[poet]

Who are too tired or too hot or married or expecting child or simply choke...

Djoker didn't look like he wanted to be out there end of the 3rd set and Fed choked once Djoker lost and the pressure on him grew. What a couple of wusses.

[CWD]

Who are too tired or too hot or married or expecting child or simply choke...

Djoker didn't look like he wanted to be out there end of the 3rd set and Fed choked once Djoker lost and the pressure on him grew. What a couple of wusses.

who you like in the final?

[Snowball]

i agree
there is no way to understate what just happened today
it is quite UPSETTING - no pun intended.
and this is why fewer ppl take tennis betting seriously
than team sports.

[EaglesPhan36]

You always have to consider conditions and recovery at this point in Slams. Djokovic has almost always not liked windier conditions and I think we've seen him revert a bit to his early days when heat/humidity effects him a lot. The match he had against Murray, he had some humidity to deal with, but it was almost perfect with no wind - right up his alley. I think a lot of people didn't really pay attention to that match either with how wobbly Djokovic looked at times against some of the things Murray was doing.

Federer, I mean it was difficult to guess how he would come out today. He seemed fresh against Monfils even after five sets. But muscles tighten, etc. some times after rest. Couple in that Cilic is about 10x mentally stronger right now than Monfils due to superior coaching and you had the perfect storm. Shit happens dudes.

People have been pining for different Slam Finals match-ups for a while and now we've got one. To me, it makes tennis betting more exciting, but also where you actually have to do some homework. You can't just say Djokovic, Nadal, Federer ... book it. They'll win at this stage. It's the changing face of the men's game. Its somewhat refreshing and what makes players like Djokovic, Nadal and Federer that much more special. Over the next few years, it's probably going to become more of a revolving door at some of these Slams in the Finals.

[Hardcoar]

Federror on the other hand is easily one of the best players in the wind ever.

[EaglesPhan36]

Did you just fart in my general direction?

[ManeOnFire]

Did you just fart in my general direction?

That's a really good joke!

[sluggy1616]

Who are too tired or too hot or married or expecting child or simply choke...

Djoker didn't look like he wanted to be out there end of the 3rd set and Fed choked once Djoker lost and the pressure on him grew. What a couple of wusses.

I wonder if Feds daughters could sense that daddy was having a bad day on the court. That would suck laying an egg with your young daughters in attendance. They might one day go the way of the POLE just because of this poor performance.

[SEKTAUR]

I wonder if Feds daughters could sense that daddy was having a bad day on the court. That would suck laying an egg with your young daughters in attendance. They might one day go the way of the POLE just because of this poor performance.

STFU weirdo

[poet]

who you like in the final?

I saw some good cappers on Cilic but I don't see it. Nishi just beat the #5, #4 and #1 players in the world. Cilic might have gotten by one of them. Cilic barely beat Anderson and Simon then took care of Birdshit (no surprise there) and an overconfident and jaded Fed who had all kinds of pressure on him to win that match. Nishi is a complete tennis player while Cilic is a two dimensional one (big serve and big groundstrokes, but not much else). If this was grass, I'd say Cilic had a decent shot but on hard courts? Cilic reminds me of Ivanisevic and Nishi of Agassi (in how cleanly he hits the ball). But Nishi is more athletic than Agassi and Cilic a better mover than Goran. I'm curious to know what others think but that's my take.

[CWD]

I saw some good cappers on Cilic but I don't see it. Nishi just beat the #5, #4 and #1 players in the world. Cilic might have gotten by one of them. Cilic barely beat Anderson and Simon then took care of Birdshit (no surprise there) and an overconfident and jaded Fed who had all kinds of pressure on him to win that match. Nishi is a complete tennis player while Cilic is a two dimensional one (big serve and big groundstrokes, but not much else). If this was grass, I'd say Cilic had a decent shot but on hard courts? Cilic reminds me of Ivanisevic and Nishi of Agassi (in how cleanly he hits the ball). But Nishi is more athletic than Agassi and Cilic a better mover than Goran. I'm curious to know what others think but that's my take.

nishi the small fav i would say from his history vs cilic and the fact he took out the bigger names raonic-djoko. cilic getting zero credit for win vs fed, the guy who was cruising and who many thought was a lock to play in the final and possibly win. im liking cilic, just depends how you rate the upsets i guess and who you think really impressed more, did djoko just not give a shit or did he really get beat and did fed choke or was he really beaten soundly?

[poet]

Another thing to consider, the last tall guy to win a slam was Delpo and before that it was Safin and Ivanisevic (both around 6'4). Tall guys (like Cilic) don't usually win slams in tennis against skilled little guys. Both Delpo and Ivanisevic could easily have lost in the finals they won. Tall and tennis don't go together often, in terms of long term success, though it can happen every once in a while.

[SirtySree]

Another thing to consider, the last tall guy to win a slam was Delpo and before that it was Safin and Ivanisevic (both around 6'4). Tall guys (like Cilic) don't usually win slams in tennis against skilled little guys. Both Delpo and Ivanisevic could easily have lost in the finals they won. Tall and tennis don't go together often, in terms of long term success, though it can happen every once in a while.

Problem with this statistic is the fact that outside of the big 4, not many others have won a GS in the past decade. Also another problem is what counts as a 'tall' guy. If you count 6'4 players as tall, that would make up a much small % of players so like comparing 10% of players to 90% of players, of course that 90% will win more GS titles.

[poet]

Problem with this statistic is the fact that outside of the big 4, not many others have won a GS in the past decade. Also another problem is what counts as a 'tall' guy. If you count 6'4 players as tall, that would make up a much small % of players so like comparing 10% of players to 90% of players, of course that 90% will win more GS titles.

On the other hand, there is a reason why most tennis players are not tall like basketball players. There is an optimal height, size, weight in tennis just like any other sport. It does not suit really big/tall guys.

[SirtySree]

On the other hand, there is a reason why most tennis players are not tall like basketball players. There is an optimal height, size, weight in tennis just like any other sport. It does not suit really big/tall guys.

Personally I would have to disagree with this opinion. There are tons of tall players that are good at tennis. Yes I agree that some don't move well but height allows them to have a better serve and ground strokes to be hit at a higher point when they can get to it, hence seeing the likes of Isner, Karlovic, and even Del Potro hitting massive forehands when they get to plant their feet. Del Potro being the exception that he can also move well. Also to be honest, outside of Isner and Karlovic, I can't really think of a tall player that moves badly.

If we look at the Top 20 players, it is fairly split from players over 190cm and players under 190cm.

[SirtySree]

Also with the reference to basketball, how many sports do we see with 7'0 players? Most tall players get college scholarships or drafted into the NBA with little skill and only get noticed cause of their potential at that height.

[SirtySree]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_in_sports
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/dat...-weight-height

These two articles pretty much sum it up. Tennis players are in fact taller in comparison to majority of sports apart from basketball and volleyball.

[Hardcoar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_in_sports
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/dat...-weight-height

These two articles pretty much sum it up. Tennis players are in fact taller in comparison to majority of sports apart from basketball and volleyball.

They do. They have little to do with the point though; it's not optimal to be very tall for tennis players, in the sense that the best tennis players are generally not particularly tall.

When discussing optimal height, it's not as interesting to see average height in the entirity of a sport as it is interesting to see average height for the top players.

Also see: http://www.pinnaclesports.com/online...g-servers.aspx

The author essentially argues that being tall is a disadvantage (in one way) that is especially exacerbated in a best-of-five format.

I agree that tall height is certainly an advantage as well, but clearly it is all in all not favorable at the highest levels of the game, and even less so in grand slams.

[bruceBRUCEbruce]

Another thing to consider, the last tall guy to win a slam was Delpo and before that it was

this might possibly be because of the dominance of nadal/feds/djoko

sampras, lendl, boris becker all 6'2 or taller, plenty of all time greats aren't little guys...

[poet]

Thanks hc, didn't think what I was saying was that controversial. Anyone who watches tennis on a regular basis knows this. But people just wanna argue for arguments sake.

[poet]

Big difference between 6'2 and 6'4, 6'5 etc

[Hardcoar]

I think Sirty makes some good points though, but wanted to add my opinion as well as the above article because I found it interesting particularly with regards to an attempt at explaining why things are they way they are, with taller players being a disadvantage due to playing long as well as "tight" matches with therefore slimmer margins, which, all in all, is more of a factor in Best-of-five set matches which typically give more ATP points).

There are distinct advantages of tall height as well, and plenty of top 100 tennis players are quite tall, but it would seem as though it's not the very "extreme optimum", so to speak.

It should be noted however, that the explanation given in the linked-to article is only the author's hypothesis based on the correlation between the "provided fact" and the "discovered fact" – It does not necessarily mean that there is any causality between the different factors.

[bruceBRUCEbruce]

Big difference between 6'2 and 6'4, 6'5 etc

size of dmoney's c0ck?

[Hardcoar]

[smandur]

this happens when you bet tennis




today chokers : riba, kevin king , tatishvili,ante pavic,Gerard Granollers ,marko djokovic,melzer

still us final to come

[Hardcoar]

They all choked?

Do you know what "choking" means?

[smandur]

yes, physical response to the mental state . All losing from a big lead

[Hardcoar]

Ok, then that's pretty bad indeed.

[SirtySree]

Thanks hc, didn't think what I was saying was that controversial. Anyone who watches tennis on a regular basis knows this. But people just wanna argue for arguments sake.

This is a discussion board for opinions. Wasn't arguing for sake of arguing but rather just having a debate...

Some good points especially by HC but the problem I see is what is defined as tall? Saying only players like Isner is tall is a big stretch cause there's only like a few 2 meter tall players playing professional sports outside of basketball and volleyball so they make up such a small sample size it's not possible to draw any conclusions from. Then you take players 6'2 and over which still only makes up less than 50% of the players, I would consider that a fair consideration as being tall. (ie. 6'2+ = tall, 6'1 or 6'0 = average, 5'11 and below = short).
Using those numbers would give a pretty fair split of players into each category and makes drawing conclusions much simpler and from the past, we have seen 6'2+ players achieving better than others.