score at least once.

Sorry, misread as 'GS final set' so my example above isn't right.

There was a 16-14 final set in the 2004 French also and plenty of others throughout the ages around that length or longer. Especially in doubles where there was a 20-18 final set in the final once.

This match overnight was the longest match in number of games since the tie-break was introduced though.

if that helps