Talk About Tennis 2.0

It was not a bad match, it was not a great match. Some good strokes and points.
But Daniil has Jannick's number. Not definite (there was a time in which Sampras could not beat Chang and Nalbandian had Roger's number) but Jannick will have to figure this one out.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 02, 2023 9:04 pm It was not a bad match, it was not a great match. Some good strokes and points.
But Daniil has Jannick's number. Not definite (there was a time in which Sampras could not beat Chang and Nalbandian had Roger's number) but Jannick will have to figure this one out.

The age disparity is too large to compare with Nalbandian/RF dynamics, IMO. Jannick is on the ascend, while Daniil maybe has couple of years max of his physical prime. Athletes like Djokovic are unique, for the rest of mortals the decline is inevitable. Also if Jannick plays more doubles, he'll improve his net skills, which is necessary to be successful against the style of Medvedev.

Leylah and Taylor were true to form in the doubles Final, playing one good set and one bad set... and losing to the better team of Gauff/Pegula.
The 1st set was close - Leylah/Taylor had their chances - they were serving for the set before the tiebreak, but didn't get it done. Then they kind of gradually fell apart in the 2nd set.

Still, they had a good tournament - and had a good one at Indian Wells, too, losing a very close match to the top team of Krajcikova/Siniakova in California. To be considered true challengers over the long term, though, they'll have to be more consistent in their play.

Looking at Medvedev winning Miami after losing in IW final I thought that it was a rare occurrence, but my memory failed me. Turned out, it happened a lot actually. Most recently Federer done it in 2019. And the first was Agassi - twice in 1990 and 1995. Remarkably - on both occasions winning in Miami against the same player to whom he lost in IW.

We have to retire the "Legend" lable. Yeah, Blake was a fine player, a complete gentleman on court, and a pleasure to watch. That forehand was stunning.
But he is not a legend. If Blake were such, we will simply not have any nouns or adjectives for Pete, Roger, Rafa and Nole.
Other than that, good win for Coco/Jessica.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 10:28 pm And I hope so; I have said already. I like Carlitos, but I don't want a dictatorship in the ATP.
But Sinner hits every ball the same, and Carlitos does not. He will (most likely) win it.

....AND, now, If dull and "Reformed" (that new, adorable, bouncy image-consultant-approved commercial of his- ) Medvedev finds a way to dominate, we all know who to blame....

I mean, sure, Alcaraz certainly has been dominating the ATP tour this year- with his....two tournament wins....

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 02, 2023 10:59 pm We have to retire the "Legend" lable. Yeah, Blake was a fine player, a complete gentleman on court, and a pleasure to watch. That forehand was stunning.
But he is not a legend. If Blake were such, we will simply not have any nouns or adjectives for Pete, Roger, Rafa and Nole.
Other than that, good win for Coco/Jessica.

Madison Brengle is still a legend. Other than that, I am in full agreement.

nelslus wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:10 am

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 31, 2023 10:28 pm And I hope so; I have said already. I like Carlitos, but I don't want a dictatorship in the ATP.
But Sinner hits every ball the same, and Carlitos does not. He will (most likely) win it.

....AND, now, If dull and "Reformed" (that new, adorable, bouncy image-consultant-approved commercial of his- ) Medvedev finds a way to dominate, we all know who to blame....

I mean, sure, Alcaraz certainly has been dominating the ATP tour this year- with his....two tournament wins....

Actually, my jinx worked.
Had Carlitos won, he would have three tournaments (same as Daniil) BUT two of them would be MS1000's and he would be #1. With bragging rights for best 1st quarter of the year of all players (Novak would disagree).
So, give me some credit this time

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 02, 2023 10:59 pm We have to retire the "Legend" lable. Yeah, Blake was a fine player, a complete gentleman on court, and a pleasure to watch. That forehand was stunning.
But he is not a legend. If Blake were such, we will simply not have any nouns or adjectives for Pete, Roger, Rafa and Nole.
Other than that, good win for Coco/Jessica.

I understand what you mean, but in this context, it is perfectly okay to do so. Should there be NYT's articles referencing James Blake as a legend? No. But this was said, not written and calling someone a legend is a common colloquialism in the US when praising them. It would be insulting for Jess to say "this is James Blake, he's fine."

Also, I'm not sure, but I think you might be missing the overall love that the American tennis players and audience have for James Blake. You're focusing very much on his skill as a player, but this is definitely talking about more than that, he has one of the very best reputations of any current or former player in US tennis on and off the court.

I agree. I loved to watch him play. And, all reports, articles, information and opinions of the man say nothing other than him being a total gentleman.
But... legend.
You know me. I am not a fan of absolutes. This is very close to the conversation about the use of the word "literal" (no longer meaning "literal").

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 5:12 pm I agree. I loved to watch him play. And, all reports, articles, information and opinions of the man say nothing other than him being a total gentleman.
But... legend.
You know me. I am not a fan of absolutes. This is very close to the conversation about the use of the word "literal" (no longer meaning "literal").

Yes, these are just common colloquialisms that you have to adjust to. I can't even begin to tell you the trivial things I've seen people do that get them referred to as legends. Referring to James Blake the man, not the player (which is how I took Jess' reference) as a legend, doesn't come close to cracking the top 100 on not the proper use of that title.

I'd never seen Blake do anything questionable... until his recent marketing for an online gambling entity. I consider that to be quite cheap - and I say that about anyone who encourages and advertizes gambling.
I've also seen a significant number of people criticize Blake, Gretzky, and other well known current and former athletes who encourage, and do marketing for, gambling.