El Pistolero said:
Tennis can be unpredictable.
Tennis is possibly the most predictable sport.
For one its a simple one on one format so the better usually prevails.
For another its a long period of time (or points anyway), so having a temporary boost of good form will not give you a win. You have to keep the level up to win.
Also the large number of points mean that a wrong call or a mistake will have minimal impact, whereas in many other sports a wrong call can settle the game.
Most importantly, you cannot defend a lead. There is no road or clock to run out. You actually have to grab the win. Even if you are 2 sets and 5 love up, you have to play to a high level to win that final game. If you take your foot of the pedal, you dont get the win.
Thus, most of the sumptuous that cause upsets are choked out. For an upset to come the better player needs to be weaker and the worse player needs to have the game of their lives.
auscyclefan94 said:
El Pisterlero 1 The Hitch 0
I wanted Clijsters to win that match more than Pistolero did, and I predicted that she would win the match.
So I dont really understand.
the asian said:
If he played about 10 years earlier, he would have won 1 or 2 French opens.
Guys like Albert Costa, Gaston Gaudio and Juan Carlos Ferraro all won a French open and Ferrer certainly would have had a decent shot.
For him to win a slam, Djoker, Fed and Nadal all have to be injured at the same time.
David Ferrer is about 10 cm too short. Hes as good a player as anyone else but you just cant cut it in the modern game at 175.