Better they are aching today!!!!

Mahut was back on Court 18 yesterday evening for a Doubles Match!

and Isner lost 6-0 6-3 6-2 today.

I appreciate the joke, but its things like this that hack me off with people's attitude towards tennis and is probably part of the reason that British tennis remains in such a state.

Henman, despite most people's perceptions, was actually a very good player, who maintained a consistantly high ranking for nigh on 10 years....4 Wimbledon semis, 1 French Open semi and a US Open semi indicates a player who deserves better than the general mocking he gets from folk who know little about the game.

no borg????

So you've ranked McEnroe 8th based on the fag-end of his career. If you'd seen him at his best, he'd be in anyone's top 3 without question.

So when we're all mocking Keith Senior on Sunday for being a , will you be on hand to remind us he has won four Grand Finals, one Challenge Cup final, several international caps for England and Great Britain and a test series win over New Zealand?

Senior, whatever people say, has been a fine player....Like Henman, certainly not the best or a great, but somebody who will be able to grow old gracefully, knowing they acheived plenty to be proud of.

Henman was an OK player at a time when tennis was undergoing a power shift in terms of dominant players; Sampras was at his peak towards the early years of Henman's years in the top 20, while Federer emerged at the end of his years as the greatest tennis player ever. How many times did Henman beat either of those in Grand Slams? Federer once at Wimbledon... How many times did he beat Hewitt, or Roddick, or Nadal? All players who have won and reached Slam finals.

Unfortunately for Henman he was a choker who lacked the ruthlessness and overwhelming desire to win that marks out real winners. His best opportunity to reach the final he bottled when losing to Ivanisavic despite having the game in his pocket. The fact of the matter is people are only interested in players winning Grand Slams - Anne Jones did, Henman did not, and for that reason alone he was not the player you seem to think he was.

And this is precisely why British tennis is in the sorry state its in today, simply because most people haven't a clue that the sport exists beyond the two weeks at Wimbledon.

By your reckoning Colin Montgomerie was/is a $hite golfer, as is Lee Westwood, despite the fact that if you judge them by their rankings then it is obvious that they are not.

I find it very irritating that for 2 weeks at the end of June, seemingly everybody is an expert at Tennis....A similar irritation for me is the World Cup, where all the numbnuts come out of the woodwork in their England merchandise and proceed to claim that they are football's biggest fans.

Ultimately, for Henman, he spent much of his career in the top 10 in the world rankings, and is much respected by Tennis people outside this country for his acheivements in the game....I'm pretty sure he isn't really isn't that concerned by the views of folk from within his country who know little about the game.

can murray go all the way?

He can, but I doubt he will. Might have the top 4 in the semi finals though.

i'd love a 3some with the Williams sisters, thats my tennis knowledge

29 degrees there today!

As long as that Haggis quaffing git doesn't win it I'm not bothered. Can't stand his moody, miserable mush.

Federer in massive trouble currently. Two sets and a break down to Berdych.

Out!

Goodnight Federer!

and goodnight murray....cant say i`m sorry...

he played preety good but failed to take advantage of crutial points and nadal was just too good

Glad he's out.

I'm glad Murray is out. He is a dour, petulant, sulking nice person. He was up against the best today, found wanting and easily beaten in the end in straight sets (and has his own serve broken twice in the last set).

Interesting observation....Even more interesting that this summary could easily be used to describe Wire.

Ok against $hite, backsides go when up against the elite....

I'm no fan of Murray by any means, and I agree he was comfortably beaten, largely due to netting on crucial points or unaccountably smacking them out of play - the match point being a 'casing point' (sic JWP).

However, I think tennis needs to look at its scoring system - Murray won 6 fewer points in the whole game than Nadal, yet was to all intents and purposes blown away. Last week there was that match between Mahut and Isner which lasted a stupid amount of time.

The way matches are scored does not, to me, necessarily give an adequate reflection of the relative merits of the players involved.