Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Anyone else getting an error with their Prime?
Matteo!!!
Chuffed for him, would have been an absolute gutter had he lost that from the position he was in throughout that 5th set. 5th match point. Well done lad!
If nadal doesn't get injured does Matteo have any chance?
Bianca Andreescu is the best thing to happen to the WTA tour for years and years, bar nothing.
If nadal doesn't get injured does Matteo have any chance?
Bit harsh on Osaka
I agree though. Ironically enough outside of those two, the one before that was probably Andreescu's next opponent. That'll happen when you have variety in your game, always fun watching Bencic casually without much effort rip great return after great return at the Hopman Cup off 110/120mph serves from the men.
On a slightly unrelated note, I find it really weird how much Andreescu and Bencic look alike.
I can see Nadal becoming the joint goat by the French Open next year. Federer can only realistically win Wimbledon now so he will probably end up being overtook by both Nadal and Djokovic.
Just going back to our conversation a few days ago mate, just out of curiosity, would you currently rate Stan and Andy as exact equals in terms of career achievements, and had say Stan beaten Medvedev the other day and ended up taking this title, would that make his unequivocally greater than Andy in your opinion with that extra slam?
Once you've won 16-20+ slams then the final total should be the deciding matter IMO, but I was just wondering your thoughts on the prior example, and I'd agree, if Nadal wins this then I think it's highly likely he will pass Fed.
I firmly believe slam wins are what matter , I used to really rate Wawrinka and even when it was a so called " big four" I believed it was more a big three. Murray was a brilliant player and I did like him but overall he was nowhere near the level of the other three as the records will show and in ten years time nobody will class him in the same bracket as them three, I believe Murray is closer to Wawrinka ability wise than he is Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. If Wawrinka had won this slam then I would have said he had achieved more than Murray.
It is an interesting topic for sure. I'm sure it has been discussed on here many times (and will continue to be), but I was just thinking about it again when watching Wawrinka-Medvedev the other day. I'd personally say Murray would still have achieved more with all his other accomplishments (11 slam finals, almost single handedly winning DC, 2 Olympic golds, YEC, year end #1, then Masters etc.), but then it does go back to how you see the picture.
I do personally think the more slams you win, i.e. what the Big 3 have done, then the other stuff becomes far less signifcant, as if say Nadal ended on 21 and Federer on 20, I wouldn't be saying 'ah, but Federer won this and that...' but where that line is drawn, I'm not really sure.
No doubt Murray has probably achieved more than Wawrinka when it comes to finals but he has still only win 3 slams. I just think it comes down to slams you have won at the end of the day and not finals you have lost. As it happens I hate the whole goat argument and I like Djokovic the least out the three of them, however if it came down too it and I had to pick one player to save my life in a game of tennis I would pick Djokovic.
I can never get away with watching doubles, even if a latter stage match involving a Brit or two.