Gulbis (or anyone surprising) for the title!

First topic message reminder :

I'm bored.

Bored with the repetitive play, with the same boring names at the top and their largely media-friendly 'personalities'. Basically, the sport is boring me now. I'm even bored of Federer being at the top of the game after all this time (though he will always remain TMF of course).

Something new is needed, and where better to find it than in this prodigal prodigy; a weed smoking (allegedly) party animal with the shots and game to beat anyone on their day? He has a quarter that should hold no desperate fears for him, and a seeded semi-final opponent he knows he really should have some big advantages over.
After that, well a tough final but he has the size and power to upset Nadal (big power is his only chink on clay).

It would completely enliven the sport. Imagine the buzz, the inspiration to his peers? The sport would suddenly feel fresh again. You could say the same if Dimitrov, Janowitz or Raonic won, but I think Ernests would have even greater impact. Even Ernests would have to take himself seriously and knuckle down.

So come on Ernie, blast through a surely tired Monfils tomorrow and let's see something new.

Edit: Damn correction thing put apostrophes in his name.

I think Gulbis is dead on his feet out there. He needs a second wind, and quick.

lydian wrote:That's not correct.
The problem is slowed conditions due to dumbed down surfaces and balls - leading to longer ralleys and young players unable to break through due to conditioning vs skill misbalance.
This isnt about marathon ralleys but the game as a whole and its future, not its present.
Let me ask this - for a skill based sport how many "driving aids" do we want to give the players?
Why not just allow elasticated strings and 3 feet wide racquets that weight 300g for ridiculous power? Where does it end?

This thing about young players not breaking through because of conditions is often presented as fact but it's really not. There is absolutely no way of proving what would happen under different conditions, so it will only ever be speculation.

Why can it not simply be that the younger generation are not as good?

Dimitrov at Rome plays a great match to knock out Djokovic. He then gets knocked out in the next round by Wawrinka. Is that technology or conditions? Or is it more that a leading light of the young generation, at the age of 22, still can't string a couple of great performances together.

Variety of surfaces - yes, we need that.

But the idea that conditions favour retrieving and there is a whole generation of talent being prevented from breaking through, doesn't hold up to scutiny.

Equipment has to be controlled. Currently it isn't.

bogbrush wrote:Equipment has to be controlled. Currently it isn't.

I would argue that much greater issues are lack of variety in playing surface (which can and should be better controlled) and a lack of quality in the upcoming generation (which can't be controlled).

Get the variety in playing surface and equipment pretty much ceases to be a factor.

Monfils' celebration shows, to him, the importance of beating Ernests.

Was it that bad?

lol...they're no worse than mine TSJ!

Gulbis for the title? Oh well...that was short-lived.

The problem is Gulbis' mother is mentally and physically fitter than he is once its gone past 3 sets!

My suggestion is to just replace the name "Gulbis" with "Monfils". The thread would work very well all the same.....

Jeremy_Kyle wrote:My suggestion is to just replace the name "Gulbis" with "Monfils". The thread would work very well all the same.....

Ill make a change what I really mean.

Monfils' goose is cooked now. It's going to have to be Paire or someone similar at this rate.

What the hell, I'm going for Wawrinka as the equine nocturne.

Let's be honest, there isn't going to be a surprise winner here. Whoever wins the top half semi final will win the title.

The bottom half is more open for debate. Fed looks a very obvious favourite but there have to be questions how he will hold up if someone can really push him. If he does lose then really one of about six players could come through. I'd love it to be Monfils but I can't imagine he is fit enough.

Tsonga is the only possibility. I saw him play Neimenan and though the sets were hard fought he looked very good.

Lydian, I watched Miami 04 and saw you were right, a more agressive Nadal. Was that because surfaces/conditions were different then?

It's interesting to read your comments. Do learn things from time to time.

Cheers HB

Yes I think the faster conditions played their part, probably smaller balls too. He also played up nearer the baseline so was taking the ball earlier...which negates those who say he can't do it. He just choses not to play that way anymore as surfaces slowed. I'd much rather he reverted to this style again, I'm sure he'd cause Djokovic more problems too.

I read this funny interview from Gulbis given today. What a character, and obviously very bright too.

“I respect Roger, Rafa, Novak and Murray but, for me, all four of them are boring players. Their interviews are boring. Honestly, they are boring as crap. I often go on YouTube to watch the interviews. With tennis, I quickly stop. It is a joke. It’s Federer who started this fashion. He has a superb image of a Swiss gentleman, perfect for him. I repeat, I respect Federer but I don’t like it that young players try to imitate him. When I hear them answer like Roger, I am terrified by phrases like: ‘I had a little bit more success at certain moments and that is how I won.’ I do not want to hear in an interview a guy who I will not name, but who I know well thinks all his opponents are a***holes, putting on an act.”

“I want to say what I think. And if my prediction is that I am going to win the match, it doesn’t bother me to say so. I would like interviews to be more like in boxing. OK, maybe those guys are maybe not the brightest on earth, but when they face each other down at the weigh-in, they bring what the fans want: War, blood, emotion. All that is missing in tennis, where everything is clean, and white with polite handshakes and some nice shots. While the people want to see broken rackets and hear outbursts on the court.”

Well said Ernests!

Dont think this is worth starting a new thread for.. but looks like "The Mouth" Gulbis is making himself popular in the locker room

http://www.tennisgrandstand.com/2013/05/29/ernests-gulbis-top-four-are-boring-lower-ranked-players-are-treated-like-crap/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tennisgrandstand+%28TennisGrandStand%29

At least there's someone having the danglies to stand up and say things that are frowned upon in certain places.

I read somewhere that his father is extremely rich, but that makes his comments about the lower ranked players and their treatment even more pertinent and relevent.

The way the media covers the top players doesn't always do them any favors. In an attempt to portray them as nice so we will all love them they get carried away. My own favorite is the way Murray is always best buddies with the player of the moment. This was the lead line in the coverage from the Times of yesterdays play.

Gaël Monfils for French Open title? Well, old friend Andy Murray hopes so

Sorry no link as PPV but as always well worth it.

Ha ha! Pass the sick bag...

bogbrush wrote:Equipment has to be controlled. Currently it isn't.

Pipe dream.

Although I wholeheartedly agree.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Dont think this is worth starting a new thread for.. but looks like "The Mouth" Gulbis is making himself popular in the locker room

http://www.tennisgrandstand.com/2013/05/29/ernests-gulbis-top-four-are-boring-lower-ranked-players-are-treated-like-crap/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tennisgrandstand+%28TennisGrandStand%29

I wonder who the guy is? He later refers to himself not taking naughty time outs, one presumes 'unlike others'.

Ooh sounds like somebody but I dare not say........

1. “I do not want to hear in an interview a guy – who I will not name, but who I know well, that he thinks all his opponents are assholes – putting on an act” in his pressers.

--------

Yeah I agree and that sounds like someone else I could mention... but

I like how he despairs of people imitating Federers behaviour, but.insincerely.

“I respect Roger, Rafa, Novak and Murray but, for me, all four of them are boring players. Their interviews are boring. Honestly, they are boring as crap. I often go on YouTube to watch the interviews. With tennis, I quickly stop. It is a joke. It’s Federer who started this fashion. He has a superb image of a Swiss gentleman, perfect for him. I repeat, I respect Federer but I don’t like it that young players try to imitate him. When I hear them answer like Roger, I am terrified by phrases like: ‘I had a little bit more success at certain moments and that is how I won.’ I do not want to hear in an interview a guy who I will not name, but who I know well thinks all his opponents are a***holes, putting on an act.”

So it's not Federer, it's a 'young' player.

'I had a little bit more success at certain times'. Hmmmmm

Well we will never know will we ? But Gulbis would call Mother Theresa all the names under the sun if she beat him he is not the best loser Ive come across

I think it is brilliant that someone is stepping out from the careful PR image that most of the top guys cultivate now. Tennis needs its bad boys as well as its flamboyant characters in the equation too.

So much more interesting to hear some strong and controversial opinions than the same old, same old every single press conference.

Strange though dont you think how Gulbis comes out with these controversial opinions after he has lost a match. . Rarely do you hear from him after he wins.. I wonder why ?? If he had beaten Montfils yesterday and he had still been in the tournament I wonder if he would have been so vocal.. but again we will never know will we ???

Haddie-nuff wrote:Strange though dont you think how Gulbis comes out with these controversial opinions after he has lost a match. . Rarely do you hear from him after he wins.. I wonder why ?? If he had beaten Montfils yesterday and he had still been in the tournament I wonder if he would have been so vocal.. but again we will never know will we ???

Do you follow his press conferences closely?

Whatever the timing, that doesn't detract from the fact that it is a slightly more interesting statement, because it is refreshingly un pc, than 99.5 percent of all other press statements.

All these guys have the same carefully nutured 'what a sportsman' image, and all the Gulbis is doing is saying, what we all guess, that the image you are sold is the one the sponsors are paying for, the one they think the public want....not necessarily the essence of a person.

Born Slippy wrote:Let's be honest, there isn't going to be a surprise winner here. Whoever wins the top half semi final will win the title.

The bottom half is more open for debate. Fed looks a very obvious favourite but there have to be questions how he will hold up if someone can really push him. If he does lose then really one of about six players could come through. I'd love it to be Monfils but I can't imagine he is fit enough.

If Nadal wins the top half semi then I agree it's a foregone conclusion pretty much, but if Djokovic comes through then I think Federer has a very real chance if he's playing well, after all he beat the best version of Djokovic we've ever seen at this same tourney just two years ago. I;m surprised that you would think the top half winner is a lick on for the title especially if it happens to be Screech - who I believe is eminently beatable on clay.

I think it's refreshing to hear some different opinions so I don't mind someone (Gulbis) coming out with some controversial statements. It adds more spice to the tour.

However, I think guys like Gulbis only come out with this stuff because they can't produce the goods on court. In other words Roger, Rafa, Screech are busy letting their racquets do the talking - they don't need to be controversial in their press conferences, in fact, the moment they say anything that doesn't toe the squeaky clean image line, they're taken to task by pundits and fans. Gulbis, otoh, can say whatever he likes, because let's face it, no one cares and because he's never gonna do anything too fantastic on court.

Actually I really agree with you emancipator- it's much more difficult for the top guys to go off piste in the same way.

Also didn't really mean to imply that Gulbis' interview was more interesting per se than, for example, one of Federer's quite analytical ones, but it is just quite fun to have a little bit of someone like Ernie speaking frankly, (even if it is while he is smarting from a loss) just as contrast.

Maybe stepping out in public from the habitual 'tugging of the forelock' might help Ernie unleash the power of his racquet in the next encounter? Or perhaps he will just be thrashed unequivocally?

Another great bit from the Gulbis conference:

I think also between the third and fourth sets he took out his phone and was photographing. Did you see him taking pictures of the crowd doing the wave?

I didn't see him, but I really don't care what he was doing with his phone or with the crowd. What can I do? I played a beautiful point, I have 22 people applauding for me. (Laughter.)

22 is not enough?

Yeah, if half of this is your team, you gave tickets before the match, that's not enough. French crowd is French crowd. It's good. It's good for them; bad for us.

emancipator wrote:I think it's refreshing to hear some different opinions so I don't mind someone (Gulbis) coming out with some controversial statements. It adds more spice to the tour.

However, I think guys like Gulbis only come out with this stuff because they can't produce the goods on court. In other words Roger, Rafa, Screech are busy letting their racquets do the talking - they don't need to be controversial in their press conferences, in fact, the moment they say anything that doesn't toe the squeaky clean image line, they're taken to task by pundits and fans. Gulbis, otoh, can say whatever he likes, because let's face it, no one cares and because he's never gonna do anything too fantastic on court.

I agree with you too em. When he starts winning and talking instead of losing and talking I might listen
Until then Ernie just get out there and play.

Gulbis is just that kind of guy. He's grown up around money, probably spoilt and is used to having his say knowing the well wont run dry regardless. However, I don't mind, the tour needs guys like this. I suspect because he started by saying the top 4 are boring and all platitudes that the guy he won't mention is top 4 also. It can't be Federer as he's already mentioned him. Can't see it being Murray somehow either as he's more open/heart on sleeve...so take your pick!

Its whoever has beaten him I daresay dont have to look very far do you

According tp BBC website live update thread Murray and Federer have said the following :

"To be honest, over the years I have found it difficult to open up and be a bundle of laughs in press conferences or interviews," Andy Murray said of the accusation.

"I always try to give honest answers, but they are fairly boring so I don't have to deal with the aftermath of any scandals."

Federer added: "Our interviews are not always the most exciting. But that's not just our fault, that's the machine.

"After each match, we have to give press conferences.

"But also you cannot say anything you do not like about something to someone without being totally criticised by many people. Therefore, everyone is very careful."

So it looks like to a certain extent they agree with Gulbis but having had their fingers burnt in the past have become very circumspect in what they say. I can think of a good few threads on here where a player has made a comment and it has led to some healthy debates on whether it is arrogant, self serving, playing mind games etc.

PS. Good to see you back TP

Funny thing is I thought one of the things levelled at Federer was him being critical of opponents after a defeat?

I'd have thought Murray fans would remember bristling at the post-match comments from Dubal 2008.

That's what they're saying. Anything resembling a critical remark tends to be blown up by the press, likewise earlier in his career Federer was considerably more outspoken than he is now. Same with Novak. With all their sponsors and commitments, any negative PR definitely isn't something they want to court.

I've seen fans of lots of players bristling after one of their opponents has made a comment. I think the natural tendency is to be less critical of what the player you support says. It something that is prevalent across most of society.

The press are schooled to ask questions which elicit an answer that can be interpreted which every way they choose. A lot of the answers are taken out of context and I think most of us tend to take the majority of it with a pinch of salt.
Yes as Roger says it is boring.. because the press ask the same ridiculous questions over and over and there are only so many answers you can give.
Personally after playing a grueling five set match that you may have JUST won or JUST lost I think I would be tempted to tell the press to ..... wel it ends in off anyway

Andy Roddick. Press Conference GOAT.

http://m.youtube.com/results?q=andy%20roddick%20press%20conference

Take your pick. All classics.

One of the best.......

http://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=related&v=RPgWoOon8-w

Someone different to the final would be nice, outwith the Top 4 which of the current players have made a final recently. del Potro, Berdych and then you have to start going way back 5 or 6 years to guys like Tsonga and Baghdatis.

I think a lot of what players say is done TiC, just to wum the media, they know they will be misrepresented and misquoted 99% of the time, so why not play them at their own game.

Unless someone in the crowd actually asks a decent question, they'll get newsbite portions with a little sarcasm thrown in and a huge portion of "say what they want to hear" to be minimalistic in their replies as they're quite knackered most of the time.

ryan86 wrote:Someone different to the final would be nice, outwith the Top 4 which of the current players have made a final recently. del Potro, Berdych and then you have to start going way back 5 or 6 years to guys like Tsonga and Baghdatis.

You forgot Soderling who made back to back finals in RG 2009/2010

invisiblecoolers wrote:

ryan86 wrote:Someone different to the final would be nice, outwith the Top 4 which of the current players have made a final recently. del Potro, Berdych and then you have to start going way back 5 or 6 years to guys like Tsonga and Baghdatis.

You forgot Soderling who made back to back finals in RG 2009/2010

True, but he's not here either

the reference to putting on an act suggests gulbis may be talking about janowicz who said something to this effect about djokovic

Ernie is an interesting cat, can't help but like him. Let him have a go at the big 4, like others have mentioned it isn't like he wins anything other than Del Ray beach. But that being said, the top guys in tennis have a huge incentive to conform. Look at how Djokovic was critiqued for his humor and impersonations, look at how some criticize Federer for his highly sportsman like post loss interviews, or how Murray gets knocked for his running dialogue. These guys are basically tennis players slash corporate pitchmen, not a recipe for exciting post match interviews. That is the way of the world alas. But still Ernie is fun and one of the best interviews in sports, much better than the overgrown and nasty frat boy Andy Roddick who moved about on a tennis court like a pregnant sow.

I like Gulbis but to be frank he kind of needs to earn the right to speak like this through his results. Otherwise he's just another moaning bit part player sniping from the cheap seats, like Stakhovsky, who won't be taken seriously. He's also motivating the top 4 against him for sure.

Then he compares tennis to boxing and says it needs far more drama in interviews. He asks for less acting put on by the top players yet doesn't realise the delicious irony that is boxers being the biggest showmen/actors in town when it comes to those pre-fight weigh-ins/interviews

lydian wrote:I like Gulbis but to be frank he kind of needs to earn the right to speak like this through his results. Otherwise he's just another moaning bit part player sniping from the cheap seats, like Stakhovsky, who won't be taken seriously. He's also motivating the top 4 against him for sure.

Then he compares tennis to boxing and says it needs far more drama in interviews. He asks for less acting put on by the top players yet doesn't realise the delicious irony that is boxers being the biggest showmen/actors in town when it comes to those pre-fight weigh-ins/interviews

I do so agree... soon to be known as Ernie "the mouth" Gulbis. I think Ernie has spent his entire life enjoying centre stage with his controversial behaviour: Why stop now ???