security alert, prolly a suspicious bag or something. After the fed incident at the french people are being more cautious.
General Discussion: The Tennis Appreciation Thread
Show original post
11 Jun 2009 16:55
11 Jun 2009 17:44
what odds will you give on him winning a slam?
14 Jun 2009 16:55
14 Jun 2009 19:01
think hd started on wimbledon in 2006. it only has hd camera's on centre/court 1.
as ive said before hd broadcasting is $$$$$$$$.
the bbc dont even own a single hd camera capableof covering live sport such as tennis, they sold it all last year…
i didnt know murray is managed by cowell and fuller…hes gonna be on the front of every magazine going these next coming weeks, including 'the beano, radio times and the big issue'…they are gonna pump the jade, jordan and kerry mugs to the max and make them believe hes the next messiah…forget how shit he actually is, and that he will NEVER win fuck all.
i didnt know murray is managed by cowell and fuller…hes gonna be on the front of every magazine going these next coming weeks, including 'the beano, radio times and the big issue'…they are gonna pump the jade, jordan and kerry mugs to the max and make them believe hes the next messiah…forget how shit he actually is, and that he will NEVER win fuck all.
what odds will you give on him winning a slam?
the season is essentially a month long, its sandwiched between two longer, bigger prized moneyed surfaces in clay and hard court. (monte carlo (clay), miami (hard court) or halle in holland.. whats more attractive to play at? granted the usa has a couple of grass tournaments but they're hardly prestigious. i think its about 80% of the top 50 who play on grass once a year and thats wimbledon..
fair point, its more the surface then wimbledon itself, but the whole ethos about it being the best tournament is bullcrap. its the least enjoyable to watch and in particular the bbc's coverage which is stuck in the 80's (only last year or the year before they got the 6200 hi def cameras on court and rinsed the slow mo feature on stupid things like a ball toss!) with its 3 camera angles, look at the us and french with its hip height angles where you feel like you're getting an idea for how low the ball is hit, it pains me to watch the coverage.
fair point, its more the surface then wimbledon itself, but the whole ethos about it being the best tournament is bullcrap. its the least enjoyable to watch and in particular the bbc's coverage which is stuck in the 80's (only last year or the year before they got the 6200 hi def cameras on court and rinsed the slow mo feature on stupid things like a ball toss!) with its 3 camera angles, look at the us and french with its hip height angles where you feel like you're getting an idea for how low the ball is hit, it pains me to watch the coverage.
. its the least enjoyable to watch and in particular the bbc's coverage which is stuck in the 80's (only last year or the year before they got the 6200 hi def cameras on court and rinsed the slow mo feature on stupid things like a ball toss!) with its 3 camera angles, look at the us and french with its hip height angles where you feel like you're getting an idea for how low the ball is hit, it pains me to watch the coverage.
think hd started on wimbledon in 2006. it only has hd camera's on centre/court 1.
as ive said before hd broadcasting is $$$$$$$$.
the bbc dont even own a single hd camera capableof covering live sport such as tennis, they sold it all last year…
Sign in to post in this thread.