Wimbledon 2016 & Grass Season (Draw Is Out!)

Tenez wrote:

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:Ultimately, this obsession with fitness being the only thing that matters in modern tennis demeans the sport and tarnishes Fed's legacy. I find it an insult that supposedly the greatest player to ever pick up a racquet can be confounded merely by superior legs and lungs.

But once again, it's a fact. The fittest wins all the slams...and if it was not for huges talents such as Federer and Stan, the super fit retrievers woudl have won all the slams since 2005. Murray, Nadal and Djoko have won 28 slams out of the last 32 (8 years!) And each time it was the fittest on the day who won the final match of teh grand slams.

And it actually emphasises and not diminish Fed and Stan legacy. Being able to win while attacking against "roadrunners" (Fed's expression) is an amazing achievement only the upmost talented players can do.

Oh and it's not "merely" superior lungs and legs but is soleley legs and lungs which make the difference between them and the rest. No different than Pete's serve making the difference on fast surfaces but that same serve unable to make the difference on slower conds like clay. 14 slams on fast versus fat 0 on clay.

Thanks for coming back to me Tenez. I will respond properly myself when I get some spare time. In the meantime, can you address my post re Murray's H2Hs. I went through all the significant H2Hs and concluded that fitness is not the decisive factor in any of them. Can you let me know which of these you disagree with?

By the way, sorry for hijacking the grass season thread. Happy to move to another one if you prefer.

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:
In my book, one key advantage for Murray is his ability for returning big servers on faster surfaces. If this isn't a form of tennis talent, I don't know what is. We all know Tenez has an incredibly long list of tennis player more talented than Murray and Djoko. So, can he explain why they can't return a big server like Raonic as effectively?

More to the point, if fitness is so important as a determinant of success on today's tour, why do these more talented players not just get fitter? Surely the financial incentive is there for them to do so. Murray's ability to return serve is a legitimate natural talent that sets him apart from the pack, as it's something you can't teach. In contrast, anyone can work on fitness and, even if you believe illicit means are used by some, surely these are still accessible to all top players. Let me assure you Tenez, if the majority of lower ranks thought they were regularly losing due to fitness, they'd be moving heaven and earth to close the gap. I see no evidence of that.

The biggest weakness with the Tenez fitness theory is that it suggests that competitive advantage is totally reliant on the factor which is most reproducible, i.e. fitness. That just doesn't make sense. If Murray and Djoko's success depended only on fitness, then where are all the clones? They simply don't exist and even Tenez accepts that the new generation doesn't conform to the fitness mould either.

No question that Nadal's emergence contributed to an arms race of fitness at the very top of men's tennis. But this arms race depended on having a group of players very close to parity in the talent stakes. If you can't first match a player with your tennis ability, then superior fitness alone is not going to cut it. Hence why there is less emphasis on fitness further down the tour (although modern conditions plus increased professionalism has increased the base level of fitness across the tour).

Ultimately, this obsession with fitness being the only thing that matters in modern tennis demeans the sport and tarnishes Fed's legacy. I find it an insult that supposedly the greatest player to ever pick up a racquet can be confounded merely by superior legs and lungs.

I will respond shortly. It's quite simple.

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:
In my book, one key advantage for Murray is his ability for returning big servers on faster surfaces. If this isn't a form of tennis talent, I don't know what is. We all know Tenez has an incredibly long list of tennis player more talented than Murray and Djoko. So, can he explain why they can't return a big server like Raonic as effectively

It was down to talent in the 90s...much less now. In the past with natural strings, returners had to stand close to the line in order to block the return and create enough pace to trouble the server (and volleyer). Now the return technique is very different. Especially since they are using DHBH. If you step back, you have more time to read the serve (remember bigger balls slow faster towards the baseline). So they even have time to swing the racquet on returns (as opposed to just block the return back then). So the main difficulty is to move your body one meter right or left  very fast and that is fitness. Underated fitness. But this is why Djoko is very good at returning. Long and thin limbs able to put his racquet on the ball cause his moves his body so well. Murray is the same, just that he burns more energy for the same result.

Look at Gilles Muller. He is the perfect example to prove my point. very talented player, great eye hand coordination as his volleying proves, yet  he is heavily built with thin legs so uncapable of returning cause he simply doesn't move well, in particular in this fraction second necessary to go from still to reach for the ball.  It's the difference between a ferrari and a truck. Murray has probably a better eye/hand coordination than Djoko, yet Djoko is the better returner cause he simply mover better. But neither of them woudl be noted as great returners if they were SHBH...cause it woudl be much harder to time the ball as well on the backhand side.

More to the point, if fitness is so important as a determinant of success on today's tour, why do these more talented players not just get fitter? Surely the financial incentive is there for them to do so. Murray's ability to return serve is a legitimate natural talent that sets him apart from the pack, as it's something you can't teach. In contrast, anyone can work on fitness and, even if you believe illicit means are used by some, surely these are still accessible to all top players. Let me assure you Tenez, if the majority of lower ranks thought they were regularly losing due to fitness, they'd be moving heaven and earth to close the gap. I see no evidence of that.

the rest of the pack is getting there. Don't worry. remember the time when we thought Nadal was one in a century phenomenon? Well now we have 3 like him...and one of them was a very poor natural mover (Murray) and Djoko was an asthmatic with respiratory problems who could not stand pollen or the heat ...or both. In a few years they will all have caught up with them physically...though some will be ahead of the science again.
And what you do not see is that after a few long rallies talent goes over the window, so players are developing a game not to rely on talent. Or to have to use it least. hence Djoko/Murray finals which bore everybody.

The biggest weakness with the Tenez fitness theory is that it suggests that competitive advantage is totally reliant on the factor which is most reproducible, i.e. fitness. That just doesn't make sense. If Murray and Djoko's success depended only on fitness, then where are all the clones? They simply don't exist and even Tenez accepts that the new generation doesn't conform to the fitness mould either.

It's a fitness thing again. Those 2 are ahead physically but most of teh new generation will beat them convincingly soon. We are already seeing real talented player like Nishi seriously hurting Djoko despite being much weaker mentally. I am pretty sure that Nishi woudl have beaten Djoko 2011 or 2012 convincingly. problem is that Djoko is now much better now than then. And Nishi will be better in 2 years time if he keeps fit.

No question that Nadal's emergence contributed to an arms race of fitness at the very top of men's tennis. But this arms race depended on having a group of players very close to parity in the talent stakes. If you can't first match a player with your tennis ability, then superior fitness alone is not going to cut it. Hence why there is less emphasis on fitness further down the tour (although modern conditions plus increased professionalism has increased the base level of fitness across the tour).

I am sorry but you don;t get it. The talent difference between nadal and Federer is not close. It's miles away. they are simply not competiting on the same field. Nadal showed the way by sending a very spiny and energetic ball (thanks to fitness) preventing Federer to use his talent (difficulty of timing a crazy spiny ball)...while forcing federer to run and destroy his talent even more. Those are basic concept in tennis you shoudl know as a tennis fan.

Ultimately, this obsession with fitness being the only thing that matters in modern tennis demeans the sport and tarnishes Fed's legacy.

I do not know if you have followed tennis over the last few years but it is not "my" obsession but the players obsession. They are all getting fitter and as Murray often says before his finals versus Djoko: "It's going to be physical"! Don't you listen to Murray? Have you seen Murray legs and arms? I am at a loss that you are blind to the obvious!

This is quite remarquable:

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/draws/index.html?event=QS

8 French players out 8 go through the first first round of qualifying! 1 chance in 256!

I doubt they will be as many in the final draw through.

Tenez wrote:This is quite remarquable:

http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/draws/index.html?event=QS

8 French players out 8 go through the first first round of qualifying! 1 chance in 256!

I doubt they will be as many in the final draw through.

I didn't realise there were eight of them! No WCs for the French?
Last year I saw Hebert, HPM and Robert there.


When is the main draw, Friday?

I guess.

I am tempted to go to the qualif today. It's such a great place to watch tennis from close. I will support Rublev again.

Can you make it LV? I will probably go at 12.45. It's cycling distance for me.

I'm in Wiltshire and got plans this weekend unfortunately.

Tenez wrote:I guess.

I am tempted to go to the qualif today. It's such a great place to watch tennis from close. I will support Rublev again.

Have fun!

Unfortunately I can't go this year.


A friend went on Monday and said there now is a queue! Must be because of security.

The draw is out!

Fed in Nole's half.

QFs

Nole-Raonic
Federer-Nishikori
Murray-Qasquet
Stan-Thiem

Murray has the easiest draw.
LTA trying to keep Scottish petrol in the UK.

not surprised to see that mrray has been given an easy draw,wont be surprised if he makes the final again or go on to win
tough luck for federer,cant see him get passed djokovic if the draw goes as expected

Veejay wrote:not surprised to see that mrray has been given an easy draw,wont be surprised if he makes the final again or go on to win
tough luck for federer,cant see him get passed djokovic if the draw goes as expected

I think Fed would probably have got the better of Djoko last year in the semi.....he played much better in the semi than in the final and yet the final was close....at least for 2 sets. This year however he seems really under par physically.

i agree, he played an incredible match against murray,i also reckon had it been djokovic he was facing the he would have won,perhaps not as 1 sided
i also think that had he faced murray in th final,there still would have been enough in the tank to win the tournament,definitely the year before
last years final he looked really spent,his agre really caught up with him
i still think that federer could win if djokovic is knocked out before the semi finals
just watching the steriod monster blow the little monika piug roght off the court at eastbourne
its so obvious to see the difference  and how a player on steriods can over power someonelike that

Who is the steroid monster at Eastbourne?

O
At Boodles, just saw number one junior (Greek!) play GG Lopez, only 17 AND a SBH!!!
Nice player.
There is hope!

Next, Haase -Taylor Fritz.
The announcer said he has just got engaged. At 18!!!!!!

Haase is such a joker!

Fritz, boring. Classic American tennis minus S&V.

I am going to dropp off in this sun....

the steriod monster is the one who won eastbourne...cibulkiva
shes got so much bite and power behind her shots,doesnt looks natural to me

And now...Dusan-Nobody-Bagels-Lajovic vs Berankis!

Berankis and Lajovic are producing best serving and shots of the day!

Berankis's serve is amazing!

And loving Dusan's BH. Old school.

Bottom half is a death trap.  Federer and Djokovic couldn't really have wished for an easier draw.  Especially Djok - since Federer is prob in his weakest ever year.

bottom half has murray, thiem,  berdych, tsonga, brown, kyrgios, isner, Gasquet, Wawrinka, Tomic, Del Potro, Zverev.
Top half has Djokovic, Federer, kohl, ferrer, goffin, raonic, dimitrov, cilic, nishikori

Murray does not have the easiest draw.  He has the hardest half by far. Kyrgios is not a walk over, either.

Well....we will have to differ once again! Murray has a very easy draw. he might make a meal of it like in the FO but he coudl not have an easier draw. So has Djoko though.

Order of play out for tomorrow:


http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/schedule/pdf/schedulePDF8.pdf

some great matches tomorrow,really looking forward to seeing what form roger is in

Tenez wrote:Well....we will have to differ once again! Murray has a very easy draw. he might make a meal of it like in the FO but he coudl not have an easier draw. So has Djoko though.

 The field is such now that any draw looks easy for Djokovoic/Murray.