The Official Tennis Thread

Started by Doogie Browser, January 26, 2010, 11:25:28 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

JPGJOHNNYG

#510
Quote from: nrico2006 on May 17, 2019, 12:43:01 PM
Quote from: JPGJOHNNYG on May 17, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
What does this idiot need to do to get a ban.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/48300357

More and more tennis players think this behaviour is fine and more worryingly more and more peers, fans and journalists happy to make excuses for it.
The guy should be thrown out of the sport

I saw an article on hiom the other day where the whole focus was on him slabbering about Djokovic and how he cringey he is as he tries too hard to be liked etc.  He let rip on a few other players too.

He is a nasty piece of work but instead of being dealt with the authorities bend over backwards for him only for him to embarrass them all again a few weeks later. You can understand why Serena with all her titles sometimes seems untouchable but some also ran in the top 50 really wouldnt be missed

Angelo

The GOAT picked up his 12th RG today.

A remarkable achievement
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Angelo

I see Wimbledon have shafted Rafa with the seedings. I don't know how they get away with their sordid little seedings system when all the other slams go with the rankings. It really cheapens the event as a whole.

I wonder which giraffe will make a break for it this year.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Hound

Quote from: Angelo on June 26, 2019, 07:17:19 PM
I see Wimbledon have shafted Rafa with the seedings. I don't know how they get away with their sordid little seedings system when all the other slams go with the rankings. It really cheapens the event as a whole.

I wonder which giraffe will make a break for it this year.
They're hardly picking on Rafa. All players who's performance on grass is worse than other surfaces get demoted and vice versa. 9 years since Nadal won it. Federer won it the year before last.

nrico2006

Quote from: Hound on June 26, 2019, 10:09:00 PM
Quote from: Angelo on June 26, 2019, 07:17:19 PM
I see Wimbledon have shafted Rafa with the seedings. I don't know how they get away with their sordid little seedings system when all the other slams go with the rankings. It really cheapens the event as a whole.

I wonder which giraffe will make a break for it this year.
They're hardly picking on Rafa. All players who's performance on grass is worse than other surfaces get demoted and vice versa. 9 years since Nadal won it. Federer won it the year before last.

Don't see the issue myself. I would seed Federer ahead of Nadal for Wimbledon based on their records there. Djokovic will take care of Nadal in the semi finals, but Nadal probably won't make it that far going by his track record.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

gallsman

Nadal made the semifinal last year, losing 9-7 to Djokovic...

Maiden1

Not sure it makes much difference if 2nd play 3rd in the semi final anyhow.  4th seed vs 3rd maybe would make a difference depending on whether he wants to play Djokovic or Federer in semi.
There are no proofs, only opinions.

nrico2006

Quote from: gallsman on June 26, 2019, 11:22:32 PM
Nadal made the semifinal last year, losing 9-7 to Djokovic...

Usually out long before that stage though.
'To the extreme I rock a mic like a vandal, light up a stage and wax a chump like a candle.'

TabClear

Quote from: nrico2006 on June 27, 2019, 09:12:22 AM
Quote from: gallsman on June 26, 2019, 11:22:32 PM
Nadal made the semifinal last year, losing 9-7 to Djokovic...

Usually out long before that stage though.

6 SF out of 13 appearances. Not bad, comparable with all his US/Australian records.

mouview

Where do people rate these in the pantheon?

Federer has most Slams with 20, just one French but evenly divided between the other 3.
Nadal has 18, has won them all but his haul is dominated by French opens with 12; he's won Australia only once.
Djokovic has 15, again one French, and fairly well divided between the rest.

I would rate Federer the best, because he's won the most, even late in his career, and has always been a supremely stylish player. However, when all three would play their best, I think the others would both beat him, e.g. Wimbledon 2008 final, a memorable US semi v Djokovic, when he failed to convert 2 match points.
For me Djoko second, not as skillful as Fed. but very hard working almost complete all-rounder and extremely difficult to beat. I think his head-to-head v. the other 2 in Slams is positive?
I'd have Nadal third because his clay-court dominance doesn't greatly extend to other surfaces and because I've always felt that his game was more purely power-based, with less of a skill element than the other two. I'm sure more knowledgeable observers would disagree however. Thoughts?

Angelo

Quote from: nrico2006 on June 26, 2019, 10:19:32 PM
Quote from: Hound on June 26, 2019, 10:09:00 PM
Quote from: Angelo on June 26, 2019, 07:17:19 PM
I see Wimbledon have shafted Rafa with the seedings. I don't know how they get away with their sordid little seedings system when all the other slams go with the rankings. It really cheapens the event as a whole.

I wonder which giraffe will make a break for it this year.
They're hardly picking on Rafa. All players who's performance on grass is worse than other surfaces get demoted and vice versa. 9 years since Nadal won it. Federer won it the year before last.



Don't see the issue myself. I would seed Federer ahead of Nadal for Wimbledon based on their records there. Djokovic will take care of Nadal in the semi finals, but Nadal probably won't make it that far going by his track record.

It's the only slam that deviates from the rankings, an insidious old boys club. So what if Federer won it the year before? He got knocked out a round earlier than Nadal last time round. On the women's side they go with the rankings, it's a very unfair way of doing things.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Angelo

Quote from: mouview on June 27, 2019, 01:43:52 PM
Where do people rate these in the pantheon?

Federer has most Slams with 20, just one French but evenly divided between the other 3.
Nadal has 18, has won them all but his haul is dominated by French opens with 12; he's won Australia only once.
Djokovic has 15, again one French, and fairly well divided between the rest.

I would rate Federer the best, because he's won the most, even late in his career, and has always been a supremely stylish player. However, when all three would play their best, I think the others would both beat him, e.g. Wimbledon 2008 final, a memorable US semi v Djokovic, when he failed to convert 2 match points.
For me Djoko second, not as skillful as Fed. but very hard working almost complete all-rounder and extremely difficult to beat. I think his head-to-head v. the other 2 in Slams is positive?
I'd have Nadal third because his clay-court dominance doesn't greatly extend to other surfaces and because I've always felt that his game was more purely power-based, with less of a skill element than the other two. I'm sure more knowledgeable observers would disagree however. Thoughts?

Nadal and Djokovic are miles ahead of Federer.

Federer was lucky that he happens to be 5/6 years older than them or he'd probably not have clocked 10 slams on the board.

Look at the slams Federer won, 12 of them were 2007 or before, at this point Nadal was 21 and Djokovic 20 - not even near their prime years. For Federer's first 12 slams the competition was basically past it Agassi and Sampras and guys of Federer's vintage who couldn't hack the Nadal/Djokovic/Murray era like Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian, Safin etc. Djokovic and Nadal have always had each other as company and Federer and Murray and other guys like Wawrinka and Del Potro.

Nadal and Djokovic both enjoy superior head to head records with Federer.

Nadal for me is unquestionably the greatest of all time. His dominance on clay will never ever be repeated in the sport and the calendar of the tennis season discriminates against clay courters. Clay court plays completely different to grass and hard courts which are very similar, there is only 1 clay court slam and 3 between grass and hard courts.

This clay court power myth seems to be perpetuated in anglocentric countries. Clay court is the one surface that commands a fantastic all round game, it's not just made for one dimensional giraffes to serve ace after ace, the type that you will see dominate the grass and hard court season.

- Marin Cilic is a US Open champion, an Australian Open finalist and Wimbledon finalist. He has never made it past the QF stage at RG.
- Kevin Anderson is a Wimbledon and US Open finalist. He has never made it past R4 of Wimbledon.
- Milos Raonic is a Wimbledon finalist, never past R4 of RG.

There is a high correlation between a one dimensional big server and doing very well at Wimbledon, it's all about bludgeoning the ball past the opponent. On clay it is about strategy, shot selection and variety. The most difficult shot to execute on tennis is the drop shot and you'd don't see it anywhere to great effect as you at Roland Garros.

The cardigan wearing, strawberry and cream brigade don't like having the one dimensional aspect of grass court tennis and the acefests it serves up (no pun intended) pointed out.

Could you imagine an Isner-Anderson semi final with over 100 aces being served up on clay? No, neither could I.





GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Milltown Row2

They are currently ahead of Federer? As it is, Federer has amassed more grand slams that the other two, regardless of when he won them. Saying winning one grand slam is easier than winning another is silly, and I can't remember a commentator ever saying that either. It may be harder for certain players to win on clay, and that's possibly based on what suits their style or how they started out in tennis.

Going out on a limb here but I think they all want to win Wimbledon
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea

Angelo

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 27, 2019, 07:57:39 PM
They are currently ahead of Federer? As it is, Federer has amassed more grand slams that the other two, regardless of when he won them. Saying winning one grand slam is easier than winning another is silly, and I can't remember a commentator ever saying that either. It may be harder for certain players to win on clay, and that's possibly based on what suits their style or how they started out in tennis.

Going out on a limb here but I think they all want to win Wimbledon

Djokovic and Nadal are the no 1 and 2 in the world, every other slam goes with the rankings as should Wimbledon. Federer has won 2 more slams than Nadal, 5 more than Djokovic, he is 5 years older than Nadal, 6 than Djokovic, he won 12 of those 20 slams before Nadal  and Djokovic had reached the same age that Federer had captured his first slam at.

Federer has played a distant third over the past decade.
Winning on clay requires a far greater all round game, look at someone like Thiem in comparision to Kevin Anderson. Thiem is a superb all round player, Anderson is a big serving giraffe.
GAA FUNDING CHEATS CHEAT US ALL

Milltown Row2

Quote from: Angelo on June 27, 2019, 08:29:19 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on June 27, 2019, 07:57:39 PM
They are currently ahead of Federer? As it is, Federer has amassed more grand slams that the other two, regardless of when he won them. Saying winning one grand slam is easier than winning another is silly, and I can't remember a commentator ever saying that either. It may be harder for certain players to win on clay, and that's possibly based on what suits their style or how they started out in tennis.

Going out on a limb here but I think they all want to win Wimbledon

Djokovic and Nadal are the no 1 and 2 in the world, every other slam goes with the rankings as should Wimbledon. Federer has won 2 more slams than Nadal, 5 more than Djokovic, he is 5 years older than Nadal, 6 than Djokovic, he won 12 of those 20 slams before Nadal  and Djokovic had reached the same age that Federer had captured his first slam at.

Federer has played a distant third over the past decade.
Winning on clay requires a far greater all round game, look at someone like Thiem in comparision to Kevin Anderson. Thiem is a superb all round player, Anderson is a big serving giraffe.

But until Nadal wins 2 more to equal and a third to surpass him (should he not win any more) I'll say (personal choice) that Federer is bigger player. Forget about Anderson let's stick with the 3
None of us are getting out of here alive, so please stop treating yourself like an after thought. Ea