« Photoshop Disaster? Nope, a Mimicking Error | Main | Forgotten Camera: Jan Morén »

Sunday, 07 September 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00df351e888f883400e554ecba358833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference OT: What the—?:

Comments

He's been bubbling under the top ten for some time now. He seems to display most un-British attributes of focused aggression and skill - we normally specialise in mindless violence and incompetence. Oh, and he's Scottish by the way.

He's been around for a few years. He beat Federer in 2006, and also this year. If you seriously "never even heard of" him before, you need to watch more tennis.

Whoa! If only he'd done that at Wimbledon!

Yes, indeed, Murray has come up through the ranks quietly. He's not a flashy, trashy fellow so he's not as attractive to lenses as the sneering Nadal. It's entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that he'll beat the road-weary Federer Monday if he can keep his head together. (He has beaten Federer in the past.)

If he stays on the radar Nike will, no doubt, stuff his shorts with cash and update his fashion style from the 1970's.

The hard court at the US Open is now faster than Wimbledon, and Nadal's spins are less effective on this surface. Nadal's high bouncing balls are also less effective against tall people and those with two handed backhands. All that said, Nadal is great on every surface and the young Murray played a brilliant match.

"Nadal's high bouncing balls are also less effective against tall people"

Amin,
I'm no expert, but Murray looked to me to be taking the ball *very* early. Like Connors did when he was young....

Mike J.

Who is Murray?

He only owns a 2-1 career mark against Federer.

That's all :-)

Scottish fella actually.
Miserable to boot. Good player tho

Andy Murray is (hopefully) the next Fred Perry.

The joke here is that if a Scot wins he's British, if he loses he's Scottish! Andy is our great British hope and the new darling of Wimbledon. Go Andy!

Oh, and that gesture (showing us his biceps): he was roundly criticized in his first year in the seniors for not having enough stamina after he lost in four or five sets. In the later sets he was clearly exhausted. At first I think he was saying "I'm fit now!", but I think it has just become a Murray celebration gesture now.

Disclaimer: I'm not a tennis fan, just an occasional observer and deducer.

If you are following tennis outside the US Open, you may remember that Nadal was defeated at the same stage (semi) in straight sets by a French guy named Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.

Now *that* was a surprise.

Andy Murray, on the other hand, has been a promising young Brit (some would say Scot) for a couple of years.

He was a contender for the last spot at the Masters cup last year until the last tournament, and was ranked #6 before the U.S. Open. So a great achievement, but hopefully a sign of more to come.

Btw, great picture. Now if this was a photography blog, there would be lots of info about hardware, lens, aperture, etc. ;-)

http://psc.photoshelter.com/image/PSC000854818
Mike,
More Scottish muscles you won't recognize.

Chris Hoy current triple world champion and now triple Olympic Champion. I don't suppose they showed much of the cycling on US telly. If you are curious look for the Keirin video on the BBC website

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics/cycling/7565356.stm

Must be all the porridge

Definitely Scottish.

"you need to watch more tennis"

I would enjoy that, but I don't have cable and in my market they didn't even show the men's final of the U.S. Open on TV. We basically get two tournaments a year on TV, Wimbledon and the Open.

I presume the final was shown on cable...but I wouldn't know.

Mike J.

Well...Despite having a whole training entourage Murray collapsed like a cheap card table in the championship. My impression was that, despite being young, strong, and skillful he was simply not mentally tough enough to withstand Roger's game.

Nevertheless, I can't feel too bad for Murray. Although he lost he still took home over $1 million in prize money. ($750,000 in runner-up prize and another $500,000 for something else.) Nice payday.

Whose arm is that?

The coverage Murray has gotten up to this past week was too often about Wimbledon hopes and hype rather than his actual accomplishments and progress. Even though I do casually follow tennis, his speed and tactical brilliance were news to me.

We did get the Monday evening final on CBS. Sad for some of us that most tennis coverage has moved to cable. On the other hand, the sport loses much in the translation to TV, IMO. Anyway, with Federer in good form, hungry, and with an extra day's rest, the winner of the Murray/Nadal semi was a long shot.

The comments to this entry are closed.