There is a good chance we might see Isner pitted against Nadal in the 4R. Loved their final in Cincinnati. Will be interesting to see how this one goes.
Printable View
There is a good chance we might see Isner pitted against Nadal in the 4R. Loved their final in Cincinnati. Will be interesting to see how this one goes.
yes :shaking: tough ones for nadal first against dodig and then isner and federer if all goes well.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
There was an interesting discussion during the Federer match about the way the courts have changed. The arguement posed was as to whether Roger had got the raw deal with the change in courts. A good point was made on the monotony of serving and volleying and the likes of a Sampras running through the draw with just the serve alone. It is tough to disagree seeing how the long rallies have made the game a lot more entertaining for the crowd. The occasional serving and volleying does have its charm, but I guess the organisers are forced to have slower courts. Its not just for the players but also for the people watching it.
I think it played INTO Federer's hands during his peak from 2004 to 2008. He could stay right back against big hitters like Roddick, Blake, Safin and beat them by converting defence into offence. Which is exactly how Nadal, Djoko and Murray have played to beat him by and by. Fed still had the game to beat the Roddick generation but even a chance of an upset was practically ruled out once the courts slowed. Wimbledon slowed down in 2001...the first time that Fed made an impression. I don't think it's a coincidence.
^ A point was made as to how Federer adapted from being a true blue serve volleyer. Federer to his credit can rip the ball and the slower courts do help in generating more spin. The spin is one of Federer's most potent attack imo. He's next to Nadal on the number of rotations per minute on the ball. So the notion that the courts have been overtly disadvantageous to Federer is not true. The one thing that hurts Federer though is his stamina. Over the years its been hard for him to play the excrucuatingly long rallies and that too against the likes of Nadal and Djokovic.
I don't know if he was ever an out and out serve volleyer or just an all court player with the ability to play serve volley...like say Bjorn Borg. Even in 2003, he played Roddick from the baseline but went S&V in the final against Philipoussis. Yes, the difference in the way Nadal, Djoko play is they hit very heavy and keep at it relentlessly. That is not really Fed's forte though he has tried admirably well to keep pace with them at that. He is more about amazing wrists which he uses to suddenly and unexpected change direction and stun the opponent. Speaking of slow courts, if you watched the Llodra-Murray match, you wouldn't notice it. And I can swear I didn't when I watched the Rafter-Ivanisevic Wimb final in 2001 (when the courts were supposed to have already been slowed down). So it's also about racquets and their impact on playing styles. Even if courts were as fast today as in the 90s, the racquets by themselves would give players more options and put incoming volleyers at greater risk of getting passed. This might be unpalatable for old school tennis fans but this is just how tennis has evolved over the years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
This is exactly why we have a FO where all these pushers can hit all day long (6+ hours borefest)...
How about some variety in the GS surfaces like we used to have before.
Its a shame how the likes of Lendl, Becker, Sampras would find it extremely difficult to achieve the Career Grand Slams...
Lendl literally sacrificed playing the entire Clay season (his favourite surface) just to get that one elusive Wimbledon title, but still couldn't.
Thats how tough it was to quickly adjust to Grass after a long clay season..
Nowadays it has become a joke to achieve the Career Grand Slam, with players not have to change even a bit to achieve the same.
Just stand 6 feet behind the baseline and hit all day long beating your opponent purely on your tenacity with no variety at all. I know it is not easy to do, but it still...
Don't pair Fed with the other three. If there is one guy who could fit into any era, it would be Federer. He has all the tools needed for that. Put him on ice & he would figure out how to win it. Fed has put on lot of miles on his body (having played over 1100 matches on the tour). Lets see how the other 3 would figure when they have that much of mileage..Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
True. Hard to disagree. Federer has his foot on both places. Hard to see Nadal, Djokovic survive in the earlier era.Quote:
Originally Posted by omega
True. But he was basically a serve and volleyer when he started out. But kudos to him for adapting and maximising his all court play.Quote:
Originally Posted by crimson king