SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Rohan K.K. Chandr » Sat, 29 Jan 1994 14:04:04


Todd Martin d. Stefan Edberg 3-6 7-6 7-6 7-6

Brings back memories of Michael Stich :-(

Rohan [praying that Courier loses at least]

RamLal Nikhanj Kapil Dev: 427 and counting relatiely rapidly!!!! :-)
--
*****************************************************************************
Manchester United Football Club   *  INDIA - World Sixes Plate Champions 1993
_______________________________   *        - Hero Cup Champions 1993 !!!!!!!!
Leading the way in the nineties   *  ________________________________________
1990 F.A.Cup & Charity Shield     *  
1991 Cup Winners Cup              *  Ramlal Nikhanj Kapil Dev -
1992 League Cup & Super Cup       *    HArDLEE a KAPIL of wickets away (5 :) )
1993 League & Charity Shield      *  Mohammed Azharuddin -
1994 Treble + 1995 Euro Cup?? :)  *    Nothing need be said.
*****************************************************************************

 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Tim Bartle » Sat, 29 Jan 1994 14:34:41


Quote:

>Subject: SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT
>Date: 28 Jan 1994 05:04:04 GMT

>Todd Martin d. Stefan Edberg 3-6 7-6 7-6 7-6
>Rohan [praying that Courier loses at least]

I'm with you!

Tim [adding his own prayers that Courier loses at least, and thankful that
McEnroe again shows signs of a comeback]

Hats off to Edberg for playing a strong tournament. I do hope that I'll be
able to get hold of a tape of his match with Martin, so I can get some idea
of the kind of form he's showing. This is a disappointment primarily as an
Edberg fan but also as a tennis fan. It's not that Martin's not playing
well, because he clearly is, but I can't help but think that this will mean
a boring final. I hope Martin proves me wrong, no matter whom he plays.

BTW, I do NOT think that there is any comparison to be made between
Edberg's tournament and Sabatini's; Stefan did play some good players and
has showed strong form of late, and there is much more overall depth on
the men's side.

Tim [again praying against Courier, at work until 12:30 so that he could
find out the score of the Edberg match]

goodnight all!

 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Christopher Smi » Sat, 29 Jan 1994 21:56:44


   (Rohan K.K. Chandran) writes:

Quote:

>Todd Martin d. Stefan Edberg 3-6 7-6 7-6 7-6

>Brings back memories of Michael Stich :-(

This is not quite the case, as I believe there were service breaks in
each of the tie-break sets (I watched only the last part of the match).
Martin had chances to serve for the set up a break in both the 2nd and 4th
sets, but lost his serve.  He also converted just 4 of 17 break points.
In the 4th set tie-break, Martin led 6-1 and then lost three consecutive
points.  The very last point of the match (which Martin won with an ace)
might have been the most important point of the entire match... had
Martin lost that point, we might have been talking about a totally
different match this morning.

..Chris

--



 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Bill Wal » Sat, 29 Jan 1994 23:32:47


Quote:

>Todd Martin d. Stefan Edberg 3-6 7-6 7-6 7-6

>Brings back memories of Michael Stich :-(

That's what I thought when I saw the score, but actually Edberg *was*
broken in this match, unlike that one. Still, I can't get e***d about
the idea of this deadly-dull giant in a Slam final.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

*    Prodigy HVGM83A, CompuServe 73173,3030, America Online WFWalsh     *
*                                                                       *
*      "If you don't want to be foot-faulted, don't foot-fault."        *
*                                                  --Cliff Drysdale     *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Probal Kumar Bhattacharj » Sun, 30 Jan 1994 02:19:13

Quote:

>That's what I thought when I saw the score, but actually Edberg *was*

        -- Same here ... :-(

Quote:
>broken in this match, unlike that one. Still, I can't get e***d about
>the idea of this deadly-dull giant in a Slam final.

             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                -- Watching him in Grand Stand, Flushing last US Open against
Krajicek, I had almost the same feeling !!! He missed too many volleys on
that day ... but during the Sampras-Courier match I heard Fred Stolle
saying something to the effect that Martin played brilliant tennis against
Edberg and played ALL kinds of shots in tennis - that's not too bad !! Then
we might be treated to an exciting final keeping in mind Sampras-Martin's
marathon US Open 92 match ...

        --P.

 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by shun.cheu » Sun, 30 Jan 1994 02:11:53


Quote:

>Todd Martin d. Stefan Edberg 3-6 7-6 7-6 7-6

>Brings back memories of Michael Stich :-(

Not really. First of all, before the match, I thought that
Edberg would win in straight sets, since he was supposed to be
playing really well, and Martin had difficulties closing matches
and lacked experience. Fortunately for me, I got to watch it
live on ESPN2.

Edberg dominated the first set and broke Martin twice (Martin
served first and was broken to lose the net). Just as I thought
Edberg was cruising, Martin broke Edberg in the 1st game of
the second set. In set 2 Edberg's serve dropped noticably.
His first serve was in the 90 mile range and Martin just pounded
on them, putting a lot of pressure on Edberg, who had to volley
from awkward positions and make defensive half-volleys.
As a result, Edberg had to take more risks on his second serve
and ended up with 13 double faults for the match. They traded
breaks and Martin served for the set at 5-4. But as expected,
he became nervous and Edberg broke back. Martin finally won
the set 9-7 in the tie break in his 3rd set point.

The quality of the 3rd set got much higher. Edberg finally broke
Martin in the 7th game to go up 4-3 and served for the set at 5-4.
But Martin played a great return game to break back at love.
Again, in the tie break, Martin win it 9-7 in his 3rd set point.
The fourth set was the opposite. Martin broke Edberg in the
7th game and served for the match at 5-4. But once again Edberg
broke back. However, in the tie break, Martin ran up to 6-1,
benefitting from Edberg's 13th double fault. He eventually
converted in his 4th match point with an ace (7-4 tie break).

To sum up, as it has been said several times, Edberg's serve
isn't as strong as it used to be, and he was forced to make
a lot of difficult volleys. Martin indeed got nervous in important
games but finally came through. His serve and ground strokes
are all very good. Interestingly, Martin served for the 2nd and
4th sets at 5-4, and Edberg served for the 3rd set at 5-4,
but all of those service games were broken. In every tie break,
it took Martin 3 or 4 set points to win, and Edberg never had
a set point in any one of the tie breaks.
--

     AT&T, 480 Red Hill Road, Middletown, NJ,  07748  USA

 
 
 

SPOILER - Edberg vs Martin RESULT

Post by Mikhail V. Solod » Sun, 30 Jan 1994 03:30:31


Quote:

>>That's what I thought when I saw the score, but actually Edberg *was*
>    -- Same here ... :-(
>>broken in this match, unlike that one. Still, I can't get e***d about
>>the idea of this deadly-dull giant in a Slam final.
>            -- Watching him in Grand Stand, Flushing last US Open against
>Krajicek, I had almost the same feeling !!! He missed too many volleys on
>that day ... but during the Sampras-Courier match I heard Fred Stolle
>saying something to the effect that Martin played brilliant tennis against

                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Quote:
>Edberg and played ALL kinds of shots in tennis - that's not too bad !! Then
>we might be treated to an exciting final keeping in mind Sampras-Martin's
>marathon US Open 92 match ...

      'Brilliant' is a gross overstatement. Fred was probably just hyping
      the audience up for the final. Martin couldn't close two sets
      when he was up a break, and played 3 sloppy points in a row in
      the last tie break. Of course, some of it can be atributed to
      Edberg, who is known to never give up, but some points were really
      sloppy. It wasn't too bad, but calling it brilliant is definitely
      a stretch.

      Michael.