Wrestling Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tennis Discussion Thread

244K views 7K replies 141 participants last post by  Nige™ 
#1 ·

Hot off the heels of an amazing French Open, the men and women now turn to the grass courts of Wimbledon. Can Rafa continue with his momentum, or can Novak wrestle it back? Can Federer rise up and collect another slam? Can Murray get a breakthrough slam in front of his home crowd? Will there be a darkhorse shocker like Tomic :side: to come through and take the world by storm?

I'm thoroughly looking forward to this event, it's my favourite slam and I'm really hoping to see some great tennis on display. As far as the ladies go, you'd have to think Sharapova, Kvitova, Serena, Azarenka etc will all be in the mix, Stosur a slight chance provided she doesn't choke it up in monumental fashion, and well, who knows with the women, Wozniacki might even break through and break her duck.

June 25th, can't come soon enough.
 
See less See more
1
#3,378 ·
There is no way of finding out though. It's the same thing with every sport, because like you said thats the evolution of sport. We'll never know if Djokovic would be able to handle Sampras' Serve & Volley attack on the 90's grass surface etc...

Anyway, Nice one Fed (Y)

Tsonga vs Federer Quarter Final looks good. Especially if Jo turns up to play
 
#3,380 · (Edited)
Fed/Tsonga, can't wait. Should be a great match. Predict Fed to win in 4 close sets.

Murray to beat Chardy in straights sets and Berdych to beat Djokovic in 5(yeah bold prediction)

Raonic wasn't up to standard to be honest, he has made many silly errors. Think he made around 40 unforced erros, while Fed only did 8(which is good to see, hopefully he keeps that up) if I'm not wrong. I know Federer was serving well but still Raonic should have done better, didn't even had one break point.
 
#3,381 ·
Quarter Final Lineup Complete!!

Federer vs. Tsonga

Yeh I look forward to Tsonga/Fed, based on form I think Fed should win but it might be tough as Tsonga has been playing really well this tournament too. Could go four sets maybe.

Murray vs. Chardy

Chardy is playing very well and may cause Murray a few problems as Murray still hasn't really been tested in the tournament so far. I think Murray should work out Chardy's game though and go through without any huge issues. It could maybe go four sets, although I think he should still win in three.

Ferrer vs. Almagro

Almagro is actually playing a very good tournament so this could be a close one. Although every time I say that about a Ferrer match he seems to win fairly easily and loses in the semi finals. I think either player could win, although I predict Ferrer in five sets.

Djokovic vs. Berdych

I think it's the most interesting quarter final match just due to the big question marks over Djokovic and how he may be feeling after his epic match with Wawrinka along with Berdych and how well he's playing this tournament. I think Berdych will cause a lot of problems for Djokovic but Djokovic and his resolve will see him come through this match in four or five sets.

SEMI FINALS

Novak Djokovic vs. David Ferrer
Roger Federer vs. Andy Murray
 
#3,383 ·
The courts aren't fast though. There's no point in saying a guy like Del Potro would have more success than Ferrer if they were. They aren't. If someone like Del Potro wants to have the success of a Djokovic then they have to adapt their game to the environment they're playing in. The defensive players didn't adapt in the 90's. They didn't win as much. You play to the current environment and nothing else. It's a different era and you can either develop a strategy to win in this era or play a different strategy which wont win you as much. I don't win as much because the courts are slow isn't a valid argument for lack of success. Can you imagine a player coming out and saying that?

Injuries happen regardless. Yeah they're might be a link between speed of courts and injuries but injuries will happen on fast courts too. They're inevitable. Nobody's probably arguing that point because nobody's a doctor.
 
#3,385 · (Edited)
But we are not players. We are fans of the sport. I don't want every player to be a grinder (which is the best tactic in modern tennis just like S&V in the 90's). If everyone does what you and NJ88 are implying then everyone will have the same style. I think your missing the point. To use another example, if every football team played like Barcelona then football would be boring. It's not about who will succeed btw. As much as i would like Tsonga to succeed, thats not the point of my argument. It's about having a better variety of matches. How can you be against that? Tournaments are way too predictable atm, and thats partly down to the courts. The only slam surface which isn't slow is Wimbledon (even though it's far slower than before), and guess what? It's the most unpredictable slam atm, which makes it more exciting. I'm not saying every court should be faster, i think that some courts should be faster to create more Variety in the sport.

As for injuries. Yes they will happen even if the courts are faster. But thats not what i'm saying. I'm saying that with slower courts, there's higher chance of injuries.

You people are not getting what nazzac is saying. He isn't saying that the courts should very fast so that it can suit attacking players, he is just saying he wants to see variety in tennis, different styles. He thinks that the courts should be faster because the courts are too slow atm(which kind of benefits defensive players), he doesn't want players of a particular style to benefit.
^ This. At least someone knows what i'm trying to say
 
#3,384 ·
You people are not getting what nazzac is saying. He isn't saying that the courts should very fast so that it can suit attacking players, he is just saying he wants to see variety in tennis, different styles. He thinks that the courts should be faster because the courts are too slow atm(which kind of benefits defensive players), he doesn't want players of a particular style to benefit.
 
#3,386 ·
To me the top players are the top players. The argument that the top players are defensive ones is kind of dumb to me. To be a top player, one would think you need an all court game. Being able to defend, attack, volley, serve, it all goes into being a complete player. If your only good at one or two things you will struggle and the best players can exploit you. I recall Federer losing to Isner last year in Davis cup because Isner was able to blow him away with his serve and use his forehand like a boss. Different styles exist and can work, but if you are a player with a a deficiency, the best players will ask the big questions and look to break you down.
 
#3,387 ·
Primarily defensive is what i've said. Of course the top players are all court players, but Murray, Djokovic, Nadal are Primarily defensive, just as Federer is primarily offensive.
 
#3,389 ·
I'm not denying the variety argument btw. Never have. I'm arguing your point about harder hitters not benefiting because of the slower courts. They're not benefiting because they're not adapting to the environment that they're playing in. The argument that someone like Wawrinka should have won that match against Djokovic is silly. Djokovic won because he was the better player on the day and won more sets on that court than Wawrinka. On a faster court Wawrinka probably would have had a better chance of winning. It wasn't on a faster court though and even if it was, Djokovic could have played a different game to adapt to the pace of the court. You can't make excuses for a guy like Ferrer doing better than a guy like Del Potro because of the court they're playing on. It's not like they turned up for this tournament and the courts were drastically slower than normal. The players who win Slams are the players who the best tennis on the given court. Ferrer does better than Del Potro because he has a better strategy for the game he's playing.

Don't give confused with me arguing against faster courts. Yeah it'd be nice if Wimbledon was faster so players have to change their strategy for each slam. They're not though so it's a dead argument complaining and Murray and Djokovic's success because of the environment they're playing in. You adapt your game to the environment, not the environment to your game.
 
#3,390 ·
They are not benefitting. The slower surfaces favour defensive players, there is no argument, just like Fast surfaces benefit attacking players. There is a reason as to why Nadal is the greatest Clay courter ever, and Sampras/Federer are the greatest grass courters ever. Slower surfaces favour defensive players, hence why defensive players win RG most often and offensive players won Wimbledon most often (although the slowing down of Wimbledon has made this less often) I agree that they should work on adapting better, I've said that before, but thats not the point. Anyway it's not just big hitters. Offensive isn't all about how hard you hit you know. Serve & Volley is offensive tennis and it's dying right before us.

Also, i'm not making excuses. I like Ferrer, but i realise that a lot of his success against offensive players (exception being Federer) is because his style of play works best on slow surfaces, which most surfaces are in todays game. And one of my favourite players, Del Potro is not a fast court player really. Del Potro likes to have big swings at the ball, which he won't get on fast surfaces, and also he wouldn't be able to retrive because of his poor movement. like i said, the best style in todays game is Grinding, just like the best style in the 90's was S&V.

Also, name one time where i said Murray & Djokovic's success is down to the court speed? I never said that once. Murray has done well on grass, and so has Djokovic, so i do recognise that. Your trying to put words into my mouth.
 
#3,398 ·
I thought you were responding directly to my post. I was just kidding around really. Doesn't matter now anyways.

Well, Safin for a time was considered a 1 slam wonder after he got injured, but then he won the AO in 2005, so i wouldn't be quick to count Del Po out. Federer & Nadal won't be around for much longer, and Del Po is younger than Murray & Djokovic (albeit not by much). I'm not saying he'll deffo win another slam, i think it's just too early to say that Del Potro is a one slam wonder. He's 24, so he hasn't even hit his peak years yet. If he doesn't win one in the next few years, then i think that statement is more valid.

Roddick was a little unlucky in his career tbf. After he won his slam, Federer arrived. But just because Roddick didn't win another slam doesn't mean Del Po won't.

All i can say is, We'll see...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top