FauxPolitik

Monday, September 12, 2005

Open Wrap: Don't everyone jump up at once to congratulate me for picking both the men's and women's winner in Queens. Sure, you say, Federer was an easy pick. But I bet that, after Andre had rallied to win the second set, and had Roger down a break in the third, you thought -- just for a moment -- "Andre is about to do to Federer what he did to Blake." I thought it. As for Clijsters: Who else looked likely?

I'll say this about Federer: He can be the most exciting player to watch, and then he can also be rather dull and clinical. Most of his victory over Andre was rather clinical. He's best when he's fighting for the match. Much like Sampras, he dominates the field so much that he can be a bit boring to watch. Let's hope that someone steps up to challenge him, or men's tennis could become even more of a snooze than the 90s were. Sampras, after all, never won Roland Garros. Federer, on the other hand, has the right game to win it repeatedly.

2 Comments:

  • Ok, good picks on the champions. Proof that if you keep picking against the 35 year old Agassi, eventually you'll be right. As soon as he plays Federer, that is.

    Clijsters was no shocker. Once she beat Venus, the draw opened up nicely for her. Not having to play Sharapova helped, too.

    By Blogger Flyer, at 10:46 AM  

  • Of course someone with some stones would have at least picked someone besides Clijsters .... hmmmm, who might have done that??

    Federer is just awesome to watch. Yes, at times he gets a little bored, but it must be hard to keep oneself motivated. I suppose losing that second set was just enough for him to get serious.

    Well, time for a snooze until the French in the Spring -- what's that? There's another tournament in early winter? Down Under you say? Crikey!

    By Blogger Razor, at 8:22 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home