Tennis
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 211 comments are related to the topic:
*** The Milos Raonic Will Never Win A Grand Slam Thread ***
*** The Milos Raonic Will Never Win A Grand Slam Thread ***
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 211
|
By:
No surprise to see the mug couldnt even win a set when finally faced one of the big boys
Ridiculously short for wimbledon considering how much of a mug the guy is |
|
By:
He couldn't win a raffle. Only wins on fast indoor courts because he's tall and has a deadly serve.
|
|
By:
The mug just lost to a local ball boy in straight sets and hes still shorter than Dimitrov , Tsongaa etc in the wimbledon outright
  |
|
By:
he got deep in rg have not much experience in quick transitioning between those two surfaces,and his backhand side seems very vulnerable especially when he sticking to baseline exchanges.still need to find his game on grass be more offensive and learn how to defend in-court position instead of backing off but he has lot of elements in his naive yet game he can force in future,also mug is very ambitious and slowly but constantly developing not having any major injuries, so i wouldnt be so cheerful that he will not eventually position himself as slam challenger. he can sometimes surprise with the level of improvement when u talk about raw base of his game, not flashy but solid as top four players in core. on this base he can develop in years to came with his attitude and clear goal to be contender,as his ranking type of surge showing he will always be there with good seeding.this type of player cant dominate all arounders like muz novak nadal birdman consistently but he can have spells where be tough to beat, adding his improvement direction puls decline and clear lack of replacement for current leaders may as well take him to slam titles.lesser mugs than reisnick won slams in past and current era of best players ever will come to the end soon
|
|
By:
To be fair i think i would have had a good run at RG14 if i had a draw of Kyrgios , Vesely , Simon and Granollers
|
|
By:
ah for old time's sake
 |
|
By:
I think he will, not yet, because Djoker is already in the final, but you cannot deny his improvement.
|
|
By:
agreed, the way his net play has improved makes you think Wimbledon is possible but he has not seemed to like the skiddy lower bounce in the past so the fast hard maybe his best shot.
|
|
By:
all together now.....
THE OP KNEW |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Until he gets rid of that gay sleeve, I remain unconvinced.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
ttt
|
|
By:
and the sleeve is gone
 |
|
By:
He'll just have to wait until Murray gets injured now...what a state for tennis though
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Milosz improvement is constant and his attitude to develop brings him closer and closer to win big titles.i doubt he could ever become dominant player in terms of consistent wins but he will get these chances frequently to challenge for slams.mureay will destroy him imo but he will only learn from it for future, perhaps easier chances to bag slam
|
|
By:
had a lumpy bet on kerber to bt venus and raoinic to bt federrer in their respective semi-final matches.............i thought mcenroes post match interview was interesting..........he was very fair and respectfull to fed but he said "raonic found another gear in the 4th set in i didnt know he possesed i dont think he knew himself but he stepped his game forward to a new level" i think murray would be more comfortable facing fed then raconic...........i think this final is represented of the roddick vs fed final where fed launched himself on the tennis world stage..........i backed raonic at 8s before the fed match outright and think the prices are about right........
another big plus for raonic is having mcenroe in his corner.ive only got the higest of respect for john mc and tactically think hell be able to dissect any wealnesses in murrays game. this is sport and nobody is unbeatable as djo found out against querry we,ll see who the mug is at 5.00 oclock sunday |
|
By:
Interesting views bustino - wondering if the 'first major final' issue will be a big factor though? Nerves affecting his serve for example would be disaster for him and Murray would crush him then...
|
|
By:
i think that murray would certainly have been "more comfortable facing fed than raonic" after a 2nd 5 setter for fed that's for sure.
in general i think he will be happy enough with raonic. in fact if you had told him pre tournie he would be in the final and not playing djoker i'm sure he would have taken that. i'm not dismissing raonic's chances tho, he's got a lot of weapons and seems to be moving better than he ever used to. there is a good case to say the right players are in the final having been queens club finalists too. the form players on grass. |
|
By:
I can''t see Murray winning another Wimbledon.... Roanic will be the star today his time has come.
|
|
By:
Could 'the sleeve' have been Raonic's fatal weakness?
I always said that Hewitt would never win Wimbledon until he got rid of that hideous 'baseball-cap-back-to-front' look. Lo and behold, in 2002 he turns up with a short haircut and no cap and promptly wins the event. I KNEW. |
|
By:
bring back the sleeve
|
|
By:
Maybe if he wears the sleeve over his left leg instead it might be the key?
I'm convinced that sleeve holds the key to many of life's unfathomable mysteries. |
|
By:
There's no actual guarantee Raonic wins a grand slam anyway, even now. I mean he is 25 and has a pretty terrible match up with the far and away 2 best players in the game right now. Depends how long you think Djokovic and Murray will be around, but you'd think 2 years at the absolute minimum, and by then you don't know what youngsters will be coming through.
He has a chance that he will win a grand slam, but it's far from nailed on. Excellent baseliners are always going to give him a lot of trouble, especially on slower surfaces as Raonic is never going to be absolutely elite from the baseline. Whether any excellent baseliner will actually be around in 3-4 years I guess is debatable. |
|
By:
i suspect he may well win one, probably on a hard court.
|
|
By:
As I said above, just needs Murray to get injured now....
|
|
By:
Yes but how likely is it for the foreseeable future you go through a grand slam without having to play Djokovic or Murray? Highly unlikely.
|
|
By:
yep you'd have to think there will be very few slams in the next 2 years you won't have to beat both of them to win a title. djokovic hardly ever fails to reach a final let alone a semi and murray would probably be expected to reach 6 out of 8 semi finals
even as they both approach 30 they show little sign of slowing down and if anything the gap between them and the rest is getting wider. don't think murray has had over 10000 ranking points before |
|
By:
The gap between them and the rest getting bigger is more because Federer and Nadal's decline. There has been a huge gap between between them and the rest for ages, just with Federer and Nadal struggling for a variety of reasons their paths to the final are even more open then they used to be say 5 years ago.
|
|
By:
Think Murray will go number one soon
Djoko could drop off big time now I reckon- he seemed exhausted after he got knocked out of wimbledon and seemed to want a long break from tennis |
|
By:
Is Raonic only 25? he'll def win a grand slam then
Krgios will break through soon too |
|
By:
historically it's very difficult to win grand slams over the age of 30 - the open era record is just 2 by andre agassi - but you have to think novak djokovic will beat that and if he doesn't andy murray might given the lack of serious opposition to them at the moment. they've got 3 slams next year after they turn 30 for a start
|
|
By:
Federer won Wimbledon after he was 30.
|
|
By:
There has been loads of winners over the age of 30 Federer, Connors, Korda, Sampras, Gomez, Newcombe, Agassi, Laver, Ashe and Gimeno. Ken Rosewall was 37 when he won the OZ Open in 1972.
|
|
By:
Just seen Ken Rosewall and Rod Laver both won 4 grand slams in their 30's.
|
|
By:
25 isn't that young really. I mean Djokovic, Murray have at least another 2 years at the top most likely, and that's quite a conservative estimate. He could find himself 28-29 by the time the big opportunities are appearing, by which time how good will Kyrgios, Zverev be? There's always been a big danger that the era after the big 4 era would get totally bypassed.
Tbh though I think by around 2020 the days of dominance will be over, and no-one will be dominating, and you will be left with grand slams open to be won by a lot of players. |
|
By:
On the winning grand slams over 30 it should be remembered the average age of players has massively shifted upwards the last 10 years. Players conditioning is simply such that winning over 30 will come more common. The old days 30 is probably the equivalent of around 32-33 now.
|
|
By:
Their used to be a sort of rule that was thought in tennis that if you hadn't won by 24 you were never going to win. But that's totally gone these days where it seems players almost peak in their late 20s now. I mean I highly doubt Raonic is at his peak currently at 25. Someone like Wawrinka is a better player at 31 than he was at 25. He was winning grand slams at 30, he wasn't even top 10 at 26-27.
|
|
By:
If you looked at Wawrinka's results before turning 28 you would never think on paper here is a grand slam champion, let and out multi-grand slam champion. You would probably thinking perennial 10-20 ranked player. He had a grand total of 2 grand slam QF's before 28, 1 masters final, and 2 masters semi-finals. Had won 3 titles, all of which were 250s.
After 28, in just over 3 years he's made 4 grand slam QF's, 4 grand slam SF's and won 2 grand slams. |