And yeah, maybe I'm wrong but Im not sure I'll see a Federer beaming like that after losing a GS final
Printable View
And yeah, maybe I'm wrong but Im not sure I'll see a Federer beaming like that after losing a GS final
Come on where did I say the 'national' interfere in terms of quality? For quality, top seeds. It's given more credence adn prestige it deserves because one represents the nation. I have said as much about World cup. That this prestige will never be topped by CL. All once in 4 years just elevates it. Same applies to Olympics. Let me know where I haven't been consistent here.
To me, CL/GS >> WC/Olympics, but now Olympics in Tennis is a huge ordeal. And it's second only to GS.
Gone are days when the US guys set a bad example (even JMac who has now jumped into the bandwagon) because of lack of huge sponsorship revenue.
As presupposed leap of faith on Borg/Nadal, my writing might have been contorted, but the point is pretty well made. And contrast to this generational s & v sophisticated regeneration that I'm optimistic about. Nothing much of a 'faith' here than 'fact'.
Key here is that he immediately went in, to refresh and shower himself, saved us from a breakdown. But it's a blow. Then again, he still has a chance in 4 years time, but I expect Omeha to twist it and read it as he pleases.
fed superbu:smokesmirk:
single handed back hand agagah.
The backhands were just out of the world...Absolute joy to watch....Already excited for the USO
One thing you need to realize that Federer's backhand has been significantly improved because of the slow courts and for the reason all the players targeted at his backhand. For example Sampras did not need those because courts were fast. I also agree that Federer is the one player I can think off who could have played very well on all the eras with his current game but other need to improvise to suit their different eras though. As a matter of fact this is easily the worst era to play for Federer's game and we all know how well he is managing this era.
Federer has best tie-break record ever in the history.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliabil...reer-List.aspx
If parameters are such that only RED & GREEN matters followed by 5 rings & ITF event, then I concede hands down Nadal is the best in the planet (ethukku vambu, galaxynu potturuvom)...
My parameters (as a tennis fan) are way different.
single handed backhand will become history in the near future. In future all courts will be converted into clay which will have less impact on the knees and also will have longest playing time possible.
:rotfl:..
I haven't disagreed. Till now, it doesn't stand next to GS in the *checklist*. Yes, players' dream, great to have, competitive. Is it a main factor in our debate? I'm not convinced and the extreme reaction to relegate it to inter colony matches was because of the force with which you included this as a factor. I mean let's say Fed had won it this year, doesn't change much. I don't think you mean otherwise but just for the record, football WC is in a totally different league compared to Olympic tennis. Davis Cup, not convinced at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Borg excelling in the era of wooden racquets and s/v is fine but i don't agree with your point about Nadal doing well in previous eras. [nee yaaru agree panrathukku, McE-ku theriyaadhadha nu kekka koodaadhu. I wouldn't be able to post anything in the hub otherwise! :lol: ]Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
I'm with TA on this. Fed doing this well in this era is quite something. Fast courts aren't only about big serves, right? What about finishing rallies with winners? Ungalukku long slow rallies la tactical acumen theriyidhu, but then winner-a irukkavendiyadhellaam fetch panni eduthutte irundha kaduppa irukku-num sollalaame?
Racquets vs courts: Having more powerful racquets - isn't it kind of an even change? Not rhetorical or a question to challenge you but i really want to know from you/Omeha/Feddy who i suppose have actually played a fair bit. Yes, it helped the big servers but as you have acknowledged, it has also helped the likes of Nadal right?
"Key here is that he immediately went in, to refresh and shower himself, saved us from a breakdown." -> Too much :lol:
What happened to Steve_Austin? He used to post in the tennis threads right?
Volleying with wooden racquets far easier than baseline passing shots. The current racquets are fine tuned for Nadal/Djokovic. Ask them to play in wooden racquets and hit a passing shot now.
Finishing rallies off a weak return off a powerful serve = boring for me.
I find Pistol Pete insufferably boring. A bully in a bullying era.
Question is balance. Balance Robots/Federer era to Goran/Sampras era, so that Rafter/Tsonga could be successful. :p Though this era is my preference, I see a sophisticaed form of s & v emerging.
My problem with this era is the differentiation of courts have been minimized. For example with Nadal's game he could have won several titles in clay courts in old era but the question is about the other courts such as wimbledon and fast hard courts. He might have got few hard court titles like lendl and mats wilander but wimbledon would have been a big question. Don't get me wrong, I am big admirer of Nadal though not a big fan of him. The same case goes to Djokovic also he could have done extremely well on hard courts and may be one title at french open. But wimbledon? not sure. These guys would have to change their game drastically to serve and volley to win those wimbledon tournaments and it is very difficult to adapt. But look at Federer he beat Sampras on his own game though he was past his prime and Federer too before his prime. He volleyed several times even in the last wimbledon and I too agree that Federer won French open without Nadal but he was second best player on clay for several year so single upset was all he needed to get the french open title.Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
As I said earlier sampras had mentioned that he would have never lost to double handed backhand players at wimbledon during his era. For example there is no way Nadal could have beaten Sampras during his era at wimbledon.
Courts are changed for a reason but let us accept the truth.
I am not declaring Federer is all time great but he is the one I think who could have adapted to any era better than other players I have seen. Because he simply has too many options. Look at what other great players have to say about him, then do your diligence and be objective rather than just Federer bashing.
I want Maddy to answer this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tamizharasan
My primal grouse.
Very good post TA:clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by tamizharasan
Maddy is a Pete fanatic, I heard.
I do not like Pete's game, but I do see him being destructive in 'his' era vs Nadal. But I also see Nadal hitting more direct baseline winners than 'safer' (in non-believer's terms, but for me, it's more tactical punctuations to how he finally finishes the rally) ones to mid court expecting a return, he's perfectly capable of that. Also my point of Nadal changing his attacking game also extends to coming more to the net, I remember the first time Nadal met Federer, the kid won all his net points. Federer already looked suspect in his vision in approaching the net. I always found Federer tactically weak in that regard and too much a blind spot, agitated, in approaching the net vs Rafa. Something that's not quite natural s & v to my mind. Of course, the volleying itself is natural, as are all his strokes, but the general acumen to s & v is slightly missing there. I'm not surprised he lost in further rounds after beating Pete in that Wimbeldon, and to Tim Henman (another player, like Rafter, who is more based on 'vision' in s & v than siding more towards power servers like Goran, no wonder Tim & Rafter never won the Wimby in that bullying era). Also another thing to turn on its head is the Pete vs Roger game, in fact, the difference, is Roger's passing shots. Sampras got found out in that aspect. Roger's the all-court man, any era. I certainly see him being a cross between Baseliner and s & v than any puristic prism, never much of a pure s & v..
KG
Precisely the point (our point), that he is not a pure s/v, all rounder, which gives him the edge. Would have given him the edge. As for being circumspect in approaches/volleys, isn't that something you'd expect in this era? He is going to be tentative. There was an article posted here recently which made this point nicely
Also for the racquet, that's exactly the point I was trying to make and also find out/ascertain from you (when you asked "if you have a problem with the courts why don't you have a problem with the racquets too"). Racquet la oru vidhathula ellarukkum advantage dhaane? Having said that (as an extension of that) I do avknowledge the rise of the serve machines.
Court vishayathula oru style-a thaan favor pannudhu. Maybe I am refusing to come to terms with this "evolution"...
2004/05 US hard court, how is it uniformly applied to this era? Of course, more the sample space better. But on isolation, I found the vision in his approaches flawed.
Wooden racquets advantages volleying more than passing shot. What I mean here is that we still got a Borg here. How fascinating is that !
Some modern era great will emerge for s & v. Someone with superior vision in net approaches. Think Tsonga vs Nadal Ozzie open 2008 but with more consistency.
I love my borrowed Boris Spassky quote, It is to Nadal's advantage that his opponents never know when he is suddenly going to play like Roger Federer.
ஒருத்தர் சொல்ற புள்ளிய வச்சிகிட்டே கோலம்போடும் கலை இது. நல்லாவே கோலம் போடுறிங்க. மதிப்பெண்கள் பத்துக்கு பத்து.Quote:
Originally Posted by tamizharasan
நடால் : பதினோரு கிரான்ட் ஸ்லாம் டைட்டில் (இதுல ஆறுமுறை எல்லா காலத்திலும் வெளையாடி வெற்றிபெறுவார் என்ற ஜோதிடம் கணிக்கும் ஃபெடரரை எதிர்த்து), ஐந்து ரன்னர்ஸ், ஒரு ஒலிம்பிக்.
This ongoing discussion here on single handed back end - double handed back end .. காசா பணமா.. நானும் கோலம் போடுறேன்.
Single handed back end - Sun appears in the WEST direction of sky in evening (due to cloudy atmosphere throughout the day time) - That does not mean that Sun rises from WEST.
I did get that KG. At the same time, serves would have been slower right, making the returns "easier"? Possible?Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Your extension of that to this era, the emergence of an evolved "volleyer". The volley can at best be a pathoda onnu padhinonnu, perhaps (possibly more because of drops than approaches?)
K_G
How well do you think Roger serve and volleyed in this match.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSIx60skGJM
Generating return on the bounce ? Or to toss up and serve ?
I have played with wooden racquet, I found both straining. But you could serve it powerfully with a nice elevated toss. But returning is so frigging hard with limited head size. And the more force you apply to generate the speed, it's impossible.
Nowadays, it's far easier to return. Also forget Top spin that Nadal generates now, Borg generates with pure technique in gut strings of wooden racquets.
----------
Didn't Tsonga/Murray game in the Wimby show that serve & volleying off 1st AS WELL AS power 2nd serves could be great success. The first two sets were lost by Jo precisely for adjusting his body and returning from baseline. The success in last 2 sets that he had, was all because of the approaches. Not merely for 'drop shots'.
Did that vs Federer when he came back to win from 2 sets down.
I like Tsonga precisely for this reason. Never tamed, sacked the coach who would try to convert him in to a all-court man. Because it's insanely sophisticated in vision and intelligence to do 'bushido' s & v like Rafter/Becker, tactically. In this era especially.
Tharasu,
I already said no pa? It was good, on par. But look how he is able to break Pete's serve? Do you think it's because of s & v skills, or because of his fantastic passing shots? Basically, I'm turning that on its head, and pointing out Pete's fallibility. And I don't want his era repeated.
Anyway K_G my point was just evolution. Federer would have evolved into one of the greatest serve and volleyer. Even now many experts consider him as the best volleyer ever in the game but not serve and volley. I agree that he does extremely well at the serve and volley at isolation and not when they are combined. May be you have a point here but it is his evolution responding to this era.
Quote:
Originally Posted by venkkiram
ithilirundhu neengal kooRa varum karuththu?
Venki
Totally lost on that sun west line...
He didn't evolve s & v, he's being all-courter. He's a bit like Fischer. Though I've known to be sceptic of both cases being categorized the GOAT. Heck, I even have doubts over Ali. As I do over Barca.
My point is that this conquest for Mikhail Tal (s & v) will be evolved and answered with a Garry Kasparov (enhanced/evolved s & v), when Karpov (Nadal) reigned post-Bobby Fischer (Federer).. Although Fischer-Karpov h-2-h never happened and rivalry did't materialize (it's divided who would have won, at least in Tennis, we have the answers), the analogy is valid, I think..
sari vidunga. I understand your point here.Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Pete & Roger - were/are highly skilled in single handed back hand. That does not mean double handed back hand became inferior.
DHBH - provides a player more values/benefits than SHBH. For example, The prime weapon - DHBH helped Murray a lot in recent Olympic game against Federer..
Yes in these wimbledon courts. What about pre 2002 wimbledon courts?
Venki,
SHBH is a more puristic, natural, aesthetically superior, old-school stroke. I don't have problem with purists who prefer that. I know Sampras changed his from DHBH to SHBH, it's not like these players couldn't do it. It's their choice and one they find best suited to their style of play. The reach of OHBH is greater too.
Tsonga does both. But it's the impromptu one-handed BH that gives me 'high'. No doubt.
Good article on single handed vs double handed backhand.
http://www.essentialtennisinstructio...ur-preference/
Tsonga game romba paathadhilla. Noted...
Both DHBH/OHBH in same clip..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4Z-cJL94OU
That moron commentator says he hasn't seen him play that before that year, :twisted: , pala varushama thambi velayadi irukkaan..
:fatigue:
Quote:
Originally Posted by venkkiram
Federer vs Tsonga WTF London 2011 Final Full Match HD !!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=4PEE2cYN6Wg#!
Watch this match ( first set itself enuf) to see the power of DHBH from Tsongo! Unbeatable! I never seen such kind of shots from SHBH.