Roger Federer breezed to his 12th Grand Slam bouncing Djokovic in straights. Similar to the Roddick match, Federer was pushed but passed all tests with flying colors. I thought Djokovic had a decent shot at getting him this time because Federer played some of his worst tennis in a long while against Davydenko in the semis. Davydenko had his chances and couldn't convert and neither could Djokovoc. The Federer train rolls on.
Justine Henin defeated both Williams sisters and breezed to her latest Grand Slam taking out Kuznetsova in straights. (Serena lost in the quarters but couldn't bring herself to acknowledge that she lost to a superior opponent, what a typical suburban American brat!) Sherapova stumbled early on, Kim Clijsters retired early and unless the Williams sisters feel like truly dedicating themselves again, I'd say Henin has a decent shot at a Grand Slam next year.
Monday, September 10, 2007
U-17 World Cup update
Nigeria staved off Spain in PK's, which I didn't get to see because the DVR doesn't do overtime (yeah, I know its my fault, but damn man, this technology gets right to the edge of being perfect and then nickel-and-dimes then final step, you know?). Damn, man, Nigeria won every game they played and beat France, Japan, Colombia, Argentina, Germany and Spain--not an easy road! Interestingly enough, I would've considered Nigeria's triumph an upset but perhaps not. This is actually Nigeria's 3rd U-17 World Cup while Germany has won zero.
I did get to see all of Nigeria's match with Germany (Nigeria 2-1 Germany), a good one. Felt bad for Germany's keeper: both of Nigeria's goals went right through his hands. They were both bullets from outside, the first led to a rebound when the keeper couldn't corral it, the second was a bit of a fluke that touched off the keeper's hands right into the goal. I saw a bit of Spain's semi-final tussle with Ghana, I thought they were evenly matched, Spain's goalie came up big.
All that said, this was a sloppy tournament: sloppy play, sloppy officiating, sloppy television coverage. Its nice to catch the future stars but I'll like all these kids better when they're in the majors.
I did get to see all of Nigeria's match with Germany (Nigeria 2-1 Germany), a good one. Felt bad for Germany's keeper: both of Nigeria's goals went right through his hands. They were both bullets from outside, the first led to a rebound when the keeper couldn't corral it, the second was a bit of a fluke that touched off the keeper's hands right into the goal. I saw a bit of Spain's semi-final tussle with Ghana, I thought they were evenly matched, Spain's goalie came up big.
All that said, this was a sloppy tournament: sloppy play, sloppy officiating, sloppy television coverage. Its nice to catch the future stars but I'll like all these kids better when they're in the majors.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
US Open update
Federer smooshed Roddick last night like an ant. Federer is the best I've ever seen, he's a machine. Roddick had his big booming serve going but if you can't take the tiebreaks, you ain't beating Federer. Tennis is a funny game like that: it looks like Federer smoked him straight sets but it was actually an extraordinarily even match-up. Federer didn't get any break points on Roddick until the middle of the 3rd set! Roddick had more winners than errors! When two guys both play at this high level, it’s the tiniest moments that make the difference and Federer took them all. He's a great champion, I think he showed that against Nadal at Wimbledon. You got to remember Federer rarely gets challenged by anybody, he only gets pushed by the best in the business and when he does, he beats them.
Pete Sampras made the comment last week that Federer doesn't have as much competition as Sampras did, and thus Sampras was a better champion. I understand his point: Sampras had Edberg, Becker, Courier, Agassi, Connors, Lendl, Chang, Ivanesevic, Rafter, and others up to and including Federer, Roddick and Safin. Federer has really only had to deal with Agassi, Roddick, Nadal, Hewitt and Safin and that's pretty much it--and that's a mixed bag at that. Safin never came close to his potential, Agassi was on the way out during Federer's rise, Nadal is unbeatable on clay but beatable otherwise, Hewitt's peak period was not that long and has long since passed and Roddick just can't break through.
So while I agree with the 1st half of Sampras's thought ('I had tougher competition'), I don't think I buy the 2nd half ('Therefore, I was a better champion'). The reason Federer has no competition (other than Nadal in Paris) is because he's killing people, he's crushing careers around him, he does not let the other guys win. There is no competition because Federer doesn't allow it.
Federer's career reminds me of Mike Tyson. When Tyson burst onto the scene Ali was long gone and Holmes was hanging around getting old. Tyson made his name by brushing aside all the old guys and then he dominated for 4-5 years. He ushered in the next generation and then dominated it. That's what Federer has done: he chased off Sampras, Agassi and Kafelnikov, then he outlasted Hewitt and Safin, suffocated Roddick and his only real challenger is Nadal. I suspect Federer will get old and retire rather than go to prison like Tyson. On Charlie Rose the other day he suggested that he was aiming for 2012 Olympics in London as potentially his grand hurrah, which I'd say is within his grasp. So that means he's got his eye on 20 majors, 2 gold medals and 3 or 4 Davis Cups. I bet he takes most all of those.
Pete Sampras made the comment last week that Federer doesn't have as much competition as Sampras did, and thus Sampras was a better champion. I understand his point: Sampras had Edberg, Becker, Courier, Agassi, Connors, Lendl, Chang, Ivanesevic, Rafter, and others up to and including Federer, Roddick and Safin. Federer has really only had to deal with Agassi, Roddick, Nadal, Hewitt and Safin and that's pretty much it--and that's a mixed bag at that. Safin never came close to his potential, Agassi was on the way out during Federer's rise, Nadal is unbeatable on clay but beatable otherwise, Hewitt's peak period was not that long and has long since passed and Roddick just can't break through.
So while I agree with the 1st half of Sampras's thought ('I had tougher competition'), I don't think I buy the 2nd half ('Therefore, I was a better champion'). The reason Federer has no competition (other than Nadal in Paris) is because he's killing people, he's crushing careers around him, he does not let the other guys win. There is no competition because Federer doesn't allow it.
Federer's career reminds me of Mike Tyson. When Tyson burst onto the scene Ali was long gone and Holmes was hanging around getting old. Tyson made his name by brushing aside all the old guys and then he dominated for 4-5 years. He ushered in the next generation and then dominated it. That's what Federer has done: he chased off Sampras, Agassi and Kafelnikov, then he outlasted Hewitt and Safin, suffocated Roddick and his only real challenger is Nadal. I suspect Federer will get old and retire rather than go to prison like Tyson. On Charlie Rose the other day he suggested that he was aiming for 2012 Olympics in London as potentially his grand hurrah, which I'd say is within his grasp. So that means he's got his eye on 20 majors, 2 gold medals and 3 or 4 Davis Cups. I bet he takes most all of those.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Fed Ex Standings
1 Tiger Woods 30,574
2 Vijay Singh 19,129
3 Jim Furyk 16,691
4 Phil Mickelson 16,037
5 K.J. Choi 15,485
6 Rory Sabbatini 13,548
7 Zach Johnson 13,341
8 Charles Howell III 12,126
9 Brandt Snedeker 11,870
10 Adam Scott 11,196
11 Scott Verplank 10,691
12 Steve Stricker 10,621
13 Sergio Garcia 10,547
14 Woody Austin 10,483
15 Hunter Mahan 10,185
I wasn't able to catch much of Mickelson dueling Tiger over the weekend but its nice to see Phil back. Funny to suggest that he's had a bad year since he's still in 4th--ahead of Choi, Sabbatini and Johnson, who've all had impressive seasons--but he hasn't had much impact in the majors this year and that's the sign of a bad year. I'm not really rooting for anyone but when the best are at their best then that's what best.
2 Vijay Singh 19,129
3 Jim Furyk 16,691
4 Phil Mickelson 16,037
5 K.J. Choi 15,485
6 Rory Sabbatini 13,548
7 Zach Johnson 13,341
8 Charles Howell III 12,126
9 Brandt Snedeker 11,870
10 Adam Scott 11,196
11 Scott Verplank 10,691
12 Steve Stricker 10,621
13 Sergio Garcia 10,547
14 Woody Austin 10,483
15 Hunter Mahan 10,185
I wasn't able to catch much of Mickelson dueling Tiger over the weekend but its nice to see Phil back. Funny to suggest that he's had a bad year since he's still in 4th--ahead of Choi, Sabbatini and Johnson, who've all had impressive seasons--but he hasn't had much impact in the majors this year and that's the sign of a bad year. I'm not really rooting for anyone but when the best are at their best then that's what best.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
U-17 World Cup Update
Quarterfinals
France U17 P 1 - 1 P Spain U17
Ghana U17 2 - 0 Peru U17
Argentina U17 0 - 2 Nigeria U17
England U17 1 - 4 Germany U17
Interesting to see the African teams knock out the South Americans. Wouldn't call it a surprise to see Germany get past England but, man, that's quite a beatdown.
Wednesday
Spain-Ghana
Thursday
Nigeria-Germany
Can the Africans keep it going and knock out the Europeans next? I'll go with Germany and Ghana, though I didn't do so hot in the last round: 'I'll take Spain, Peru, Argentina and England'
France U17 P 1 - 1 P Spain U17
Ghana U17 2 - 0 Peru U17
Argentina U17 0 - 2 Nigeria U17
England U17 1 - 4 Germany U17
Interesting to see the African teams knock out the South Americans. Wouldn't call it a surprise to see Germany get past England but, man, that's quite a beatdown.
Wednesday
Spain-Ghana
Thursday
Nigeria-Germany
Can the Africans keep it going and knock out the Europeans next? I'll go with Germany and Ghana, though I didn't do so hot in the last round: 'I'll take Spain, Peru, Argentina and England'
FIBA update
Championship
USA 118-81 Argentina
3rd place
Puerto Rico 111-107 Brazil
Got to be honest: never figured out how this tournament worked. And even though the stars finally showed up for some reason the talking heads yawned their way through it instead of getting into it. The games were all on at weird times and I was only able to catch random pieces of a handful of games but if given the chance I could've been totally into this. Our greatest--most watchable--stars coming together to whomp the shit out of our neighbors? Dude, why does no one want to see this?
I love international play. As fans we're supposed to be peeved that David Beckham flies to England to play (though no one seemed to mind that his Galaxy teammate Landon Donovan played in Sweden the same day) and that Carmelo Anthony should forego playing for his country to save himself for the Denver Nuggets (yeah, who could pass that up?). But I say fuck all that nonsense! Ignore the sports talk clowns! Look, its more games with a whole new array of the stars you already know and love--why wouldn't we want that? It's freakin' awesome!
USA 118-81 Argentina
3rd place
Puerto Rico 111-107 Brazil
Got to be honest: never figured out how this tournament worked. And even though the stars finally showed up for some reason the talking heads yawned their way through it instead of getting into it. The games were all on at weird times and I was only able to catch random pieces of a handful of games but if given the chance I could've been totally into this. Our greatest--most watchable--stars coming together to whomp the shit out of our neighbors? Dude, why does no one want to see this?
I love international play. As fans we're supposed to be peeved that David Beckham flies to England to play (though no one seemed to mind that his Galaxy teammate Landon Donovan played in Sweden the same day) and that Carmelo Anthony should forego playing for his country to save himself for the Denver Nuggets (yeah, who could pass that up?). But I say fuck all that nonsense! Ignore the sports talk clowns! Look, its more games with a whole new array of the stars you already know and love--why wouldn't we want that? It's freakin' awesome!
First day of school
App St. beat Michigan over the weekend and the talk is that this is one of the biggest upsets in sports history. Biggest upset in sports history? Gimme a break--you're comparing this to the Miracle on Ice? You crazy! Isn't it much more likely that Michigan's just overrated? Look, App State has won back-to-back Championships--a lower division, yes, but clearly they're used to winning games--they've got the longest winning streak in the nation. It doesn't strike me as that amazing that App won a game as an underdog. And the flip side: last year Michigan inched toward a national championship, then fell flat on their asses and hasn't done anything since. Why are we so amazed by this result?
Michigan is currently ranked #33; the last 1-A team that App St. beat was Wake Forest, currently ranked #39. Michigan was ranked #5 but upon seond thought they are now ranked #33--where they apparently belonged all along! They're marginally ahead of Wake Forest, a fellow losing contestant of mighty App St. Is this that big of a deal? This is bigger than Buster Douglas beating Tyson? Bigger than the Red Sox coming back from 3-0 on the Yanks? Dude, I'd put McEnroe beating Borg ahead of this!
Now consider the vicissitudes of college football. Now that Michigan has completely dropped out of the top 25, they have no shot of getting back in the championship race at all. They still have to play Penn State, Ohio State and Wisconsin (the only noteworthy teams on their schedule) and even if they beat them all, they're still out of the race. Okay, but if they'd been ranked #32 in the pre-season and beat all of these teams, they still would have been out of the race. Even with those 3 solid wins, from #32 they would have had to leap frog so many teams that it simply wouldn't have happened for them. (And of course, for those 3 squads to all lose to the #32 team, they would invariably have lost other games which would make them worthless victories and thus Michigan wouldn't have gotten any credit anyway!) The real upset here is that Michigan was ranked where they didn't deserve to be from the git-go.
The only thing that made the Michigan Wolverines a 'good' team is that they were ranked #5 without ever having to play a game. Now they're no longer a 'good' team even if they run the table from here. App State on the other hand is looking at a 3rd straight championship--doesn't strike me as that great of an upset. I understand the oddsmakers have been trumped, but I dare say this ain't this biggest upset in the history of sports!
(Incidentally, I heard App's division referred to as 'formerly known as 1-AA' on numerous occasions over the weekend. So what is it currently known as and why are we still calling it by the old name?)
Michigan is currently ranked #33; the last 1-A team that App St. beat was Wake Forest, currently ranked #39. Michigan was ranked #5 but upon seond thought they are now ranked #33--where they apparently belonged all along! They're marginally ahead of Wake Forest, a fellow losing contestant of mighty App St. Is this that big of a deal? This is bigger than Buster Douglas beating Tyson? Bigger than the Red Sox coming back from 3-0 on the Yanks? Dude, I'd put McEnroe beating Borg ahead of this!
Now consider the vicissitudes of college football. Now that Michigan has completely dropped out of the top 25, they have no shot of getting back in the championship race at all. They still have to play Penn State, Ohio State and Wisconsin (the only noteworthy teams on their schedule) and even if they beat them all, they're still out of the race. Okay, but if they'd been ranked #32 in the pre-season and beat all of these teams, they still would have been out of the race. Even with those 3 solid wins, from #32 they would have had to leap frog so many teams that it simply wouldn't have happened for them. (And of course, for those 3 squads to all lose to the #32 team, they would invariably have lost other games which would make them worthless victories and thus Michigan wouldn't have gotten any credit anyway!) The real upset here is that Michigan was ranked where they didn't deserve to be from the git-go.
The only thing that made the Michigan Wolverines a 'good' team is that they were ranked #5 without ever having to play a game. Now they're no longer a 'good' team even if they run the table from here. App State on the other hand is looking at a 3rd straight championship--doesn't strike me as that great of an upset. I understand the oddsmakers have been trumped, but I dare say this ain't this biggest upset in the history of sports!
(Incidentally, I heard App's division referred to as 'formerly known as 1-AA' on numerous occasions over the weekend. So what is it currently known as and why are we still calling it by the old name?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
