Weeks 3-4 - Australian Open (men's)

Spectator · All-time great

RE: Weeks 3-4 - Australian Open (men's)

savva0122 · Intermediate Club Player

Should be a fairer contest too on Saturday, with the weather forecast to plunge into the high 20s!

RJA · Hall of fame

seagull wrote:
LOL has no chance against Lopez :) What is the h2h 7-0?

Perhaps I was unclear but when I said "playing like this he has almost no chance against Lopez " I meant he was going to have to up his level against Lopez if he is going to win that match.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Lopez played Andy tough in their last meeting, so that'll give him more hope. Andy should be Ok if he plays like he did at the end of the 3rd set, back still a big issue.

korriban · Challenger level

I think Lopez will be quite tough, but I presume Andy will be improving with every match, so will prevail. With the draw so open in his section I'd expect him to reach the QF now. Any more would be unexpected and, frankly, a huge bonus.

For the record, there are EIGHT French men in the L32. A quarter of the entire field. Puts things into perspective, since we failed to get anyone apart from Andy in the L64......in both mens' AND womens'. LTA take note.

Spectator · All-time great

Ah, but would our players consent to having the radioactive genetic alterations that enable you to hobble one day and then play and win two five-set matches in succession in forty+ degree heat? And would our government permit it? (Even the French have been naming M. Simon "mutant")

Jesting aside, it is a huge accomplishment on the part of the French. Allez les Français! (Within limits, eg not Mr Robert in the 3rd round, or M Tsonga/M Simon should they play a certain M Murray in the QFs, etc)

philwrig · Hall of fame

korriban wrote:
I think Lopez will be quite tough, but I presume Andy will be improving with every match, so will prevail. With the draw so open in his section I'd expect him to reach the QF now. Any more would be unexpected and, frankly, a huge bonus.
For the record, there are EIGHT French men in the L32. A quarter of the entire field. Puts things into perspective, since we failed to get anyone apart from Andy in the L64......in both mens' AND womens'. LTA take note.

I wonder whether the French would trade 8 frenchman in the L32 for a grand slam champion. Both would be nice.

Miriambee · Futures level

Delpo is out, that should widen the points gap between him and Andy.

indiana · Tennis legend

Del Potro went out in R3 last year. Andy will only widen his points gap over JMDP if he reaches the final again. Anything less and Del Potro will actually overtake Andy.

korriban · Challenger level

philwrig wrote:
korriban wrote:
I think Lopez will be quite tough, but I presume Andy will be improving with every match, so will prevail. With the draw so open in his section I'd expect him to reach the QF now. Any more would be unexpected and, frankly, a huge bonus.
For the record, there are EIGHT French men in the L32. A quarter of the entire field. Puts things into perspective, since we failed to get anyone apart from Andy in the L64......in both mens' AND womens'. LTA take note.
I wonder whether the French would trade 8 frenchman in the L32 for a grand slam champion. Both would be nice.

You're absolutely right. But can a National Tennis Federation do any more than help create the conditions through which huge numbers of kids play the game, get good coaching, and are channeled through the system if talented.....the sheer numbers of French players doing well is testament to something good in France......but no amount of organisation, systems and money can guarantee a GS champion

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes, it does look that in general French tennis ( system, attitudes, cumulation of whatever ) is light years ahead of the UK.

I presume most of us thought that already, but 8 into the last 32 here just absolutely hammers it home. Imagine us having say 3 !!?

Ratty · County player

Economics: the study of the allocation of scarce resources.

Because the French are genetically similar to us, and our populations are much the same, then one might expect an overall equality in performance. So, we're better than them at cricket, rugby, and cycling; and they're better than us at tennis and soccer.

This is because we have allocated differing amounts of resources to the sports. So what's the big deal?

indiana · Tennis legend

Can I suggest that it isn't simply a question of just how much resources you allocate, but how well these allocated resources are used.

And genetically similar as they may be, it is more than possible that one country can for various reasons end up with people that are in the positions that matter more capable of driving the sport forward.

korriban · Challenger level

Ratty wrote:
Economics: the study of the allocation of scarce resources.

Because the French are genetically similar to us, and our populations are much the same, then one might expect an overall equality in performance. So, we're better than them at cricket, rugby, and cycling; and they're better than us at tennis and soccer.

This is because we have allocated differing amounts of resources to the sports. So what's the big deal?

National success/failure in sports has little to do with the amount of resources allocated, beyond a minimum amount needed for a nation to be broadly competitive. The reasons Serbs, Russians, Croats and Czechs/Slovaks are so good at tennis will be complex, but it's absolutely clear its NOT about them allocating tons of resource to the sport. Why do so many of their players need to train outside the country? Attracting young sporting superstars into tennis (rather than other sports) and investing WISELY must surely have something to do with French success. I simply don't accept it's simple economics at all.

By the way, to argue that we are better than the French at cricket is open to debate at the moment!!!!! wink

steven · Tennis legend

Ratty wrote:
Economics: the study of the allocation of scarce resources.

Because the French are genetically similar to us, and our populations are much the same, then one might expect an overall equality in performance. So, we're better than them at cricket, rugby, and cycling; and they're better than us at tennis and soccer.

This is because we have allocated differing amounts of resources to the sports. So what's the big deal?

So is Ratty's big secret that he's actually American? wink