The Flow

Sept 8, 8.05 PM EST: I tune into the channel that telecasts US Open Tennis - TSN - to watch my favourite woman tennis player Henin hit it for the title. There's Carole King singing "God bless America." I get a little irritated and switch to the Discovery Channel. I see the twin towers collapsing - it's the documentary 'What really happened inside the twin towers.' I switch back to TSN; she's still singing "God bless America." Yeah, sure!


Anonymous said...

American tennis coverage sucks man. I know it better than most. They once stopped transmitting Federer vs Almagro to show Roddick vs Gimelstob.

Btw, Federer is getting too awesome. Inspite of his below par game this US Open, he is going to win it now. Oh my God. It's time for the fighter in Gasquet to stand up and show Federer his place and his age. I hate Nadal so much. And Djokovic too.

Suresh said...

Yeah, Federer didn't look as invincible in this open - especially in the semifinal. What a terrible match that was?
Final was much better. I wish he broke Djokovic a few times though. I don't hate Djokovic as much as Nadal. Actually, I kind of like his personality. Just that his game lacks flavour (as he has often confessed). Gasquet's game is alright but he's getting chucked in the first few rounds almost every time. He doesn't seem like a grand slam winner to me.

No the coverage was alright. Carole King was singing "God bless America" with a choir on court.

Anonymous said...

No actually this time, Gasquet had fever and gave a walkover to Donald Young. Flimsy excuse, I know for pro player. He's like a spoilt child I guess.

Frankly I don't see Djokovic beating Gasquet consistently because I have seen them play each other and Djokovic had to fake an injury in the second set to actually win the final at Estoril. That's why Djokovic is disgusting to watch. The next few years would be interesting to watch Gasquet's advance. He can end up with a great career and multi grandslams, or a nobody who just plays with a lot of flair and brains now and then.

And its most likely that he would end up as latter, thats what makes it interesting to follow his career. Self destructing geniuses are always a treat to watch, especially in their moments of brilliance. That's why I would rather watch Gasquet creaming a backhand pass and then lose the match rather than Federer's crappy play that still fetches him a win.

"Choir on Court"? Haha.. I didn't watch any match this time because I just moved house and the cable isn't yet connected. The coverage still sucks. For a regular tennis watcher like me. The masters tournament coverage is the worst.

Anonymous said...

Anyway my point was there's only a very thin line between a grand slam winner and a top 20 player. If Djokovic can almost cross that line with his one dimensional game and disgusting gamesmanship, so can Gasquet when he wants to.

Funny thing is I backed Federer in the same way around 2001 after I realised my favourite Guga Kuerten had an injury and lost his game. He was as inconsistent as Gasquet but he wanted to win very much and cried when he didn't. And I somehow was more than right. I just thought Federer will win atleast 3-4 GS, but this guy's going too far. And he needs to be checked because he is not playing superbly like he did in 2004-05. And its a shame if he is allowed to go on and on like this.

Suresh said...

Frankly, I don't find Gasquet's backhand passing shots any better than Federer's. I'm surprised you call his game crappy. He's one of the few players who actually develop a strategy against people who they find difficult the first few games of the first set. Ex: Fed's 4th match against Lopez (and the one against Isner).
Federer is one of the few that make Tennis more than momentary displays of exceptional skill (like Gasquet does). But a planned out execution that requires the skill level to start with.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Fed is a great strategist. It feels like he is playing chess out there. I find his game crappy since 2006, compared to 2004-05, not compared to Sampras or Agassi or anybody. That's when Fed had a strategy and executed it almost flawlessly. True he lost a few more games then, but it was because he lost it to brilliant players like Gasquet, Safin and Kuerten. Now Fed is constantly making errors and is saved only by his improved serve. The flashy shots on break points seem like fluke (atleast to me).

What's special about Gasquet is the near extreme grip on his backhand, more like Gustavo Kuerten. It's simply a thing of beauty. Especially the running backhand pass. I doubt I have ever seen Fed hitting one (just for aesthetic purpose). Fed's backhand is a simple eastern grip and is susceptible to high top spin shots and is way flatter than Gasquet's.

I like tennis. I love whoever plays aggressive tennis and without a double handed backhand. Exceptions are Safin and Baghdatis.

The Individualist said...

I say that double-handed backhand shots make male players look feminine in an ungainly way. Am I a sexist? :p

Anonymous said...


You say you like Djokovic's personality. Did you mean his imitations of other players? or his manipulation of media into projecting himself as a fun loving kid?

I think he is a disgusting player because of his antics on the court. Worse than Nadal because he is clever at hiding it. I may be saying this because I like Gasquet, but the way he struggled against Gasquet in the Estoril final and the antic he pulled in the second set to finally get into Gasquet's head and win the match was only cheap. I felt so sorry for Gasquet who was surprised that an opponent limping in the second set was running like a hare and broke his first serve in the third set. He did the same to Federer too in Montreal and beat him, closely though.

I think he is just an attention freak. If you notice the soundbyte that his mother gave after the final, you would know he is the mould of Sharapova and Williams. I say this because his parents are his coach and his mother said that his son is 'better than Federer and lost because of a long season and inexperience'. Such a joke. As Federer said, 'Novak is a djoker'. I hope Gasquet shows him his place the next time they meet. And he is perfectly capable of doing that.

CoNfUsEd said...

This is not related to this post, but edho, ennala mudinjadhu

Suresh said...


I've seen some of his youtube videos (off-court), and I thought he's a fun guy. I never really liked his imitations though; especially when he brought it on court. I thought it was, as you say, done deliberately to sway the crowd on to his side. I think Roddick's imitations are a lot more playful and 'agenda-free' than his. Other than that, I haven't seen too many matches of his in general, so his antics probably slipped too. For some reason I didn't like him winning either. I thought his game working for no good reason. Especially the first round match. One of the commentators wrote him off and I sided with him.
But I don't think his antics is the only thing that pulled him through all the rounds. This may sound a little blunt, but aren't the players supposed see through his 'antics' given his history with "injuries"? I'll be glad to watch he and Nadal fighting it out - ugly players and ugly games.


Thanks for the link. I didn't watch that interview though, I saw Satyaraj's instead. It had me laughing like anything. He had made fun of 'Sivaji' and the movie industry in general. He's one of a kind in that regard. Even Kamal cannot come out of his false-modesty/honesty and say those things.

Anonymous said...

Yeah Suresh,

He has a decent game and a good brain. His obvious weapon is his forehand that is flat and powerful and he hits it deep one shot and tries a drop shot the next shot. He does this thing so often that its now predictable. He has lot of sting on that forehand and can trouble anyone, but to win he has to do a little more. Like playing with opponents mind, like endlessly bouncing balls or faking injuries.

You are right, opponents should see through his injury fakings and its their problem not his. It looks like a strange tactic in men's tennis to lose a set to win a match. So far, Djoko seems to be the only guy who is successfully following such a tactic.

I would love Gasquet to do such tricks and win atleast one GS, but for some reason these players with beautiful games don't have that attitude. I got a little carried away in my last comment though about Djoko. It is to his credit, through hook or crook that he wins matches. And he will win a GS before Gasquet, and that makes me sad. Kind of like the time when I felt bad about Hewitt and Roddick winning Grand Slams when Federer wasn't getting even a look in.

If Nadal and Djoko play each other, each set will take 90 minutes to be completed. Djoko delays with his annoying ball bouncing tactics and Nadal takes extended breaks between games. Disgusting players, both are. They make tennis boring to watch.

Do you remember the Roddick-Gasquet wimbledon match? The five sets took 3 1/2 hrs. A similar match between Djoko and Baghdatis just before their match took 5 1/2 hrs. Because both Djoko and Baghdatis are time wasters. A similar match between Nadal and Djoko would take a week to be completed. I am sure Fed dislikes Djoko and he said that quite bluntly last year. Ofcourse he is trying to be diplomatic now that Djoko is no.3 in the world.

Anonymous said...

What I like about the interview is that pose of 'Evlo saadhichitten.... but I am still humble.'

The superb question is ' After the brilliant Sivaji, Where you have reached? Enga neenga reach aayirikkinga?' The reply was even mindblowing. He used a simple quantification technique of showing the level 'vetri' by streching both of his hands and later realised that he needed thousand hands to show the exact proportion of success. But we get the idea Shankar. You are great, Rajni is great, Tamil makkal are great. Now please go and kill yourself before your kids watch this disgusting interview and realise how much of a moron their father is.

Suresh said...

^^ hahaha @ vetri-hand comment

Post a Comment

©2009 english-tamil