|
Day 14.
Sept 10, 2007 12:34:44 GMT -5
Post by corswandt on Sept 10, 2007 12:34:44 GMT -5
I see that most people picked the "did my faves do well or not?" approach to label the USO as a good or bad tournament. ;D
The way I see it, it was bad.
When the 2006 AO began, there were (on paper) something like 9 contenders (Davenport, Clijsters, Pierce, Mauresmo, Henin, Sharapova, the sisters, maybe Hingis) plus a series of outsiders also with a shot at the title (Kuznetsova, Myskina, Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Petrova, maybe even Schnyder, since she used to do well in Australia).
Considering how things went at this USO, for the 2007 AO we will have
- an overwhelming favourite - two other contenders who may or may not bother to show up - two dark horses (the Serbians)
And nothing else. And I don't think you can consider this objectively as a good development, unless you're a die hard fan of Henin who only wants to see her win, damn be everything else, but then of course you're not being objective.
|
|
|
Day 14.
Sept 10, 2007 13:20:38 GMT -5
Post by Edna Krabappel on Sept 10, 2007 13:20:38 GMT -5
When the 2006 AO began, there were (on paper) something like 9 contenders (Davenport, Clijsters, Pierce, Mauresmo, Henin, Sharapova, the sisters, maybe Hingis) plus a series of outsiders also with a shot at the title (Kuznetsova, Myskina, Ivanovic, Vaidisova, Petrova, maybe even Schnyder, since she used to do well in Australia). And look how it ended. Serena was really fat and managed to do the impossible and lose to Hantu. Venus bombed out in first round to Pironkova of all people, Pierce also lost early, Davenport did her thing and lost as soon as she had to face a real challenge (i.e. Henin). Clijsters spent more time talking about her injury than actually playing. And the "outsiders" were even worse: Ivanovic get spanked by Stosur, Vaidisova played what probably was the worst match in tennis history against Mauresmo, I don't remember what Myskina did but she didn't do anything anyway etc. For all the supposed contenders (and I don't think the majority of them were much of contenders anyway), that tournament SUCKED. It was easily the worst GS of the last decade and more. So, even if he have less "contenders" and "outsiders" going into AO '07, it doesn't have to mean anything. Now, as for US Open '07, I think it was a good tournament. There were some pretty entertaining matches (I'm not too demanding, I don't always expect breathtaking quality, as long as it's fun to watch): Jankovic vs V.Williams, Peer vs Vaidisova, Justine vs both sisters, Jankovic vs Cornet. We got to see some new faces like Szavay, Azarenka, Paszek, Vakulenko or even Radwanska, another youngster made a big run (Chakvetadze)... Most of them got beaten easily once they got to the later stages of the tournament, but that would happen to the usual suspects like Petrova, Dementieva, even Davenport or perhaps Mauresmo the way thing have been going with her lately. I'm sure there were some good men's matches too. And of course, Justine won! ;D
|
|
|
Day 14.
Sept 10, 2007 15:03:38 GMT -5
Post by corswandt on Sept 10, 2007 15:03:38 GMT -5
Maybe, but once a tournament is hyped it doesn't matter that it doesn't live up to the hype. You can call it "the Football World Cup effect". The more it sucks, the more people say it's the shit. The casual fans mostly can't tell a quality tournament or even match from a bad one.
The 2008 tennis season isn't looking particularly compelling right now, and it won't matter that it does end up being much more interesting than expected.
Expectations are everything.
|
|
|
Day 14.
Sept 10, 2007 16:00:50 GMT -5
Post by Wagasi on Sept 10, 2007 16:00:50 GMT -5
Well I hope your expectations come true then Corswandt The ATP is glad that they finally have 3 possible contenders, so 1+/-2 contenders on the WTA wouldn't be too bad if those main contenders finally play at a high level when it counts (which would be much preferable to some past slams where all players ranked 5-15 play mediocre-ly and inconsistently and you get a lot of close matches but crap quality and Justine or Serena or Maria or Mauresmo bullshits her way to the title with only one or two good matches along the way). Matches wise, most of the ones I got to see were crap. Men's and women's. The real standout was the Justine-Venus match. A real barnburner, especially that first set. The Henin-Serena match I didn't see most of the first set and a lot of 2nd set so that might've been good too and Venus-Jank match was better than most women's matches but I couldn't enjoy it because I kept thinking about how Jank would choke it in the end. Russians were usually bad whenever they came on my TV. Vaid-Peer was another one that was close but not that good. Most of the Spaniards' matches were extremely boring. Roger's were ok, but I'm so accustomed to his brilliance that it's not very awe-inspiring anymore. Can't stand Roddick or Blake so didn't watch them. All in all I'd probably only want to tape one match of the whole fortnight.
|
|