TSR Tennis Society

Yes it is.

Li Na has been great so far.

I thought so. Thanks for confirming it for me, though

What's the score? Only watched the first few games because I have History revision to be doing

Li Na is a set and a break up (6-4, 4-2).

It is ridiculous that a player like Schiavone has won a grand slam but someone with talent of Andy Murray has still failed to do so. Speaks volumes about the lack of quality in the women's game right now.

Shut your mouth. Schiavone is a very good clay court tennis player and Italians always tend to reach their prime in the 30s. Granted the top 4 are not particularly strong but the WTA has quality, albeit not as exciting as the men's division. Don't use Murray's lack of Grand Slams to denounce the WTA ffs.

Shut yours. Schiavone is nowhere near the same level a player like Henin was on clay. Murray's inability to win a slam is because he has been born into a generation with the two greatest tennis players of all time. Granted he hasn't performed at his best in the finals but Murray is far more deserving of a grand slam than Schiavone will ever be.

The WTA is in such a poor state at the moment- the absence of the Williams sisters, the sudden retirement of Henin and a world number one who is barely deserving of that position. Wozniacki has secured that ranking on the number of tournaments she's played as opposed to being the best player in the world.

Shut yours. Schiavone is nowhere near the same level a player like Henin was on clay. Murray's inability to win a slam is because he has been born into a generation with the two greatest tennis players of all time. Granted he hasn't performed at his best in the finals but Murray is far more deserving of a grand slam than Schiavone will ever be.

The WTA is in such a poor state at the moment- the absence of the Williams sisters, the sudden retirement of Henin and a world number one who is barely deserving of that position. Wozniacki has secured that ranking on the number of tournaments she's played as opposed to being the best player in the world.

You don't win Grand Slams's because "you deserve it" you win Grand Slams because you have beaten every opponent that you have faced during the tournament. Don't be so close-minded. If you actually watched tennis outside of the Grand Slams then you would realise that in 2010 Schiavone had some excellent form on the clay court. Her win was well deserved. Moreover, Murray has been beaten in Grand Slams by not just Federer and Nadal but players like Tsonga, Gonzales, Wawrinka, Djokovic, the list goes on! The bottom line is you win Grand Slams because you were the most consistent player in that tournament.

Lastly, yes the WTA is weaker without the aforementioned players and I'm not a huge fan of Wozniacki either. However she has been the most consistent throughout the SEASON and therefore has earned the ranking of Number 1. Granted she may lose this position but at the end of the day, Grand Slams are not the only tournaments in the tennis calendar. I mean Jesus Christ dude, ignorance or what!

Murray hasn't won a major because he hasn't been good enough. Other players put in just the same amount of blood, sweat and guts. They are just as deserving if they happen to land a Grand Slam.

Murray isn't as good as Djok, Federer and Nadal and never will be and I'm currently seriously struggling to envisage him ever winning a Grand Slam.

Why? Because he's too passive in his play and mentally he evidently chokes on the very biggest occasion, e.g. in a grand slam final.

Schiavone is excellent on clay. She played much better last year in the FO final vs Stosar on clay and in the second set today vs Li Na she started to find a bit of form but then got blown away in the tie-break.

I like watching Li Na, I like her personality, I also like Schiavone who is a top quality player, who plays with alot of style and diversity.

I thought todays final was decent to watch.

No-one should be dismissive of Schiavone's achievements in recent years. She's got better with age and she is one of the fittest players on the WTA. Great work ethic and she has maximised her talent to great effect...

something Murray hasn't done, mainly because he's too passive, doesn't back his ability enough and struggles to pull himself out of troubled waters during key moments/phases in matches.

Murray hasn't won a major because he hasn't been good enough. Other players put in just the same amount of blood, sweat and guts. They are just as deserving if they happen to land a Grand Slam.

Murray isn't as good as Djok, Federer and Nadal and never will be and I'm currently seriously struggling to envisage him ever winning a Grand Slam.

Why? Because he's too passive in his play and mentally he evidently chokes on the very biggest occasion, e.g. in a grand slam final.

Schiavone is excellent on clay. She played much better last year in the FO final vs Stosar on clay and in the second set today vs Li Na she started to find a bit of form but then got blown away in the tie-break.

I like watching Li Na, I like her personality, I also like Schiavone who is a top quality player, who plays with alot of style and diversity.

I thought todays final was decent to watch.

No-one should be dismissive of Schiavone's achievements in recent years. She's got better with age and she is one of the fittest players on the WTA. Great work ethic and she has maximised her talent to great effect...

something Murray hasn't done, mainly because he's too passive, doesn't back his ability enough and struggles to pull himself out of troubled waters during key moments/phases in matches.

Shut your mouth. Schiavone is a very good clay court tennis player and Italians always tend to reach their prime in the 30s. Granted the top 4 are not particularly strong but the WTA has quality, albeit not as exciting as the men's division. Don't use Murray's lack of Grand Slams to denounce the WTA ffs.

Murray hasn't won a major because he hasn't been good enough. Other players put in just the same amount of blood, sweat and guts. They are just as deserving if they happen to land a Grand Slam.

Murray isn't as good as Djok, Federer and Nadal and never will be and I'm currently seriously struggling to envisage him ever winning a Grand Slam.

Why? Because he's too passive in his play and mentally he evidently chokes on the very biggest occasion, e.g. in a grand slam final.

Schiavone is excellent on clay. She played much better last year in the FO final vs Stosar on clay and in the second set today vs Li Na she started to find a bit of form but then got blown away in the tie-break.

I like watching Li Na, I like her personality, I also like Schiavone who is a top quality player, who plays with alot of style and diversity.

I thought todays final was decent to watch.

No-one should be dismissive of Schiavone's achievements in recent years. She's got better with age and she is one of the fittest players on the WTA. Great work ethic and she has maximised her talent to great effect...

something Murray hasn't done, mainly because he's too passive, doesn't back his
ability enough and struggles to pull himself out of troubled waters during key moments/phases in matches.

On reflection, it was a bit harsh for me to say that Schiavone didn't deserve her slam so I thought I'd just clear that up. However, you may be overstating her recent achievements cos she hasn't won a single title since landing the FO last year.

Personally, I can't envisage Murray failing to end up with a major- his consistency in the slams has been good and he just needs to find a way
to overcome that final hurdle. I'd agree that Andy's defensive mindset is an issue but he can play aggressive tennis when forced to (and as he did so in wins vs Nadal at the Aussie+US Open). It's all about him finding that right balance....

You shouldn't be reaching you prime in your 30's regardless of you nationality, you fitness at that age is not as good as when you are 25. You should have reached your peak by 25 too, in terms of playing ability. The womens game currently is rubbish, its form based not class based. Thats why you have so many poor no. 1's because they are able to reach it off a hot streak of form rather than consistently dominating.

He's using it wrong, but Murray is a good example. He is good player, better in comparison to his peers than Schiavone, but he hasn't won a Slam due to the players at the top being so dominate from Slam to Slam. You don't see Fed, Djok, Murray, and Nadal crashing out in the early rounds very often, you don't see the top spot changing hands that often. The mens game is in era of real quality, but that doesn't change the fact the womens game is very poor currently.

I agree that in general a player will have peaked by the age of 25 but that's not to say that people don't peak later. Just look at Li Na. She's gradually been getting better over the last few years. Other things come into play, like for her it was injuries and having time out to go to university, therefore her development was a lot slower.

Women's tennis has no out-and-out star at the moment but that doesn't have to be a bad thing. It's certainly a bad thing for the WTA from a marketing stand point but unpredictability should be never be viewed as bad by fans. In a lot of ways it's refreshing.

University is going to slow development, but younger fitter players should be giving 30 somethings a tough time in the latter rounds. I personally think Women should be playing 5 sets at the Slams, but thats a different issue.

I don't think you need a Nadal or Fed style star, but there are to many players in the womens game who are able to suge to the top from a hot streak of form, then collapse horribly, Ivanovich what the hell has happened to her? Safina? Wozniacki will be the next one if she doesn't turn things around. They lack true class, even when Fed or Nadal aren't playing well, they still have the mental grit and intelligence with point construction to dispatch lesser player. Nadal this year has been a classic example, he hasn't played well at all, serve has been poor, falled back to pre US open levels, his backhand is the worst I have seen it in a long time, yet he is in the final. Nadal had a pretty debilitating injury, how far down the rankings did he fall, how far did he progress when it mattered?

A grand slam final should be the two best player in the world on that surface, not the hottest, the best, there is a difference. I think Li Na will reach no.1 soon, as she has an intelligence in her play, not many others seem to have.