PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's coverage today: Blake, Henman, Federer, Agassi, Nadal, and Roddick!


bis2806
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:16 PM
Blake - danish dude
Henman - Soderling
Federer - Gasquet
Agassi - Pashanski
Nadal
Roddick......

:o

UDACHi
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:17 PM
While I'd much ratehr watch WTA tennis, they should both be good matches.

IceHock
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:20 PM
yeah,i'm actually interested in fed vs. gasquet.although fed will win,it should be a very good match.

40-0
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:20 PM
its fair. defending champ , hard opponent on the first round, it could be interesting, maybe even take a set to roger. In the other hand, vera vs kim, it could go in str8s to kim or str8s to vera.

cometz9
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:21 PM
Thats why i'm subscribing to Wimbledon livestream :) ESPN :o i've given up on that :bs:

FedExpress
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:21 PM
Gasquet is well on grass. He took a set in Halle from Roger and he won Nottingham this week. But I don't really think that he could beat Roger but maybe he can took a set from him again ;)

TomTennis
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:22 PM
C'mon off it.

Are you kidding me. Yes Federer is the HEAVY favourite, but Gasqeut has beatn him before and was expected to do well at this event, as well as winning his second grass court title this week in Nottingham.

Yes Kim v Vera may be close, but the quality of tennis in Richard v Gasquet would appeal to MANY more.

Aaron.
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:22 PM
I KNEW Those Tards on Espn were gonna show federer but wont matter because ill be gone in the morning and wont be back till 2pm

silverwhite
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:22 PM
The quality of play will be better, for one.

IceHock
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:23 PM
C'mon off it.

Are you kidding me. Yes Federer is the HEAVY favourite, but Gasqeut has beatn him before and was expected to do well at this event, as well as winning his second grass court title this week in Nottingham.

Yes Kim v Vera may be close, but the quality of tennis in Richard v Gasquet would appeal to MANY more.


lol he's playing his last name??:confused:

K-Dog
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:23 PM
No, Gasquet just won a grass court tune-up yesterday. Roger is the defending champ. Kim is not. Roger is more fun to watch than Kim imo. Gasquet vs. Roger is prob the most exciting men's first round.

tenn_ace
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:24 PM
Let me think: a 3 times Wimbledon winner and one of the best young prospects vs. Player who got once to the semis and player ranked in 40s..... The choice is easy.

as much as I like Vera and fine with Kim, there is really NO comparison between those 2 matches.

Ty-Ty
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:24 PM
I'm not to upset. They both have a lot of potential to be awesome matches.

backhanddtl4
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:24 PM
Hahahah Gasquet vs. Federer will own the Kim match.....Seriously I can't believe you'd even complain about this. Gasquet is playing hot, and Federer is just Federer but he hasn't been so good lately, AND he's defending champ. The quality of tennis in this match will own any women's match quality....clearly.

Aaron.
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM
I have Tennis Channel so i wonder if they will be showing Federer and Gasquet

SelesFan70
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM
While Fed v. Gas is the better match on grass, ESPN showing a men's match over a women's match should suprise NO ONE! :o

IceHock
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM
although the thing i don't get as the tourney progesses,we basicly know who's gunna be in the final on the mens side yet they show the matches anyway,and it's like we already know the winner before the match has started while on the womens side it's much different.

tenn_ace
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:25 PM
C'mon off it.

Are you kidding me. Yes Federer is the HEAVY favourite, but Gasqeut has beatn him before and was expected to do well at this event, as well as winning his second grass court title this week in Nottingham.

Yes Kim v Vera may be close, but the quality of tennis in Richard v Gasquet would appeal to MANY more.

I don't agree that it's given to Roger. Richard has just won a tournament, so he must be playing well and he did beat Roger before

jj74
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:26 PM
Sorry but i think Federer-Gasquet is a lot more interesting than Vera-Kim, Richard is very good on grass (he had very bad luck with the draw) and last time he met Roger on grass was a very tight match

cometz9
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:27 PM
I have Tennis Channel so i wonder if they will be showing Federer and Gasquet

they have absolutely no coverage for Wimbledon.

Knizzle
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:28 PM
What makes anyone think Vera will challenge Kim?? Gasguet will probably do a better job than Zvonareva.

Aaron.
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:30 PM
they have absolutely no coverage for Wimbledon. :fiery: Dear God! I Just got it too that Sucks :o

Anna F'd Enrique
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:32 PM
Federer/Gasquet is much moe interesting than Kim/Vera. NEXT!

IceHock
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:33 PM
:fiery: Dear God! I Just got it too that Sucks :o


it covers no grand slams,you can go to www.thetennischannel.com (http://www.thetennischannel.com) and it as listings of what tourneys it will cover,it's at the top

bis2806
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:33 PM
I want to see Vera's crying antics :sad:

tenn_ace
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:36 PM
I want to see Vera's crying antics :sad:


now you're talking like a "real" tennis fan :p

gmak
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:36 PM
although i want vera to do well, i don't think she has too many chances against kim...

Fed vs Gasquet will be a lot closer match...

CrossCourt~Rally
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:43 PM
Federer/Gasquet is much moe interesting than Kim/Vera. NEXT!

Exactly! I mean i love Kim and the Kim vs Vera match should be an entertaining match. BUT...Roger is the defending champion here and Gasquet just won a grasscourt warm up in Nottingham . There is much more of an audience for this match then the other in america and espn KNOWS THAT :p Anyways...it would be just wrong not to show the defending champs first rd match on tv..i mean cmmon! :lol: That being said..i hope they ateast show parts of the vera/ kim match to keep us up to date...especialy if it gets interesting. ;) :bounce:

CrossCourt~Rally
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:45 PM
lol he's playing his last name??:confused:

:lol:

davidmario
Jun 25th, 2006, 08:57 PM
They are right in showing Federer/Gasquet. This is a potential blockbuster! Gasquet just won a tournament on grass and their last match two weeks ago was very close with two tiebreaks!
Buy Wimbledon LIVE ;)

ClaudiaZ-S
Jun 25th, 2006, 09:24 PM
I saw him this week, Gasquet can beat him :scared:

starr
Jun 25th, 2006, 09:45 PM
Okay this is getting really annoying. Why in the world would ESPN show the no.1 seed who will beat Gasquet on grass anyway? Kim vs. Vera is probably the closest match on the women's side and they are not even going to show it. Shame.

That's a big no brainer. Gasquet has been hot on grass this year and has beaten Federer previously. It's the best first round match up on the men's side among the top rated men. They might show parts of Kim's match if the men's match doesn't have much excitement and Kim's does.

watchdogfish
Jun 25th, 2006, 09:51 PM
Sorry but i think Federer-Gasquet is a lot more interesting than Vera-Kim, Richard is very good on grass (he had very bad luck with the draw) and last time he met Roger on grass was a very tight match

Agreed. IMO I'd prefer to watch Federer/Gasquet over Clijsters/Zvonareva any time!

tennisbuddy12
Jun 25th, 2006, 09:52 PM
wow im shocked...

Andrew..
Jun 25th, 2006, 10:06 PM
Stupid thread.


"Why in the world would ESPN show the no.1 seed..." :retard: :retard: :retard:

Wow, what a comment. ESPN2 is showing the undisputed king of grass and defending champion, playing Gasquet, a talented youngster who just won a grass court tuneup. What stupid coverage!

pav
Jun 25th, 2006, 10:07 PM
I don't like watching bloody men's tennis exceptions Nalbandian and Nadal only men who start with N! Federer's F'ing good but F'ing not exciting to watch:sad:

TomTennis
Jun 25th, 2006, 10:20 PM
Let me think: a 3 times Wimbledon winner and one of the best young prospects vs. Player who got once to the semis and player ranked in 40s..... The choice is easy.

as much as I like Vera and fine with Kim, there is really NO comparison between those 2 matches.

well said! :wavey: agreed!

Scotso
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:50 AM
I'm glad Vera won't be polluting my television.

Why wouldn't they show Federer vs. Gasquet? That match is much more appealing.

charmedRic
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:54 AM
Probably the hottest match as far as prospects go in the First round of both tournaments. I'm psyched for Federer & Gasquet.

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:55 AM
Well, I still subscribed to Live Wimbledon in case they aren't showing good matches later on. :p

.ivy.
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:58 AM
Personally, I'd prefer to watch Feds/Richie on grass than Kim/Vera. Kim's game is boring to me (like Nadal's) while Roger and Richie employ variety in their games (with those great backhands).

new-york
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:01 AM
Number One player & three time defending champion has the edge.

In any situation.

spencercarlos
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:03 AM
Okay this is getting really annoying. Why in the world would ESPN show the no.1 seed who will beat Gasquet on grass anyway? Kim vs. Vera is probably the closest match on the women's side and they are not even going to show it. Shame.
I donīt see any reason why they should broadcast Kim-Vera instead of Federer-Gasquet, less than two weeks ago the two played a 7-6 6-7 6-4 match, and Gasquet has beaten Federer before, and just won Nothinham this week.

Scotso
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:05 AM
Well, I still subscribed to Live Wimbledon in case they aren't showing good matches later on. :p

I thought that was only for Brits :o

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:10 AM
I thought that was only for Brits :o

:shrug: No, anyone can subscribe... It's available in most countries. Currently downloading -pova - Serena match to see what the quality is like. Finished in 20 mins, and gotta tell you - the quality isn't anything to write home about at all. :o I mean - you can definitely see everything, but it's not great quality.

Ryan
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:13 AM
It's just a better match. No question.

Drake1980
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:14 AM
I think they should show the Federer match personally but hopefully they'll show some of the Vera match as well.

tennissportmusic
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:16 AM
I have to say if I was in charge of a tv channel I would go with Roger V Richard.

SelesFan70
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:22 AM
I saw him this week, Gasquet can beat him :scared:

He "can", but he won't. ;)

Berlin_Calling
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:25 AM
Richard :sad:

dav abu
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:26 AM
Roger will get through but hopefully it will be a good match. Here (thanks to BBC interactive) we will flick between the R V R and K V V matches.

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:36 AM
Meh, I am excited more about Vera vs. Kim. :p

punk
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:39 AM
Vera V Kim is the match to watch tomorrow, I expect Roger to make the final without a fright.

MH0861
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:40 AM
Even if you don't like men's tennis, I think it would outrageous for anyone to think ESPN is wrong for choosing Federer/Gasquet over Clijsters/Zvonareva.

Volcana
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:48 AM
Okay this is getting really annoying. Why in the world would ESPN show the no.1 seed who will beat Gasquet on grass anyway? Kim vs. Vera is probably the closest match on the women's side and they are not even going to show it. Shame.I'm sure they'll show Clijsters vs Zvonareva in Belgium. Otherwise, Fedex is the star of this show. ESPN might show Venus instead of Fed, given the choice but I'm not even sure of that.

(Of course, what are the odds that they'd schedule the defending champs opposite each other?

junlee_vee
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:08 AM
Venus plays first on Tuesday. ;)

switz
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:19 AM
:lol: you must be kidding. of course in this wtaworld bubble you can maybe convince yourself that Clijsters/Zvonareva is more interesting but ask almost any member of the general public who that would want to watch and they'll say Federer.

Federer versus Gasquet is probably one of the most exciting first round slam matches in many years for people who actually want to watch quality tennis.

There's really no reason to expect Zvonareva to push Clijsters much in any event. Yes she played well in Birmingham but she beat she didn't take out any giants of the game facing Tu and Jackson in the semis/final.

I'm almost tempted to leave the Coldplay concert i'm going to tonight early i want to Fed versus Richie that much

MH0861
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:44 AM
:lol: you must be kidding. of course in this wtaworld bubble you can maybe convince yourself that Clijsters/Zvonareva is more interesting but ask almost any member of the general public who that would want to watch and they'll say Federer.

Federer versus Gasquet is probably one of the most exciting first round slam matches in many years for people who actually want to watch quality tennis.

There's really no reason to expect Zvonareva to push Clijsters much in any event. Yes she played well in Birmingham but she beat she didn't take out any giants of the game facing Tu and Jackson in the semis/final.

I'm almost tempted to leave the Coldplay concert i'm going to tonight early i want to Fed versus Richie that much

:worship:

Sally Struthers
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:49 AM
ESPN should show Roger's match. Kim will win 2 and 1 :o

faboozadoo15
Jun 26th, 2006, 04:04 AM
i think we'll get some kim highlights. calm down, and get with it.

roger is being shown for like a zillion reasons, and IMO, he's worth waking up at 8 for.

Sir Stefwhit
Jun 26th, 2006, 04:19 AM
I'm so sick of this talk about, "the quality of the game". Roger can beat someone 6-0,6-0,6-0 and have played brilliantly while doing so, with very few UE's from both players, but it still wont make it any less boring! I'll take a real competitive match over a 'high quality' one any day. To me a high quality match means highly entertaining, but to everyone else it means a match with very few UEs.

Although I have little interest in mens tennis, I am one of the many that would love to see that (Fed-Gasquet) first round match. As soon as the draw was announced that was definitely the most obvious 'must-see' and it's a good decision by ESPN.

With all that said, if Roger is blowing Richard out of the water, and my beloved Kimmie is in a tight fight with Vera, then they would obviously need to swith over. I don't mind sharring my viewing time with the fellas, I just hate it when their decissions aren't the ones that would satisfy most of their viewers.

Junex
Jun 26th, 2006, 04:28 AM
they have absolutely no coverage for Wimbledon.


^Tennis Chanel.....


so whats the reason for them to be called "The tennis Channel" ..... :confused:

TTC sucks!!! :devil:

switz
Jun 26th, 2006, 05:16 AM
I'm so sick of this talk about, "the quality of the game". Roger can beat someone 6-0,6-0,6-0 and have played brilliantly while doing so, with very few UE's from both players, but it still wont make it any less boring! I'll take a real competitive match over a 'high quality' one any day. To me a high quality match means highly entertaining, but to everyone else it means a match with very few UEs.



it's just like how some people love hollywood blockbusters while others prefer indie films with substance. fine either way.

No Name Face
Jun 26th, 2006, 05:19 AM
fed/gasquet >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kim routing vera 6-3, 6-0

pav
Jun 26th, 2006, 09:30 AM
All I can say is bloody Kimmy had better watch out if the new model courtesan Superbepa shows up!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v664/kahu/bigbep.jpg

Langers
Jun 26th, 2006, 09:37 AM
Okay this is getting really annoying. Why in the world would ESPN show the no.1 seed who will beat Gasquet on grass anyway? Kim vs. Vera is probably the closest match on the women's side and they are not even going to show it. Shame.
You're so pitiful. :rolleyes:

Anyone in their right mind would want to see Federer v Gasquet over that average match of yours. Clijsters will probably absolutely destroy her and will be over within an hour.

spudrsca
Jun 26th, 2006, 09:46 AM
That's why the men are getting paid more than the women.
The first round matches between men are much more interesting than the first rounds between women.
It's the men that make the first rounds of grand slam interesting, if there were only women, the quality of tennis would be not great.

tennisjunky
Jun 26th, 2006, 10:52 AM
I'm so sick of this talk about, "the quality of the game". Roger can beat someone 6-0,6-0,6-0 and have played brilliantly while doing so, with very few UE's from both players, but it still wont make it any less boring! I'll take a real competitive match over a 'high quality' one any day. To me a high quality match means highly entertaining, but to everyone else it means a match with very few UEs.people talk about the quality of matches and most times they sound stupid. everyone likes to see exciting matches with players playing their best. tennis stats are dated and dont tell you jack shit about quality. commentators and lame fans get caught up in those meaninless things. the exctiting matches are great because of good competition. agree that an entertaining match is the best quality. federer and gasquet are light years ahead of kim and vera in every category. true excitement never lies with kim, and vera as an opponent doesnt spice things up enough to make most people interested. only kim and vera fans would rather see them over federer and gasquet.

Williamsser
Jun 26th, 2006, 11:13 AM
I'd rather watch the Federer Gasquet match.

pav
Jun 26th, 2006, 11:19 AM
All this comaring quality etc. seems a bit silly to me ,light years ahead? federer? I have never managed to sit through an entire federer match yet, I don't think he might have all the shots, but he is unfortunately boring to watch,give me any woman's match ahead of those two.

chris whiteside
Jun 26th, 2006, 11:22 AM
There's going to be no play today (continuous rain) so the two mightn't be scheduled for the same time tomorrow!

LucasArg
Jun 26th, 2006, 11:25 AM
Federer is the show for tennis. The quality of his game right now is unbeatable.

How can you really expect Kim to be televised instead of him????? :retard:

Are you kidding me? :tape:

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:06 PM
All I can say is bloody Kimmy had better watch out if the new model courtesan Superbepa shows up!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v664/kahu/bigbep.jpg

*DEAD*

:haha:

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 12:12 PM
You guys don't sound like women's tennis fans. I don't think Federer is *that* exciting, and it's not a given how interesting that match is going to be. I guess Kim/Vera is more likely to be crap though, and I do understand why ESPN would show him.

That's why the men are getting paid more than the women.
The first round matches between men are much more interesting than the first rounds between women.
It's the men that make the first rounds of grand slam interesting, if there were only women, the quality of tennis would be not great.

Oh whatever. That's not always true.


it's just like how some people love hollywood blockbusters while others prefer indie films with substance. fine either way.

So women's tennis is like Hollywood blockbusters? :scratch: :rolleyes:

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 01:39 PM
So much for Vera-Kim being a blow-out (so far at least) :ras:

TonyP
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:22 PM
Its fun to watch Roger in his element, which Wimbledon is. And Gasquet is quite talented and making a fight out of it. I expect Roger to win in straights, but only if he continues to play on form, which he seems to be so far.

About not showing Kim, sorry, but she is not the defending champion or the number one seed.

Besides, they showed some of Martina's match and so we did get to see a top woman's player at work against a girl who had served five aces. She isn't bad, but Hingis still took the set 6-2. Pam Shriver says Martina already hit every shot known to woman.

bis2806
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:26 PM
They showed Kim-Vera for like 10 seconds and when Kim won the game to lead 3-2, Vera smashed her racket into the grass :lol:

Ryan
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:31 PM
So much for Vera-Kim being a blow-out (so far at least) :ras:


Still, Kim-Vera would have to be going 7-6 6-7 11-10 before the majority of the viewers would rather watch it over Federer-Gasquet. I agree that I'd rather watch a more entertaining match than a boring one of high quality, which is why I'm a bigger fan of women's tennis. ;) However, it cant be denied that men's tennis is just plain BETTER quality in terms of shotmaking etc. I find Federer boring most of the time too, but I can still appreciate his awesomeness.

cellophane
Jun 26th, 2006, 02:35 PM
Still, Kim-Vera would have to be going 7-6 6-7 11-10 before the majority of the viewers would rather watch it over Federer-Gasquet. I agree that I'd rather watch a more entertaining match than a boring one of high quality, which is why I'm a bigger fan of women's tennis. ;) However, it cant be denied that men's tennis is just plain BETTER quality in terms of shotmaking etc. I find Federer boring most of the time too, but I can still appreciate his awesomeness.

:yeah:


Federer usually outclasses his opponents, so I wouldn't say it's high quality if the opponent doesn't measure up. If Venus was bageling someone, it wouldn't be exciting either.

It was amusing how Martina had to wait for Olga to get on the court. :lol:

tennisjunky
Jun 26th, 2006, 05:34 PM
Federer usually outclasses his opponents, so I wouldn't say it's high quality if the opponent doesn't measure up. If Venus was bageling someone, it wouldn't be exciting either.

It was amusing how Martina had to wait for Olga to get on the court. :lol:agree!! so many of his matches are snooze fest and boring as hell. that it why it becomes exciting when you have a player that can challenge him and beat him. problem with espn is they never leave a federer match no matter the score. even though fed-richard is the match to show, that doesnt mean feel the same about all his matches. most times federer matches are too boring for words. this time around his draw is fun and most of matches look good, even the early rounds.

jj74
Jun 26th, 2006, 05:47 PM
I think most of you are focus your atention in Federer and for me he isn't the reason to prefer Fed-Richard to Vera-Kim. The reason is Gasquet, he is very talented and sooner or later he will step up and become a top player, he is probably the player all the seeds wants to avoid in first round. It will be a match between the king of grass and a young player who is very good on grass. Kim versus Vera is interesting but not so much

VeeReeDavJCap81
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:10 AM
Gasquet...:hearts:

switz
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:19 AM
So women's tennis is like Hollywood blockbusters? :scratch: :rolleyes:

it's just too complicated for you to understand. but keeping rolling your eyes anyway - it makes you look smart :)

switz
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:26 AM
I think most of you are focus your atention in Federer and for me he isn't the reason to prefer Fed-Richard to Vera-Kim. The reason is Gasquet, he is very talented and sooner or later he will step up and become a top player, he is probably the player all the seeds wants to avoid in first round. It will be a match between the king of grass and a young player who is very good on grass. Kim versus Vera is interesting but not so much

that should just be obvious. Gasquet is one of the future faces of tennis playing against someone who is likely to be one of the greatest ever. That is where the excitement comes from. If Federer where playing Tipsarevic or something then you could maybe argue Kim/Vera should be shown - even though it still wouldn't be.

Even if Roger wipes the floor with Gasquet there is value becasue you'll still see some fantastic shot making and more importantly people will see that Roger is not the only player out there with an excitingly different game

bis2806
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:47 PM
I can't stand this. They're showing Agassi now after having shown Tim and Blake. Next they are showing RAFAEL NADALLLLL and then Roddick. Woooo! When are we ever going to see Kim and Vera who are now tied 5 all!

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:47 PM
So glad I subscribed for Live Wimbledon now.

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:48 PM
And so much for Roger-Richar being the better match. :ras:

bis2806
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:48 PM
How is the quality?

davidmario
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:49 PM
Buy Wimbledon LIVE. I'm watching Clijsters-Zvonareva and it is a stunning match! They are hitting the ball so well.

And Zvonareva is so funny to watch:lol:

bis2806
Jun 27th, 2006, 04:53 PM
Is vera crying uncontrollably? I would buy Wimbledon Live if I didn't have classes like I will until just after the end of Wimbledon. Sucks.

junlee_vee
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:25 PM
I can't stand this. They're showing Agassi now after having shown Tim and Blake. Next they are showing RAFAEL NADALLLLL and then Roddick. Woooo! When are we ever going to see Kim and Vera who are now tied 5 all!

Boo hoo!! :rolleyes: The majority of tennis fans would rather watch Agassi (who has now won! :) ) play than the emotional wreck that is Vera Zvonerava.

bis2806
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:29 PM
I am going PSYCHO now. They won't even show the last points of Kim-Vera. What the fuck is wrong with them?! Fuckers.

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:35 PM
Boo hoo!! :rolleyes: The majority of tennis fans would rather watch Agassi (who has now won! :) ) play than the emotional wreck that is Vera Zvonerava.

Men's tennis fans maybe.

Anyway, Agassi's match was :yawn:

junlee_vee
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:39 PM
Nah, I'm just keeping it real. Agassi is a legend and this is his last Wimbledon...people want to watch him play. And it was a good match...unless you're into emotional breakdowns and crying as opposed to good tennis. :shrug:

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:42 PM
Well... people in general would likely have no clue who Vera is, while Andre is obviously a household name, so I can see why they showed him. But it doesn't change the fact that it was zzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Unfortunately, they don't care about that.

P.S. Vera didn't cry today. :p And the match wasn't that bad.

KClijsters
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:50 PM
Well... people in general would likely have no clue who Vera is, while Andre is obviously a household name, so I can see why they showed him. But it doesn't change the fact that it was zzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Unfortunately, they don't care about that.

P.S. Vera didn't cry today. :p And the match wasn't that bad.

No, the match between Kim and Vera was great.... I really liked that match... both were playing well..... there were some great rally's...... it's sad that someone had to loose.

Tennisaddict
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:54 PM
although the thing i don't get as the tourney progesses,we basicly know who's gunna be in the final on the mens side yet they show the matches anyway,and it's like we already know the winner before the match has started while on the womens side it's much different.

Good point, I also like the unpredictability on the women's side.
But you do get unpredictability when Safin plays though :tape:

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:54 PM
No, the match between Kim and Vera was great.... I really liked that match... both were playing well..... there were some great rally's...... it's sad that someone had to loose.

Oh yeah. I meant the Agassi match was zzzzz from what I saw of it briefly.

nouf
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:57 PM
french channel sport+ today

hingis
henin
kim
hantuchova
kuznetsova

frenchies rulez! :-)

hablo
Jun 27th, 2006, 05:59 PM
what no safin on espn ? :sad:

junlee_vee
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:00 PM
I really shouldn't talk about Vera that way. She is a professional any way you look at it, so I have to respect that. I just don't like watching her because she self destructs so often. And the beginning of the Agassi match was pretty bad just because Andre was so out of it...but once he got into it, his shot making was nice!! :cool: But I guess I'm just biased towards Andre!

The_Pov
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:34 PM
Blake - danish dude
Henman - Soderling
Federer - Gasquet
Agassi - Pashanski
Nadal
Roddick......

:o
Unlucky :haha: Over here we get to watch whatever match we want! :p

cellophane
Jun 27th, 2006, 06:36 PM
Unlucky :haha: Over here we get to watch whatever match we want! :p

Which courts can you pick from?