All I can really say is, Wow!

It must be one of the best matches ever, certainly at the Aus Open.

The quality of the match is incredible, even after 5 hours and the weather of the last few days. (218 Kilometer serve at 30-40 deep in the 5th for instance)

Incredible

I agree 100% ......

That match was unbelievable..... Flicked over to Ch7 to watch the first couple of games (was watching the cricket on Ch9) and then thought, "Screw the cricket!"

Verdasco hit winner after winner after winner..... and not once did he back off his gameplan..... Punish Rafa into submission.... I am still excited and a part of me is glad that Rafa won, so we can see the final everyone has anticipated.... But Verdasco has No 1 written all over him!!

Verdasco has instantly won me as a follower after his efforts in that match!

As long as he keeps getting his local farmer to grow those "Magic Apples" he will be a name in the Top 10 for years to come.....

Great Match

Has taken him a while to get there, and obviously it'll be tough to maintain that quality, but if he can manage to keep it up he'll surely be a threat

The best match of tennis i have ever seen.

The best match of tennis i have ever seen.

Followed tonight by the worst final I've ever seen. One set of Nadal/Verdasco lasted longer than the whole women's final.

That itself isn't reason enough to claim it the worst final, however I'd have to agree. Shocking final. Crowd were shell shocked

How much of a joke is it that women get paid the same as men? Safina will get paid more then Verdasco. Absolutely laughable.

Followed tonight by the worst final I've ever seen. One set of Nadal/Verdasco lasted longer than the whole women's final.

I think Nadal/Federer just topped the men's semi-final.

I am not interested much in tennis these days being a game of baseline power and grunt monotony. But Nadal and Federer took the game to another level last night.

Nadal's temperament and physical effort over the past couple of days was phenomenal. I thought Federer was close to his best but Nadal just keeps getting better.

As for the women, lets here no more tripe about parity of earnings between men and women tennis players. Chalk and cheese in entertainment, effort and skill.

And women's tennis is hamstrung by the vain and narcisstic Williams sisters. Is there a more openly vain and self centred high profile sportsperson than Serena Williams? Puke.

I think Nadal/Federer just topped the men's semi-final.

I am not interested much in tennis these days being a game of baseline power and grunt monotony. But Nadal and Federer took the game to another level last night.

Nadal's temperament and physical effort over the past couple of days was phenomenal. I thought Federer was close to his best but Nadal just keeps getting better.

As for the women, lets here no more tripe about parity of earnings between men and women tennis players. Chalk and cheese in entertainment, effort and skill.

And women's tennis is hamstrung by the vain and narcisstic Williams sisters. Is there a more openly vain and self centred high profile sportsperson than Serena Williams? Puke.

Well said. Women's tennis is a joke. But it is futile to suggest that, based on the results of the Australian Open, men should be paid more than women. Men don't play women, so how can one compare Nadal/Verdasco to Williams/Safina? Just because Verdasco played for 5 hours doesn't mean he deserves more than Safina. The simple fact is that Safina won her semi-final, Verdasco lost his. Of course Verdasco played far superior tennis, but that's inherent in tennis. Men play better than women. But women still have the same costs as men, and the money needs to be there to keep the sport running.

As for last night, well, that was a corker of a match. RR, I don't think Federer played his best. There were a lot of unforced errors. I think he played better against Roddick, and in the second two sets against Del Potro, mainly because he controlled his unforced errors in those matches. And full credit to Nadal for backing up from the semi and not dying on the court. Unbelievable.

I think in a few years Nadal will have risen to the status of Federer and Sampras and the other greats. After all, he's won slams on three surfaces compared to Federer's two.

Well said. Women's tennis is a joke. But it is futile to suggest that, based on the results of the Australian Open, men should be paid more than women. Men don't play women, so how can one compare Nadal/Verdasco to Williams/Safina?

Easy. By the observed standard of the game.

Nadal/Verdasco or Nadal/Federer

||

||

\/

daylight

||

||

\/

Williams/Safina

Tennis is all about entertainment...TV ratings etc.

Now let me see what was better entertainment.... Mens semis and finals or the women semis or finals? Hmmm.

The depth of talent and competition in woman's tennis has always been a concern.

Tennis players on the circuit are richly rewarded for their efforts. However, the cut of the profits pie should be biased to those that bring in the dollars to the game. Costs dont come into it.

Well said. Women's tennis is a joke. But it is futile to suggest that, based on the results of the Australian Open, men should be paid more than women. Men don't play women, so how can one compare Nadal/Verdasco to Williams/Safina? Just because Verdasco played for 5 hours doesn't mean he deserves more than Safina. The simple fact is that Safina won her semi-final, Verdasco lost his. Of course Verdasco played far superior tennis, but that's inherent in tennis. Men play better than women. But women still have the same costs as men, and the money needs to be there to keep the sport running.

So should the best women soccer players in the world be paid the same as the best men soccer players? I'm sure there are some top female soccer players out there who work harder at their sport then Beckham, C Ronaldo etc.

Should the best women AFL players get paid the same best men AFL players simply because they are the best of their gender?

If we had 2 seperate grand slams - a singles mens and a singles womens - the womens would heavily struggle for attendance and sponsorship. The men should at least be getting double what the women get.

Should the best women AFL players get paid the same best men AFL players simply because they are the best of their gender?

Dont tell me we now have women playing in the AFL?

Easy. By the observed standard of the game.

Nadal/Verdasco or Nadal/Federer

||

||

\/

daylight

||

||

\/

Williams/Safina

Tennis is all about entertainment...TV ratings etc.

Now let me see what was better entertainment.... Mens semis and finals or the women semis or finals? Hmmm.

The depth of talent and competition in woman's tennis has always been a concern.

Tennis players on the circuit are richly rewarded for their efforts. However, the cut of the profits pie should be biased to those that bring in the dollars to the game. Costs dont come into it.

Well let's look at it the other way round. Quarter finals: Federer defeated Juan Martin Del Potro 6-3 6-0 6-0 in an extremely lopsided contest. Safina beat Jelena Dokic 6-4 4-6 6-4 in a tight 3 hour affair. Del Potro was smashed, similar to how Williams beat Safina. Dokic provided fantastic entertainment for 3 hours against a much more highly fancied player than her. Dokic provided a contest, Del Potro might as well not have shown up. Yet they will receive the same amount of money. So does Del Potro deserve more money than Dokic for being thrashed at the same stage of the tournament as Dokic.

And you can't say costs don't come into it. Of course they do. Women still need to get themselves from tournament to tournament, the same way men do. Equal prize money reflects that.

Well let's look at it the other way round. Quarter finals: Federer defeated Juan Martin Del Potro 6-3 6-0 6-0 in an extremely lopsided contest. Safina beat Jelena Dokic 6-4 4-6 6-4 in a tight 3 hour affair. Del Potro was smashed, similar to how Williams beat Safina. Dokic provided fantastic entertainment for 3 hours against a much more highly fancied player than her. Dokic provided a contest, Del Potro might as well not have shown up. Yet they will receive the same amount of money. So does Del Potro deserve more money than Dokic for being thrashed at the same stage of the tournament as Dokic.

I am measuring the standard of tennis over a longer period of time. You asked the difference between Williams/Safina and Nadal/Verdasco. I gave it. The standard of tennis and entertainment is miles ahead in mens tennis now and has been for some time. And because one Spaniard has a brain fade does not condemn the whole of men's tennis.

Dokic was only entertainment for Australian audiences because of the rampant jingoism that Australia has in claiming everyone who might have the slightest connection to Australian as their own. If she had played for her country of birth then she would have been snubbed by Australians and media for not choosing Australia. Outside Australia, no one would give a stuff about a has been with a ranking of 100.

Players should be rewarded according to the money they generate in an entertainment business. Its as simple as that

And you can't say costs don't come into it. Of course they do. Women still need to get themselves from tournament to tournament, the same way men do. Equal prize money reflects that.

They dont when it comes to the sources of the revenue. It should be divided based on who provides the most entertainment like all other sports.

Does men's golf, soccer, basketball subsidise the women's alternatives? Surely they must because their costs are the same. Sorry I dont think so.

Should all AFL footballers get the same money as each other? They all have the same costs. I dont think so

Tennis gets sources of revenue through providing entertainment. The revenue should be cut on the proportional basis of the entertainment provided. And for some time, the men's tour has subsidised the women's tour.

The best match of tennis i have ever seen.

Nadal is a monster. What was it, producing 10 hours of quality within a 48 hour time frame.

I still think Federer is the more (pure) talented player (just) but Nadal's got balls of steels. The higher the stakes, the better he plays. How many times did he produce in those clutch moments? Jordan like.

No doubt he'll be captain if he ever played a team sport.

Dont tell me we now have women playing in the AFL?

Wow, i can't believe i said that, as i usually hate when people call our game AFL.

Aussie Rules i mean!

I am measuring the standard of tennis over a longer period of time. You asked the difference between Williams/Safina and Nadal/Verdasco. I gave it. The standard of tennis and entertainment is miles ahead in mens tennis now and has been for some time. And because one Spaniard has a brain fade does not condemn the whole of men's tennis.

Dokic was only entertainment for Australian audiences because of the rampant jingoism that Australia has in claiming everyone who might have the slightest connection to Australian as their own. If she had played for her country of birth then she would have been snubbed by Australians and media for not choosing Australia. Outside Australia, no one would give a stuff about a has been with a ranking of 100.

Players should be rewarded according to the money they generate in an entertainment business. Its as simple as that

Firstly, I agree re: Dokic and Australia. Only here could she have netted a sponsorhip deal which reportedly is worth a million dollars.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make was that there have been instances where women's tennis has been far more entertaining than men's. Dokic/Kleybanova was a far more exciting game than Federer's QF and SF matches (Del Potro and Roddick). Yes, the standard of tennis was worse. Women's tennis doesn't match men's tennis for quality. But women's tennis can be just as entertaining.

They dont when it comes to the sources of the revenue. It should be divided based on who provides the most entertainment like all other sports.

Today's Age has an article by Greg Baum countering that argument: http://www.theage.com.au/news/sport/tennis...3423135787.html

The Semi Final was something else. How was that tie break won by Vadasco. That is the purest and most awesome tie break you will ever see. To do it against Nadal is just amazing. Then Nadal went onto win the final set! After the 4th set tie break by Vadasco, it was that imposing I thought Vadasco would have walked all over Nadal. Just goes to show how physical and more importantly - mentally - strong, Nadal is.

I sort of felt that Verdasco was playing his match in that 4th set, sort of symbolized by the amount of emotion that was poured out. Especially after that 6th point, that was amazing.

Verdasco had just played a 5 setter against Murray, but yes Nadal is amazing. I wonder how many he'll end up with, or if Federer can finally win the French

Dont tell me we now have women playing in the AFL?

We got pretty close to it last year, with our lot running around in netball skirts.

I sort of felt that Verdasco was playing his match in that 4th set, sort of symbolized by the amount of emotion that was poured out. Especially after that 6th point, that was amazing.

Verdasco had just played a 5 setter against Murray, but yes Nadal is amazing. I wonder how many he'll end up with, or if Federer can finally win the French

I think Nadal has Federer covered - physchologically speaking...

Well I think I could well be the only woman to weigh in on the money side of things.....

I actually don't think that in a Grand Slam the women's events and the men's events should be the same prize money.

And this isn't because I am some crazy anti-feminist lunatic selling out the sisterhood, but because it isn't about how good the matches were, because if that was the case between the 08 Wimbledon final, the 09 Aussie semi and final Nadal would be paid more than anyone else (which he is cause he is winning but that is not about the quality of the matches).

My reasoning as to why the women's events in the Grand Slams (only) should be paid less is simply because they play less. The men's events are best of five, women's are best of three. It has nothing to do with how potentially good those matches may or may not be, even if the women's goes the distance, then it isn't any more than a straight sets men's win.

I always believe in equal pay for equal work (it should be a basic right), but this works both ways. However this should only apply to the Grand Slams because all the other tournaments men play (bar Davis Cup) are only best of three and therefore prize money should be as equal as the individual tournaments can get it for both men's and women's events.

The problem with the argument is that right now the men's events are selling a hell of a lot better than the women's events, and this is largely because of the two sitting at the top of the tree, and the string of performances (excluding Paris) they have put on over the last couple of years, some of which will go down in history as arguably the best ever.

As for the matches at the Open, both were amazing. I will readily admit to being a Rafa fan. I find his strength, heart, skill and continual improvement to be amazing, I also respect the way he conducts himself off the court. He is a class act, and he has Federer's number. He has now beaten him on the three surfaces of the Slams and that is enormous.

The Verdasco match was monumental in just about everything. Verdasco played out of his skin. I have never seen him play like that before (& I follow the game closely) and I hope that he keeps it up. I'm not sure about being number one as I don't think it gets any better for him than that night and he still lost, but he should be a consistent top five or ten player for a long while now.

The final was an odd match, both played some genuinely amazing shots but it was not the best I have seen skill wise, which surprised me particularly from Federer who, had a great chance to right his name in the record books, but as wonderful a player as he is, he seems to have a black hole in regards to being able to counter what Rafa throws at him, especially the high ball on his backhand, but is a little more understandable from Nadal given the lengths he had to go to get into the thing, and the 24hrs less he had to prepare, but I guess that is a testament to how much of a fighter he is.

Honestly if I needed someone to play for my life Rafael Nadal would most definitely be it!!!

In other tennis news, Kim Clijsters (remember her) is about to announce her return to professional tennis: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,2...6-11088,00.html

With Our Kimmy coming back to join Our Jelena, Channel 7 commentators will gush that Australian womens tennis is flush with home grown talent!!

Anything to do with Henin out of the picture......or Williams sisters reaching their twilight....maybe I'm just being a little sceptical.