Wimbledon 2015

lostcat

Wicklow Brave wrote: »

Well he had won 6 slams before his 23rd birthday. That is incredible.

A couple of years ago Djokovic responded to a question about whom he thought was the greatest, Federer or Nadal by responding that for him it was Nadal because he had achieved so much so young. Leaving aside the fact that he might have been having a poke at Federer, its a reasonable enough point.

I posted about the age of slam winners thing on another thread a while ago, most people who are going to win slams have at least one by 22/23 (Stan being an outlier and murray just having the bad luck of hitting peak fed/nadal/djoko).

I'm not sure the current crop of 22-25 year olds have what it takes, and that the younger generation again (Kyrigos et al) will start winning slams instead after the next couple of years of Djokovic/Murray.

On Nadal. Is it too late for him to hire a new coach? Maybe his game isn't one that can change much at this stage, but I think he could do with another voice rather than uncle toni in his ear for a bit.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

lostcat wrote: »

A couple of years ago Djokovic responded to a question about whom he thought was the greatest, Federer or Nadal by responding that for him it was Nadal because he had achieved so much so young. Leaving aside the fact that he might have been having a poke at Federer, its a reasonable enough point.

I posted about the age of slam winners thing on another thread a while ago, most people who are going to win slams have at least one by 22/23 (Stan being an outlier and murray just having the bad luck of hitting peak fed/nadal/djoko).

I'm not sure the current crop of 22-25 year olds have what it takes, and that the younger generation again (Kyrigos et al) will start winning slams instead after the next couple of years of Djokovic/Murray.

On Nadal. Is it too late for him to hire a new coach? Maybe his game isn't one that can change much at this stage, but I think he could do with another voice rather than uncle toni in his ear for a bit.

I know the women's game is different but on the topic of age Wozniacki had some interesting things to say this week about the WTA's "Rising Stars" idea They've basically pocked out a handful of players they think are about to hit the big time but Woz was asking why most of them are in their 20's but haven't achieved anything. She was World #1 by the time she was 20. Serena, Venus, Sharapova, Ivanovic. ... They all won Slams in their teens. None of the current crop of 20+ players look like achieving anything of note. Much like the men's game you have to look to the next generation, the born in the late 90's players to see anyone that looks like stepping into the shoes of the current top players.

smurfs5

Rosol (2012), Darcis (2013), Kyrgios (2014) and now Brown (2015) is added to the list of Nadal's first week conquerors. Awful record for Rafa- great to see players with the style, talent and bottle to beat the big players though.

I don't think today's match was indicative of Nadal's decline. This year, his game doesn't have the firepower or unplayable qualities it had last year but Dustin Brown simply didn't allow Rafa to play. He mixed up his shots so well, served and volleyed (how amazing were those drop volleys?) and refused to get into long points or exchange groundstrokes from the baseline. Rafa couldn't get a rhythm or foothold in the game.

Heard Greg Rusedski say a few weeks ago that Rafa's physical age is 32/33 and I see what he means -he's showing the sort of physical decline witnessed in Federer a few years ago. Federer managed to arrest the decline and brought in Edberg who has encouraged him to serve and volley and use his energy effectively. Could Rafa bring in a coach to supplement Uncle Toni to help him get back to Slam-winning form in the same way Novak, Roger and Andy have with Becker, Edberg and Mauresmo/Bjorkman?

smurfs5

What's with all the BBC-bashing over the last few pages?

I think their coverage and most of the commentators are excellent. I don't know what people want, especially in the first few days, the top seeds playing lower-ranked players are mostly straightforward matches and there isn't much to talk about. Not a fan of Henman, for example, but most of them are listenable and some are particularly good (Petchey, Reed, McEnroe, Davenport, Smith) and I have high hopes for Roddick next week. Sue Barker is an outstanding presenter as well.

Glad Setanta have the Irish rights this year. They take the BBC feed which means better commentators and better picture quality than TG4 provided and whenever I flick over, they are usually showing a different match to the BBC main channels whereas TG4 usually stuck to Centre/No.1.

I agree that the highlights show produced by IMG and shown on Setanta is excellent- lengthy highlights voiced by the peerless Simon Reed.

Mousewar

Is this Simon 'Fernando Verdasco is the future of tennis' Reed?

walshb

Nadal was very poor. I am not sure Brown is or was sensational. Far too hit and miss for me. Inconsistent. And, maybe if he cut that ridiculous hair he may play better.

EoghanIRL

walshb wrote: »

Nadal was very poor. I am not sure Brown is or was sensational. Far too hit and miss for me. Inconsistent. And, maybe if he cut that ridiculous hair he may play better.

:rolleyes:
Maybe all the women should do the same thing and cut their hair?

walshb

EoghanIRL wrote: »

:rolleyes:
Maybe all the women should do the same thing and cut their hair?

No, not really. His hair is ridiculous looking, and a hindrance to his play. It must weight a few kgs. Short and neat and maybe he wouldn't have had to go 4 sets yesterday.

Mousewar

As the man himself said, if he cared about what people thought he'd probably cut his hair.
Thankfully he doesn't.

Schlafzimmer55

Mousewar wrote: »

As the man himself said, if he cared about what people thought he'd probably cut his hair.
Thankfully he doesn't.

If he cared about his tennis career maybe he should cut his hair. He wasn't spectacular yesterday, it was a decent performance, that's all you need to beat Nadal on early round grass.

Mousewar

Schlafzimmer55 wrote: »

, it was a decent performance, that's all you need to beat Nadal on early round grass.

I've been saying that for years. No self respecting tennis player has any business losing to that claycourt grinder on grass except maybe another claycourt grinder.

Dustin has been one of the most watchable players for years now because of his attitude and the way he plays the game - a style that is shamefully near extinct.

And comments about his hair are laughable btw.

walshb

Mousewar wrote: »

I've been saying that for years. No self respecting tennis player has any business losing to that claycourt grinder on grass except maybe another claycourt grinder.

Dustin has been one of the most watchable players for years now because of his attitude and the way he plays the game - a style that is shamefully near extinct.

And comments about his hair are laughable btw.

Comments about his hair are not laughable. He looks ridiculous on court, and it has to hold him back somewhat.

As to his attitude? What attitude? Plays the game in a very reckless way if you ask me. I don't see why that is something that we should enjoy or embrace. Also, how is that style and attitude shamefully extinct?

As for no self respecting player losing to a clay grinder? Nadal is a clay grinder who has won SW19 twice. Not all SW19 winners are the same style of player. It's tennis. It is quite complex and versatile.

innuendo141

It's almost like the BBC were expecting Rafa's resurgence to happen over this fortnight- on his worst surface. Eulogy's at the ready.

Montreal and Cinci will tell a lot.

walshb

BTW, anyone know the rule on having a tennis ball in your pocket when you are not serving? Dustin had a ball in his pocket when receiving serve, and Castle commented on it, but him and Mac didn't bother to check the ruling.

Mousewar

walshb wrote: »

As to his attitude? What attitude? Plays the game in a very reckless way if you ask me.

Exactly :cool:
High risk, attacking tennis.

walshb wrote: »

I don't see why that is something that we should enjoy or embrace. Also, how is that style and attitude shamefully extinct?

Pure S&V tennis is almost completely extinct. The only notable players I can think who use it predominantly are Brown and Mahut and both are nearing the end of their careers. And yes, tennis should be ashamed of bringing about the demise of a whole style of play and one that caused so much entertainment yesterday.

walshb wrote: »

As for no self respecting player losing to a clay grinder? Nadal is a clay grinder who has won SW19 twice. Not all SW19 winners are the same style of player. It's tennis. It is quite complex and versatile.

It used to be. It used to be.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

smurfs5 wrote: »

What's with all the BBC-bashing over the last few pages?

I think their coverage and most of the commentators are excellent. I don't know what people want, especially in the first few days, the top seeds playing lower-ranked players are mostly straightforward matches and there isn't much to talk about. Not a fan of Henman, for example, but most of them are listenable and some are particularly good (Petchey, Reed, McEnroe, Davenport, Smith) and I have high hopes for Roddick next week. Sue Barker is an outstanding presenter as well.

I don't know if you're a regular tennis viewer or just tune in now and again but when you're listening to some of these people all year round you soon realise that they have very little real insight to offer.

Lindsay Davenport is excellent and I look forward to her working with the BBC every year. She has played with quite a few of the players still on the tour so she can actually contribute useful information. Most of the rest of them are practically clueless. Sometimes it feels like they've had a quick browse of the papers and looked at a few twitter feeds and that's all the prep they've done for their job.

Marion Bartolli is, like Davenport, interesting and still in touch enough with the modern game that she can contribute some really good insight during matches.

John McEnroe is useless, he is the absolute worst. He's obviously a big name to have so the BBC keep bringing him back but he hasn't a clue. The amount of times he, and loads of others, will have these inane conversations about the same issues when all they're doing is showing they don't know even the basic rules of the sport.

On the whole BBC's coverage is excellent but personally I think their team could do with a complete overhaul.

walshb

Mousewar wrote: »

Exactly :cool:
High risk, attacking tennis.




Pure S&V tennis is almost completely extinct. The only notable players I can think who use it predominantly are Brown and Mahut and both are nearing the end of their careers. And yes, tennis should be ashamed of bringing about the demise of a whole style of play and one that caused so much entertainment yesterday.



It used to be. It used to be.

S&V, and play and volley is still used. So what if not everyone is running into the net at every chance. That's every bit as boring as standing back at every point.

We may need a little more contrast, as in a good S&V vs a good Baseliner. but two S&Vs is plain boring.

Mousewar

walshb wrote: »

S&V, and play and volley is still used. So what if not everyone is running into the net at every chance. That's every bit as boring as standing back at every point.

The point is it used to have a place in the calendar. You never had to watch S&V all year round - just one brief grass season and if you didn't like it you could skip it like a lot of the Spanish players used to do.
But even that short window for true S&V volley players is pretty much gone - obliterated by a shrinking grasscourt season and the infamous slowing of the courts. The result is the extinction of an entire style of play which is sad.

And that's why yesterday it was nice to see it actually have its day in the sun. Some of us like variety in the sport.

Mousewar

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

I don't know if you're a regular tennis viewer or just tune in now and again but when you're listening to some of these people all year round you soon realise that they have very little real insight to offer.

Lindsay Davenport is excellent and I look forward to her working with the BBC every year. She has played with quite a few of the players still on the tour so she can actually contribute useful information. Most of the rest of them are practically clueless. Sometimes it feels like they've had a quick browse of the papers and looked at a few twitter feeds and that's all the prep they've done for their job.

Marion Bartolli is, like Davenport, interesting and still in touch enough with the modern game that she can contribute some really good insight during matches.

John McEnroe is useless, he is the absolute worst. He's obviously a big name to have so the BBC keep bringing him back but he hasn't a clue. The amount of times he, and loads of others, will have these inane conversations about the same issues when all they're doing is showing they don't know even the basic rules of the sport.

On the whole BBC's coverage is excellent but personally I think their team could do with a complete overhaul.

I hear Andy Roddick is doing something for the beeb this year. Now, he'd freshen things up. He has a great media presence.

walshb

Mousewar wrote: »

And that's why yesterday it was nice to see it actually have its day in the sun. Some of us like variety in the sport.

I like variety. There is still S&V at SW19, just not as much, which I am thankful for.

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Mousewar wrote: »

I hear Andy Roddick is doing something for the beeb this year. Now, he'd freshen things up. He has a great media presence.

Well Roddick falls into the same category as Davenport and Bartoli. He's knowledgeable about the current tour and knows the majority of the players. I'm interested to see how he gets on.

Another problem I have with the likes of McEnroe is that they don't seem to know any of the players outside the top 10, if even that. You get the impression sometimes that they don't actually follow the sport outside of the matches they commentate on.

RosyLily

Anyone read the tennis page in The Star today? Spot the research error!:rolleyes:

MisterAnarchy

RosyLily wrote: »

Anyone read the tennis page in The Star today? Spot the research error!:rolleyes:

Kokkinakis is a big lad for 15.They grow them big down in Australia.

RosyLily

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Kokkinakis is a big lad for 15.They grow them big down in Australia.

Must be all that sunshine and Vegemite.

seanhynes

Think the fanatics have dumbed down probably were warned

TICKLE_ME_ELMO

Kyrgios playing really well against Raonic hitting some lovely shots and then he goes and tries to hinder Raonic and then bounces his racquet into the crowd. He just can't help himself.

Gunslinger92

TICKLE_ME_ELMO wrote: »

Kyrgios playing really well against Raonic hitting some lovely shots and then he goes and tries to hinder Raonic and then bounces his racquet into the crowd. He just can't help himself.

It's like watching a child isn't it? He has a serious amount of growing up to do if he wants to go anywhere.

Dimitrov is embarrassing himself at the moment

Tony EH

Wicklow Brave wrote: »

You may well be right. It's incredible to think he's still only 29 (and only turned 29 just last month at that). He achieved so much at such a young age. Like he was only 22 when he annihilated Fed at RG and won Wimbledon in that epic final & he was long established at that stage in comparison to Murray and Djokovic who are only a year his junior. I'd love if he could win a 10th RG and maybe another Australian so he'll have won all Grand Slams multiple times.

In high impact sports 29 is "old" these days. You just cannot put the stresses on a body that those type of sports require. Eventually, it catches up.

It sad to see it happen to a great spotsman/woman, but it's an eventuality.

Wicklow Brave

smurfs5 wrote: »

Could Rafa bring in a coach to supplement Uncle Toni to help him get back to Slam-winning form in the same way Novak, Roger and Andy have with Becker, Edberg and Mauresmo/Bjorkman?

He should sack Toni and use Roig all year round. Roig coaches him 12 weeks a year and was with him for his wins in Canada and Cincy in 2013 that set him up for his win at the US Open and had Nadal playing possibly the best tennis his career. Nadal played far more aggressive than usual for that North American hard court swing and that was off the back of an early loss at Wimbledon aswell. Nadal will never leave Toni of course but he should certainly use Roig more.

Definitely agree with an earlier poster about the BBC pundits. Davenport is superb and I can't stand McEnroe when he's commentating. He's even more irritating when he's on American TV. He dials it down on the Beeb!

Kyrgios serving for the match against Raonic here, how far can he go?

RosyLily

8 years since Gasquet reached the SFs!:eek: Didn't think it was that long ago!!