French Open Tennis

[Alsacs]

The media exploits and tarnishes athletes for financial reward with nominal respect or courtesy in return. All athletes should take Osaka’s example and go on a media strike until the information industry adopts a standard of basic decency toward its subjects.
I stand with Osaka.
Shame on the French Open. Fans don’t care about the media.

 

[orange79]

Depression is a nasty thing. People who haven't suffered through it (either directly or by supporting a loved one) can not truly understand how debilitating it can be.

I understand the commitments professional athletes have, but there has to be some leeway in situations like this.

I also stand with Naomi.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

McEnroe was fabulous reacting on TV to Osaka’s statement. As great as he was on the court, he may be even greater as a commentator.

I love Osaka. I got Ali/Arthur Ashe/Lee Evans/Tommy Smith/Billie Jean King flashbacks today!

I’ll let this guy speak for me.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Nadal-Djokovic semi, sick!

 

[CuseTroop]

Nadal-Djokovic semi, sick!

This has been wild!

 

[CuseTroop]

I can't imagine being asked to leave this arena before this match is over... my goodness

 

[Fireball Jr.]

I can't imagine being asked to leave this arena before this match is over... my goodness

The show must go on.

Whatta great match. Amazing athletes.

 

[Chip]

It's crazy. I sit here with a beer in hand and marvel at how much these guys compete.

And try to avoid the mirror.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

My two favorite events: NBA playoffs and Grand Slam tennis. Heart be still!

 

[rrlbees]

That was some sick tennis.

 

[ScrabbCuse]

Not the greatest, but solid match in the women’s final today. I like Krejcikova. To be able to transition from a doubles specialist to win a singles grand slam title is remarkable. She’s also in the doubles final tomorrow which is impressive. Very personable as well based on her interviews. The women’s tour is the opposite of the men as there are no dominant players anymore. You don’t know who will be in the major finals as seen by an unseeded player winning the title over the 31st seed. So while the parity is good, there are no rivalries which is unfortunate.

 

[samspann1]

Djokovic takes the 3rd set and is in command in the 4th set.

 

[NashvilleOrange]

Djokovic takes the 3rd set and is in command in the 4th set.

He was incredible. Unreal to follow up the Nadal match with that comeback. It has to be so frustrating to finally overtake Nadal at Roland Garros and still have the crowd against you.

 

[upperdeck]

going from -300 to start the match to +200 was pretty nice value bet after getting +200 vs Nadal the day before..

 

[ScrabbCuse]

He was incredible. Unreal to follow up the Nadal match with that comeback. It has to be so frustrating to finally overtake Nadal at Roland Garros and still have the crowd against you.

Not that surprising. The casuals will always root for the underdog. Add in the Nadal and Federer fans rooting against Djokovic and that’s probably a majority of the crowd. At the end of the day, he is one grand slam behind both of those guys. He can pass them by September if he wins Wimbledon and the US Open. I’m sure he’s not too worried about fan support. (For the record, I was rooting for Tsitsipas to win.)

 

[upperdeck]

Joker is now looking at Wimbledon to set up a crazy US open.. they would all be at 20 and if he wins he would have the 2021 grand slam.

not sure if he tries to match that up with a Olympic medal.

 

[Guinness]

So which way do you all lean?

These 3 are simply the greatest ever of any era? That they have simply steamrolled any and all comers.

Or

That these 3 are great players who are playing in a weak era where there is only a few really elite guys capable of winning.

Seems crazy that Lavers record stood for decades and then right after Sampras breaks it 3 more guys fly by.

I tend to lean towards the later. All 3 are undeniably great but have benefitted from playing in a era where the number of elite players is smaller. Unlike say the 70's through the 90's were there were so many guys capable of winning.

 

[upperdeck]

Its a tough thing to figure out.. much the same as golf..

it takes the skill and the mental aptitude to win these things.. Is it harder to be dominant and win a bunch when you have 4-5 guys who can win multiple ones and thus showing they have both skill sets and are more than a 2 week thing 6 match thing or harder when you have tons of talented guys who can beat you any given match but struggle to win 6 in a row at this level?

These guys winning 60 though in an era at the same time is pretty crazy.

Jack was winning his 20 a few won a few. Tiger in his run much the same.

I have no doubt many other guys are playing at a high level but these 3 seem to rise up between them every major and knock the others off and just dont give in to all these kids,

Was talking about it yesterday during the match.. Nadel and Joker probably have 2-4 more years to be dominant.. given many players have a peek period of 5-6 yrs These 3 guys will have taken 3+ groups out of winning majors where most of the time some of them would have won 3-4..

Tsistipas played great tennis and Joker looked lost but he got better and better until he makes the other guy not able to keep up..

 

[Oakland]

Not that surprising. The casuals will always root for the underdog. Add in the Nadal and Federer fans rooting against Djokovic and that’s probably a majority of the crowd. At the end of the day, he is one grand slam behind both of those guys. He can pass them by September if he wins Wimbledon and the US Open. I’m sure he’s not too worried about fan support. (For the record, I was rooting for Tsitsipas to win.)

The crowd is always rooting for Nadal and Federer. Djokovic is the third wheel that spoiled the party.

 

[Oakland]

So which way do you all lean?

These 3 are simply the greatest ever of any era? That they have simply steamrolled any and all comers.

Or

That these 3 are great players who are playing in a weak era where there is only a few really elite guys capable of winning.

Seems crazy that Lavers record stood for decades and then right after Sampras breaks it 3 more guys fly by.

I tend to lean towards the later. All 3 are undeniably great but have benefitted from playing in a era where the number of elite players is smaller. Unlike say the 70's through the 90's were there were so many guys capable of winning.

Watching these guys play should assure you that they are all-time greats that have crushed the competition. However, I still think Laver may be the greatest ever.

 

[Oakland]

I like Jim Courier doing the mathc and the preppy guy running the desk was OK, but the tennis channel punditry was bad. Without any nod to modesty, I would have been a much better analyst of the match than P Annacone and Chandra ???.

 

[ScrabbCuse]

Naomi Osaka and Rafael Nadal have both pulled out of Wimbledon. Nadal is out of the Olympics also. Feel bad for Osaka and what she’s going through. Hopefully the time away will help her. As far as the men go, Djokovic has to be a huge Wimbledon favorite now. Not sure if an almost 40 year old Federer can do anything and the young guns mentally can’t keep up with Djokovic.