Agassi feels Murray will dominate the World Tennis in the upcoming years

HONG KONG -- Andre Agassi says Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal's domination of the men's game is coming to an end, tipping Scotsman Andy Murray as the most likely successor.

"Now we have possibly the changing of the guard. You have those top two who are now losing ground to the likes of [Novak] Djokovic and Murray and [Juan Martin] del Potro," Agassi told reporters in Hong Kong by phone from Las Vegas.

Nadal has struggled with injuries since his stunning exit in the fourth round of the French Open. Federer won the French and Wimbledon, breaking Pete Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slams, but was beaten in the U.S. Open final by 21-year-old Argentine del Potro. It was the first Grand Slam won by a player other than Federer or Nadal since Djokovic won the 2008 Australian Open.

Agassi, who preceded Federer in winning all four grand slam tournaments over his career, believes the Swiss "still has the chance to do some more special things," but the 28-year-old's chances are diminishing with age.

Agassi, who was promoting his upcoming exhibition match against Sampras in the Chinese gambling enclave of Macau on Oct. 25, worried that Nadal's injuries may be chronic.

"If you're struggling with your knee, it tends to be recurring and not to be easy to do, so I got to believe he'll struggle with it probably for his career," Agassi said.

Agassi said the 22-year-old Murray is the man most likely to be the dominant figure the next few years. The world No. 3 is still seeking his first Grand Slam title.

"From a talent standpoint, Murray is a person who should win multiple Slams," Agassi said.

"When I look at his game compared to the other players, he has what it takes to win and to win against anybody on any surface."

Ads -

Sheik Abdul Bashir’s Departure From TNA, Scott Steiner’s Knee, More
WWE and TNA Employees Meet Up In Orlando Sunday Night

How to improve Mental strength?

You mentally go down when you feel sick, and thats the exact opposite when you physically get better.

Look at Del Potro, in 2008 he wasnt a freak but now his muscles could parallel most playing tennis if not better them, this could certainly be one reason for his improved performance.

But if you need your child to be mentally stronger, put him under a lot of test at his very childhood and explain him the more he gets the excercise and test done successfully the more the tougher he will become in the future.

For Athletes they get the assistance of mental conditioning coach like physical conditioning coach these days.

The best way to make a person stronger is to improve his will power, and best way to improve the will power is to control the inner mind which could be done by yoga and many similar exercises and martial arts.

Ads -
Tommy Dreamer request his release from WWE contract

Del Potro to dominate the slams in 2010?

Let's excuse his form post US Open. I think that's understandable. He achieved his immediate goal - to win a slam. I think he was bound to drop off a bit after that.

Into the New Year, refreshed, I think Potty can show again the form which briefly allowed him to dominate every player on the Tour.

He has the power. He has the technique. I think he has a fantastic all court game. Unlike every other player, I don't see a weakness. But I surely do see some scary weapons - in particular that serve (which will only get better) and the forehand. His physique, which might have been slighlty suspect, seems to be rapidly improving. And his mental strength, which again some might have questioned, was surely shown to be up there with the best of them at the US Open.

He will come into the 2010 season brimming with confidence and a game to threaten them all. I can see him winning 2 slams this year. Could be any of them, although Wimbledon may be out of reach.

Year of the Potty?
credit -Sealpuppy - bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A61067919
WWE Smackdown ECW and Superstars result this week

Tennis Davis Cup - Home and away advantage

I would like to know what everybody thinks about the assignment of the 'home and away' status given to teams prior to a Davis Cup tie. As I understand it alternates between a pairing based on their last meeting, which could be years apart, with the designated home team getting to choose both the venue and the surface.

Potentially then, a team could go through an entire season being the home team, and always have this advantage. This may be a rare occasion, but even getting it more than any other team in your group could be deemed unfair. Especially seeing as the final always employs these rules.

I am not quite sure how one could solve this problem, given that holding a tie in a neutral venue would be almost pointless, and trying to enforce a neutral surface would be near impossible.

Here are some of my ideas:

1) The home and away status applies, but it specifies that the first two singles rubbers and the doubles are played at home and the reverse singles are played away. The surface choice is made for home and away. This has obvious downfalls, but may still be viable if organized properly. Dead reverse rubbers would be almost ignored.

2) the home and away rule stays, except that the surface choice is done by having the two teams submit a request, and the ITF then chooses a surface that niether team chose. (ie: Spain picks clay, Czech Republic picks Hard, so ITF chooses grass). this would bring in some extra mind games for the captains

3) The Davis Cup is an ITF event, so why not use ITF stadia. the home and away rule applies for the surface, but a choice of clay means going to Rolland Garros, a choice of Grass means going to Wimbledon (err in december yikes!), and a choice of Hard means going to randomly US Open or Australia (if US is in match, then OZ, and vica versa)...huge travelling commitment so maybe not a good idea, but if Davis Cup final is worth it then people should make the trip.

4) The choice of country is randomly picked between the two sides, and the surface is chosen by the away team.

Please share thoughts

Technology, a cure or curse ? in Tennis

Much has been said lately about racquet design and materials, that have heralded in a new era for today's modern player and the change that has slowly metamorphosed the game into two sides of the same coin, namely, baseline hitting V defensive play from a game that included all facets of shot making including the good old Serve and Volleyers.

There seems to be also two different camps as to whether serve and volley has declined or even disappeared from the game today.

A few (myself included) have noticed a definite fading of the chip and charge, as well as an altogether unhealthy abrupt stop in the amount of serve and volleying that used to embrace the tennis courts up to a few years ago.

Now, is this because of technological advances or might it be to do with the fact that the training regimes are geared towards counter punching and the tactical play of defensive shot making, or is it a mix of both ?

As a side note, when people try to compare era's, it dawned on me that someone like Murray, who has probably never touched a wooden racquet in his life, professionally of course, would FAIL, if he was sent back to Borg's era, as the grip and shot action are completely different to players of that time, and he would not know how to get the same kind of response from that kind of racquet.

Which leads me on to the next point, coming from the wooden era to the graphite era, its seems pretty obvious that they are two incompatibles, which begs the question, if serve and volleying was a prominent part of most players itinerary from the 80's onwards and through to the late nineties, why has it suddenly become unpopular over the last 5/6 years?

Some have mentioned that its down to the racquet speed and the problem with having your serve return faster than ever before, due, arguably, to the technology at hand or its partly due to the fact that its become unfashionable to do so, given that the 1st serve is pretty much non-returnable if put in the right spot.

I, like many on here would like to see the return of the S&V, but at what cost to the players ?
Unless the organizers try to slow down the courts or make the balls slower, (why would they anyway?) I don't see how this can happen.

Of course, we could make the players resort to using wooden racquets or even the Conner's metal paddle, but they'd probably break their wrists trying to play normally.

3822822561

HBK to retire in WWE WrestleMania 2010 -Jim Ross Blogs

Winning French Open or Wimbledon more Important for Federer in 2010?

An awful lot of talk on 606 over the past weeks and months about Roger Federer going for a 7th Wimbledon and the total weeks at no 1 record. That has importance for sure, but if Federer were to wish for one thing in 2010, surely, it has to be something different: the French Open.

Here´s why:
Let´s have a look at the list of players who have won each slam twice:
Roy Emerson
Rod Laver

But now let´s exclude amateur tournaments. Who has won each slam twice in the professional era.

Here's the list:
.

Hm. No-one on it.

Now let´s look at the list of players who have defended every slam title (i.e won two years in a row). This is for the entire history of tennis, amateur, professional, 1900s, whatever.
Here´s the list:
.

Hm. No-one on that one either.

Federer has already defended the other three successfully (he had that by 2005). If Federer could not only win each slam twice but defend every slam it would be an absolutely unique achievement.

Now I´m not saying the FO this year for Fed is even half as important as last year, the first one. It isn´t. But surely more important than a 7th Wimbledon or total weeks at no 1 - because when tennis history is written many years from now the question of GOAT won't be about Sampras versus Federer. Sampras will be in the all time top 5 or the top 10 at least while Federer will be up for the no 1 spot against perhaps Bill Tilden or Rod Laver or perhaps more likely some future champion who has yet to play a professional match or hasn't even been born. And so a 2nd French has to beat a 7th Wimbledon, if you could choose one.

Now I am saying it will be great if he gets it (for his legacy). I am not saying that it will necessarily actually happen. Djokovic, Del Potro and Nadal will be gunning for a perhaps no longer peak Fed on his weakest surface. And you can even see a shock(ish) defeat in an earlier round. Haas nearly had him this year, you can´t keep repeating matches like that against lower opponents and never lose one, this year he did, but sooner a later he will lose to someone outside the top 5 in a slam. On the other hand, the man has been in every final since 2005 when he lost to Nadal in the semi so he can hardly be written off. On the whole I´d rate his chance at about 20% maybe 25% max.

But if he does do it, the no 1 record would likely follow in any case. And perhaps so would another Wimbledon, the confidence would be so high. A very big if but a very big achievement if he makes it.

The absolute ideal would be to do in a five set thriller against a fully rejuvenated Nadal in the final. Maybe I am dreaming a bit now, but you never know.

2010 slams a Record Point for Roger Federer

Fed will surely love to hold 8 Wimby and 1 FO compared to 2 FO and 7 Wimby, and to add those it could have been 9 continious if a little luck woudl have favoured him on 2008 Wimby, which everybody will gloat if Fed go on to win 8 Wimby, so yea in all terms Wimby comes first.

On the other hand Fed will to defend FO at all cost,as long as he is fit and in form I dont find a reason for him not to win the Wimdy- FO combination again.

Anycase All GS are important for Fed in 2010 why?

1]If he win AO he becomes the joint leader in Open Era to win the AO maximum number of times [4 Tied with Agassi]

2]Would love to win FO- the only he hasn't defended yet.

3]Wimbledon win would put on him on par with Samprason Grass [7th title]

4]USO win would put him at the top of the chart with 6 wins in Open era.

#Outside USO win means, he would be the first man since Rod Laver to win a calander slam [if the other three are won].

So yes all slams are important.

Every slam is important for Fed, here are the reasons for it.

Katherine Brown is Murray's New Girl friend?

Yea Like you we all heard the rumors that Kim and Murray split because Katherine want to be Murray's GF, its pity Kim had to vacate her spot for katherine, I like many hope Kim gets a better Boy Friend who understands her love.